3 ms·
A rational response would be to isolate and protect those most vulnerable (65+) and not treat everyone as a homogenous-risk group. The risk to those under 30 wa
by briHass 3y ago
A rational response would be to isolate and protect those most vulnerable (65+) and not treat everyone as a homogenous-risk group. The risk to those under 30 was miniscule, despite the news attempting to focus on the few outlier children that unfortunately were on the wrong side of the statistic.
- manuelabeledo 3y agoHonest question, how do you isolate their caretakers? And their families? And their neighbors? Also, this would apply to those with comorbidities.
- spookthesunset 3y agoMaybe you start from the premise that you cannot control or contain a highly infectious respiratory virus? Maybe you do a cost-benefit analysis? Too bad doing cost/benefit was impossible because lockdowns were never tested or proven before being used to the scale we used them. Yet we still did them despite oodles of sound, solid logic suggesting the costs would be astronomical. That alone should have been a clue that we never should have done what we did. Especially given we already had pandemic plans… even ones created by “experts!!!” Funny they explicitly said to not do literally every single thing we did. But oh well… only covid mattered. Screw everything else.