4 ms·

> the flu was somehow eradicated at the outset of mass covid testing, Did you know "the flu" is actually many strains, the most prevalent of which changes seas

> the flu was somehow eradicated at the outset of mass covid testing, Did you know "the flu" is actually many strains, the most prevalent of which changes season to season? It is not surprising to me that Covid "won out" this season. Plus a record number of people got the flu vaccine during the pandemic. Here is what the CDC says about lower flu numbers [1] > many of the covid tests did not distinguish between the flu and covid. That's just not true. > lockdowns that pushed a huge portion of the world into poverty What would you do to mitigate the spread of a pandemic? [1] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/season/faq-flu-season-2020-2021.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/season/faq-flu-season-2020-2021.htm

yonaguska 5y ago
Thanks for clarifying the flu details. As for lockdowns- hindsight is 20/20, but I would do the following- Issue public health advisory encouraging people to eat healthier, exercise, and possibly even offer subsidies on healthy groceries and vitamins. Vitamin D deficiency is highly correlated to negative outcomes with covid infection. To this day, our federal health organizations haven't even issued statements encouraging people to eat healthier or even do something simple and easy like address vitamin D deficiency. The messaging has been negligent at best. I would not engage in a fear campaign, and lock people inside. Most spread was occuring between family members confining themselves inside, and stress wreaks havoc on your immune system. We've been subjected to fear induced mass psychosis for the past two years, and as a result have acquired a learned helplessness when it comes to our personal health. I would also take steps to address to hospital staffing and capacity issues. In the USA, hospitals always run at near capacity, for financial reasons. Instead of refusing to upset that delicate balance game they play, incentives should have been put into to place to bolster staffing so that hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed. Simply not using hospitals had the effect of killing many more people that were now missing early health screenings. I would have also liked to see only the most vulnerable be locked down, and only on a volunteer basis. A western, non authoritarian government, has no way to truly implement lockdowns effectively. Partial lockdowns have no benefits, since they didn't actually stop the spread of anything. Instead they caused irreparable harm where they were implemented with very little benefit. Basically security theater. I understand the original intentions, but the prolonged lockdowns, justified by poor metrics of "success" quickly became a political response instead of a scientific response. Lastly, outpatient clinical attempts at treating covid with repurposed existing drugs should have been prioritized. Trump's warp speed and prep act created insane incentives to actively hamper any attempts to treat covid except pharma approved methods. This whole response feels like the AIDS response all over again, except with more media coverage, widespread corruption, and money at play.
- unityByFreedom 5y ago
  I'm sorry you perceive the messaging as fear-based. Indeed the facts of a pandemic are scary but I don't think the intent of sharing facts is to induce fear. Rather, it is to share information and prepare the public. Regarding hospital staffing, I'm not sure where money for that would come from if not largely paid by patients or insurance plans. I certainly wouldn't want to see that whole system become state-owned. We should encourage rather than stifle competition.
  - skjoldr 5y ago
    No. The messaging around Omicron was explicitly fear-based. Now even the media is forced to concede that it is mild.
    - unityByFreedom 5y ago
      The CDC has always presented Omicron details as unknown. Other media will be click-baity and shouldn't be considered a primary source.

yonaguska 5y ago

Thanks for clarifying the flu details. As for lockdowns- hindsight is 20/20, but I would do the following- Issue public health advisory encouraging people to eat healthier, exercise, and possibly even offer subsidies on healthy groceries and vitamins. Vitamin D deficiency is highly correlated to negative outcomes with covid infection. To this day, our federal health organizations haven't even issued statements encouraging people to eat healthier or even do something simple and easy like address vitamin D deficiency. The messaging has been negligent at best. I would not engage in a fear campaign, and lock people inside. Most spread was occuring between family members confining themselves inside, and stress wreaks havoc on your immune system. We've been subjected to fear induced mass psychosis for the past two years, and as a result have acquired a learned helplessness when it comes to our personal health. I would also take steps to address to hospital staffing and capacity issues. In the USA, hospitals always run at near capacity, for financial reasons. Instead of refusing to upset that delicate balance game they play, incentives should have been put into to place to bolster staffing so that hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed. Simply not using hospitals had the effect of killing many more people that were now missing early health screenings. I would have also liked to see only the most vulnerable be locked down, and only on a volunteer basis. A western, non authoritarian government, has no way to truly implement lockdowns effectively. Partial lockdowns have no benefits, since they didn't actually stop the spread of anything. Instead they caused irreparable harm where they were implemented with very little benefit. Basically security theater. I understand the original intentions, but the prolonged lockdowns, justified by poor metrics of "success" quickly became a political response instead of a scientific response. Lastly, outpatient clinical attempts at treating covid with repurposed existing drugs should have been prioritized. Trump's warp speed and prep act created insane incentives to actively hamper any attempts to treat covid except pharma approved methods. This whole response feels like the AIDS response all over again, except with more media coverage, widespread corruption, and money at play.

unityByFreedom 5y ago
I'm sorry you perceive the messaging as fear-based. Indeed the facts of a pandemic are scary but I don't think the intent of sharing facts is to induce fear. Rather, it is to share information and prepare the public. Regarding hospital staffing, I'm not sure where money for that would come from if not largely paid by patients or insurance plans. I certainly wouldn't want to see that whole system become state-owned. We should encourage rather than stifle competition.
- skjoldr 5y ago
  No. The messaging around Omicron was explicitly fear-based. Now even the media is forced to concede that it is mild.
  - unityByFreedom 5y ago
    The CDC has always presented Omicron details as unknown. Other media will be click-baity and shouldn't be considered a primary source.