6 ms·

>but the statistics now show it is as safe as it was pre-pandemic to return to our regular lives. Why are people insisting on escalating restrictions further?

>but the statistics now show it is as safe as it was pre-pandemic to return to our regular lives. Why are people insisting on escalating restrictions further? Probably because the statistics don't say that at all.

frockington1 5y ago
If you use Florida as a basis for risk, it's almost non existent last few weeks. Unless you're old, a fat, or have a preexisting risk is relatively low.
- SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
  > a fat I sincerely hope that is a typo/second language error and not how you're describing/thinking about people.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- theonemind 5y ago
  > Unless you're old, a fat, or have a preexisting risk is relatively low. Unless you're [most people in the United States] Those probably cover like 60% of the US population (mostly due to prevalent obesity and an aging population)
  - datameta 5y ago
    People would be surprised how many people they know have an invisible condition that they get through life with relatively ok, but that is absolutely a risk due to covid.
    - browningstreet 5y ago
      So we're all subject to broad measures because people lack self-awareness and a reality based worldview? It's one of the aspects of the current lockdown measures that I'm growing weary of. There's no specificity w/r/t who are actually the most vulnerable.
      - datameta 5y ago
        Actually it is quite well defined by now which medical conditions are comorbidities, and we've known the increase in risk as we go up in age group. Where do you currently see conflicting evidence? It's quite convenient to think only of oneself when one is at low risk. If we can't successfully appeal to community and altruism, then simply imagine what it would be like to be diagnosed with a condition that no longer gives you the luxury of holding personal freedom above all else.
me_me_me 5y ago
I am bit unsure on my stance on this. US at statistical level has roughly 50% of population double dosed. That leaves other 50% none protected (we are speaking roughly no need to split hairs on this one). You can spread covid even when vaccinated, so you can infect and potentially kill due to your choices. You can easily make a case, wanting regular life back is a morally vague at best if not outright immoral. But there is that little ego man inside me that whispers: those 30-50% are people who didn't isolated at the start, who fanned the fire of covid in the first place, who clamied/claim its all a hoax. And now I have to suffer more restrictions for their sake, due to their own choices? If they want their freedom so much, let me have my life back too at their cost.

frockington1 5y ago

If you use Florida as a basis for risk, it's almost non existent last few weeks. Unless you're old, a fat, or have a preexisting risk is relatively low.

SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
> a fat I sincerely hope that is a typo/second language error and not how you're describing/thinking about people.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
theonemind 5y ago
> Unless you're old, a fat, or have a preexisting risk is relatively low. Unless you're [most people in the United States] Those probably cover like 60% of the US population (mostly due to prevalent obesity and an aging population)
- datameta 5y ago
  People would be surprised how many people they know have an invisible condition that they get through life with relatively ok, but that is absolutely a risk due to covid.
  - browningstreet 5y ago
    So we're all subject to broad measures because people lack self-awareness and a reality based worldview? It's one of the aspects of the current lockdown measures that I'm growing weary of. There's no specificity w/r/t who are actually the most vulnerable.
    - datameta 5y ago
      Actually it is quite well defined by now which medical conditions are comorbidities, and we've known the increase in risk as we go up in age group. Where do you currently see conflicting evidence? It's quite convenient to think only of oneself when one is at low risk. If we can't successfully appeal to community and altruism, then simply imagine what it would be like to be diagnosed with a condition that no longer gives you the luxury of holding personal freedom above all else.

me_me_me 5y ago

I am bit unsure on my stance on this. US at statistical level has roughly 50% of population double dosed. That leaves other 50% none protected (we are speaking roughly no need to split hairs on this one). You can spread covid even when vaccinated, so you can infect and potentially kill due to your choices. You can easily make a case, wanting regular life back is a morally vague at best if not outright immoral. But there is that little ego man inside me that whispers: those 30-50% are people who didn't isolated at the start, who fanned the fire of covid in the first place, who clamied/claim its all a hoax. And now I have to suffer more restrictions for their sake, due to their own choices? If they want their freedom so much, let me have my life back too at their cost.