I could really get in front of that idea. Ha Ha!!Found a solution
View attachment 2320180
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
I could really get in front of that idea. Ha Ha!!Found a solution
View attachment 2320180
That's not too bad. They were well over 3 hour waits around here on Monday. I just found a little independent place an was done in 20 minutes with minimal exposure to anyone.
A desperate measure for sure, but only for lack of hospital capacity. I disagree with that policy as well, but you've got to ask, which is better; risking infecting more people, or guaranteeing the death of those already in critical condition because there aren't enough hospital beds to treat them? I don't know, but clearly those policy makers thought the risk was tolerable.
Comparing that measure in a few states to failing to act sooner as a country is comparing apples to oranges in terms of impact in my opinion. Acting sooner would have prevented policies like that from existing in the first place, because the infection rates would have been much lower overall, meaning there would be much less of a constraint on hospital capacity.
But Johnny, your "factual update" included a politically charged article from the Washington Post that essentially casts blame on our current administration for the deaths of 36,000 American people...and on top of that, it is wholly based on conjecture.Can't refute the numbers. There are ~350k deaths worldwide based on what we know. There are ~100k of those (nearly a third) in our country. As a country, we could have done better, especially considering that we're entering a new spike now as things reopen.
I'm not trying to start a political discussion, I just want to post factual updates, as I find that to be a more positive way of dealing with all of this than pointing fingers.
I love that's what you took away from that. Read past the opinion man. My intent in posting that was to show a study showing the importance of acting early in a pandemic situation, something our current administration didn't do.
EDIT: Yeah, this next part was more political, so I removed it.
I don't think Johnny is being political at all with saying " just a week earlier, ONE WEEK, as many as 36,000 lives could have been saved" if that is a fact based off the numbers in a study then that is a fact and will only be made political by people. He didn't take a swipe at anyone just echoed what that article said based on its data.
Now an article can be biased and sadly as people want to see everything twisted into one side of the line or the other on every single issue, it will happen more often.
Again stating if we had closed earlier would save lives isn't political at all. Its just what the data points to.
I won’t dispute that 100K+ have died, but I would question the legitimacy of all of them dying of COVID.
Yeah, but it’s easy to look back on things after you have a better understanding and more information. How many of us have looked back and said..”I knew I should have bought XYZ stock” after we saw what it did later?
If decision makers honestly made the best decision they could with the information they had at the time, that’s the most you can hope for. Let’s be realistic though...China wasn’t exactly helping by providing real-time accurate info.
I won’t dispute that 100K+ have died, but I would question the legitimacy of all of them dying of COVID. We’ve already seen fakes numbers in multiple places. I’m skeptical as soon as a incentive (funding $$$) is tied to numbers of reported cases from agencies or organizations. I’ve seen too much of the same thing abused across multiple continents throughout my professional career.
Al, so I'm clear I wasn't accusing Johnny of taking swipes. Only that some things he said could be interpreted to be political and I know he's trying not to be in this thread. I'd like to have that conversation with a few friends from here around a campfire but it's not the same online.
Articles can be biased and sadly so can statistics. Your point about everything being twisted and it will happen more often is very true and what I'm trying to avoid.
If we had closed a month earlier less people would have died. That's a fact too but ignores that there were many other factors that had to be considered as we formed a response to a pandemic.
One of my biggest frustrations through this it that I don't think I'll ever really trust the numbers. From China's bad numbers (sorry that might be political) to the stories we all heard about unrelated deaths being classified as COVID-19 (and revised sometimes) I don't think we'll ever know exactly.
Good news is that I do think we'll understand the virus a lot more, I'm not sure there's a time the world has focused so much research at one time on something like this..