3 ms·
> But unless you want to live like a recluse in a bunker, what are your options? We can: • Try not to get infected • If inevitable: Get as little of it as we
by AnthonBerg 5y ago
> But unless you want to live like a recluse in a bunker, what are your options?
We can:
• Try not to get infected
• If inevitable: Get as little of it as we can
• Help the body clear the illness and after-effects
• Contract the illness as late as possible, as medicine advances faster than mutations
• Seek to support the science of figuring this thing out
• Do this together
• Seek to reduce the amount of contagious people in our local and global environment
Practically, we can:
• Wear masks. Better masks are better
• Use air conditioning, advocate for air conditioning and fresh air
• Exercise. Eat well. Go outside.
• Get vaccinated
• Read papers
• Discuss the science
• Participate in studies
• Fund science
• Explain to people what the scientific process is and how we know what we know
• Should we arrive at the opinion that certain substances, drugs, or supplements may have a protective effect, we might take those
• We can be the living scientific process: When we choose to experiment, seek to carefully note down the results and publish them
• Help others
• Fund healthcare for those who are less well off than we are
• Establish robust social immunity by discussing the options we do have to reduce infection
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jmnicolas 5y ago> Seek to support the science of figuring this thing out It's "funny" because a few months ago, I read that it was definitely an airborne virus, so hands contagion was absolutely not a concern. Then yesterday I read the complete opposite. In both case, they were reputable scientists. Thanks for the advises anyway.
- AnthonBerg 5y agoExactly! And which leads us to asking: How do we know???
- SquibblesRedux 5y agoI think we need to put considerably more effort into discussing existing and new scientific endeavors before we consider funding. I am not saying we should pause or reduce funding, but rather the reach of our public coffers has increasingly exceeded our understanding of what we are or are not accomplishing with that funding. The amount of noise, publicity, and politicization of scientific research makes it very difficult to wisely set public policy at both the national and local levels.
- AnthonBerg 5y agoI would agree, although not completely – but will I also claim that this falls under discussing, studying, funding, and doing more science %D Ah, and, it didn’t occur to me to make the distinction, but I was thinking of personal and direct funding of science. As something each of us might arguably do. It’s interesting to consider it because we arrive at the same question: What to fund?