4 ms·

Nah man that's just how I see it. How do you see it? Do you think it's impossible to remove the restrictions now? Let me hear your side.

sjg007 6y ago
Well if we open up with no restrictions a lot of people will get very sick very quickly. This will overwhelm hospitals. I mean we are almost at a complete ICU collapse right now already. And a lot of people will die, not just of covid but of other treatable diseases. Not to mention we will run out of PPE and medical supplies. Care will be rationed even more than it is now. More doctors and nurses and respiratory therapists will get sick and die. There will be a lot of death. So basically death, death and more death. This will disproportionally impact the poor and poor essential workers. And then everything will shutdown anyway because nobody will go out. We might get 1-2 months maybe 3 months.
- just-juan-post 6y ago
  > Well if we open up with no restrictions a lot of people will get very sick very quickly. This will overwhelm hospitals. The problem is that the public has been hearing this for almost 9 months now and with the exception of a hospital or two it hasn't happened. You can only cry wolf so many times. > I mean we are almost at a complete ICU collapse right now already. Besides a few one off stories could you please provide HN readers with some links? > And a lot of people will die, not just of covid but of other treatable diseases. They already are and do you know why? Because hospitals stopped doing "unessential" procedures for months and continue to do so. > Not to mention we will run out of PPE and medical supplies. Could you please share an article or three with HN readers where a single hospital has run out of PPE in the USA? > More doctors and nurses and respiratory therapists will get sick and die. If Covid is so powerful then why haven't tens of thousands of nurses and doctors died? They are exposed to do multiple times per day. Look forward to your reply!
  - sjg007 6y ago
    All of the answers you seek are in this article. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4
  - wildleaf 6y ago
    If you have friends or family in the medical field then ask them. There are frequent email updates from hospital leadership on the state of the ICU. In our area doctors are being asked to give up their time off and work unlimited hours (as long as the avg is 80 per week each month). We've had 1 hospital provided N-95 since the beginning of the pandemic. It's filthy and probably ineffective at this point. The last update said there were something like 13 beds remaining.
nobody9999 6y ago
>Let me hear your side. In the absence of any support from the Federal government. many states and localities have re-opened in the face of growing numbers of cases, hospitalizations and deaths (more than 3,000 people in the US died yesterday from COVID). Note that states and local governments are forbidden from running deficits, which is why many have reopened and stayed open even though cases/hospitalization/deaths have skyrocketed. If they want to continue to pay police, fire fighters, EMTs and keep public hospitals open, they need revenue. Implementing another stimulus as we did last spring, with support for state and local governments would allow us to stabilize the economy while limiting the risk to the populace. The outside review board for the Pfizer vaccine approved it today. The FDA will likely give emergency approval for it in the next few days. However, it will take at least six months to vaccinate enough people to limit the carnage. With a stimulus from the Federal government, we can save lives while we vaccinate as many as will take it. Not GP, but that's my side. Edit: Fixed incorrect reference to the Pfizer "virus". That should (and now does) have read Pfizer "vaccine." I'd love to hear from others who disagree with my take. I think it would be a good discussion. I hope someone who does disagree goes that route rather than other, less expressive ones.
matthewmacleod 6y ago
At this stage… what’s the point? I’m bored of this lazy and dishonest simplism cloaking itself as enlightened rationalism. You know, because it’s self-evident, that any decision to “end lifestyle restrictions” is a complex one that involves trading off the risk of further COVID deaths versus the economic impact that lockdown causes. This is compounded by the external pressure of funding which constrains the operating parameters of states. None of this is controversial, and is a constant public discussion in every country. Of course it’s not literally “impossible” for such a decision to be made. If I encounter someone making a good argument that this is the most effective path forward, I’ll listen to it. Framing it as a rational choice which can just be made, free of consequence, at any point is a bullshit argument, and that’s what you’ve done.

sjg007 6y ago

Well if we open up with no restrictions a lot of people will get very sick very quickly. This will overwhelm hospitals. I mean we are almost at a complete ICU collapse right now already. And a lot of people will die, not just of covid but of other treatable diseases. Not to mention we will run out of PPE and medical supplies. Care will be rationed even more than it is now. More doctors and nurses and respiratory therapists will get sick and die. There will be a lot of death. So basically death, death and more death. This will disproportionally impact the poor and poor essential workers. And then everything will shutdown anyway because nobody will go out. We might get 1-2 months maybe 3 months.

just-juan-post 6y ago
> Well if we open up with no restrictions a lot of people will get very sick very quickly. This will overwhelm hospitals. The problem is that the public has been hearing this for almost 9 months now and with the exception of a hospital or two it hasn't happened. You can only cry wolf so many times. > I mean we are almost at a complete ICU collapse right now already. Besides a few one off stories could you please provide HN readers with some links? > And a lot of people will die, not just of covid but of other treatable diseases. They already are and do you know why? Because hospitals stopped doing "unessential" procedures for months and continue to do so. > Not to mention we will run out of PPE and medical supplies. Could you please share an article or three with HN readers where a single hospital has run out of PPE in the USA? > More doctors and nurses and respiratory therapists will get sick and die. If Covid is so powerful then why haven't tens of thousands of nurses and doctors died? They are exposed to do multiple times per day. Look forward to your reply!
- sjg007 6y ago
  All of the answers you seek are in this article. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4
- wildleaf 6y ago
  If you have friends or family in the medical field then ask them. There are frequent email updates from hospital leadership on the state of the ICU. In our area doctors are being asked to give up their time off and work unlimited hours (as long as the avg is 80 per week each month). We've had 1 hospital provided N-95 since the beginning of the pandemic. It's filthy and probably ineffective at this point. The last update said there were something like 13 beds remaining.

nobody9999 6y ago

>Let me hear your side. In the absence of any support from the Federal government. many states and localities have re-opened in the face of growing numbers of cases, hospitalizations and deaths (more than 3,000 people in the US died yesterday from COVID). Note that states and local governments are forbidden from running deficits, which is why many have reopened and stayed open even though cases/hospitalization/deaths have skyrocketed. If they want to continue to pay police, fire fighters, EMTs and keep public hospitals open, they need revenue. Implementing another stimulus as we did last spring, with support for state and local governments would allow us to stabilize the economy while limiting the risk to the populace. The outside review board for the Pfizer vaccine approved it today. The FDA will likely give emergency approval for it in the next few days. However, it will take at least six months to vaccinate enough people to limit the carnage. With a stimulus from the Federal government, we can save lives while we vaccinate as many as will take it. Not GP, but that's my side. Edit: Fixed incorrect reference to the Pfizer "virus". That should (and now does) have read Pfizer "vaccine." I'd love to hear from others who disagree with my take. I think it would be a good discussion. I hope someone who does disagree goes that route rather than other, less expressive ones.

matthewmacleod 6y ago

At this stage… what’s the point? I’m bored of this lazy and dishonest simplism cloaking itself as enlightened rationalism. You know, because it’s self-evident, that any decision to “end lifestyle restrictions” is a complex one that involves trading off the risk of further COVID deaths versus the economic impact that lockdown causes. This is compounded by the external pressure of funding which constrains the operating parameters of states. None of this is controversial, and is a constant public discussion in every country. Of course it’s not literally “impossible” for such a decision to be made. If I encounter someone making a good argument that this is the most effective path forward, I’ll listen to it. Framing it as a rational choice which can just be made, free of consequence, at any point is a bullshit argument, and that’s what you’ve done.