• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

NON_POLITICAL China Coronavirus THREAD

Page 170 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
May 13, 2009
12,296
549
126
Missing the point, if you're going out and interacting with people, you're also deciding for THEM what an acceptable risk is.

Yes, I am. I'm fine with staying home, working on my property, taking up hobbies, and generally keeping to myself for 5 years, with only weekly grocery/supply runs. I wouldn't mind if restrictions were loosened so I could go to some of the local trails, but I wouldn't lose my mind if I couldn't. If you feel like you just simply cannot stand being in your own thoughts, taking care of yourself and your home, and just generally being outside of the general population for 5 years, I think you're the one that's got a problem, not me.
How much property do you have? What area? Any cool features of the property?

Just curious.
 

killster1

Diamond Member
Mar 15, 2007
5,880
372
126
So now you're just pulling percentages out of your ass?

No, I'm not an expert. I'm just smart enough to listen to EVERY FUCKING MEDICAL expert and they all have advised that masks alone DO NOT protect people from infection.
every medical expert? hahahaha maybe you have read from what 3 medical experts out of millions? go ahead be a sheep, listen to the experts in china saying MASKS ARE NEEDED. you ignore all the other people and focus on the one you want to believe. thats cool
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,538
582
126
Missing the point, if you're going out and interacting with people, you're also deciding for THEM what an acceptable risk is.
I'm not missing the point. You asked what a solution was and I mentioned one proposed earlier. That would protect them from folks they interact with in the world. Keep in mind that it appears that infected, asymptomatic people may be responsible for the majority of the spread so it's hard to identify who is spreading it. Testing is fine and good, but that's a point-in-time snapshot. I may be negative Monday and infected by Thursday and showing no signs. How often should I get retested?

Yes, I am. I'm fine with staying home, working on my property, taking up hobbies, and generally keeping to myself for 5 years, with only weekly grocery/supply runs. I wouldn't mind if restrictions were loosened so I could go to some of the local trails, but I wouldn't lose my mind if I couldn't. If you feel like you just simply cannot stand being in your own thoughts, taking care of yourself and your home, and just generally being outside of the general population for 5 years, I think you're the one that's got a problem, not me.
You have a very narrow view of the world. There is an ENTIRE world out there to see and different cultures to experience. Have you ever actually been outside of your home country? Are you in the US? No one - NO ONE - would think it is reasonable to "be outside the general population" for years on end. You're the outlier and need to accept that.
 
Last edited:

Roger Wilco

Senior member
Mar 20, 2017
953
571
136
Is quarantine even possible for people in apartment buildings? I would imagine that's not that much better than a cruise ship...
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,178
841
126
I love how my recommendation for people to not run out and buy masks (a recommendation the CDC and WHO still makes as masks are useless for untrained people) created the shortage.

Seriously?
What a cute strawman. I said it was a "consequence of your (...and CNN's, and others') bad advice from January." I never said you were exclusively to blame. You weren't even the only one in this thread saying that garbage.

Also, stop saying the CDC "still" recommends that people not run out and buy masks. The CDC did not advise against buying them back in January. That was CNN's take on what the CDC actually said. Back then the CDC merely said it wasn't necessary to wear them at that point unless you had an infected patient, and I agree because we didn't have community transmission in January. It's right there in the freakin' article you linked:


Unlike you, others here correctly identified the actual problem with mask supplies (hint: it wasn't American panic buying) and took correct action according to what the CDC *actually* said. They said it wasn't needed "at this point" (Jan) and we correctly asked ourselves how we would get them at a later point should the become needed. We knew that the bulk were going to China and major suppliers were already selling out. We also knew that they were recommending them for healthy people in contact with infected people.

...and yet you lecture others here on "nuance."

If they weren't in short supply domestically then you absolutely would see mask recommendations for people in high-risk groups if they had to go out... and the people who care for them... if not everyone. There is no question that their current recommendation is to ration the limited supplies of N95+ masks for healthcare workers. They make that clear.

And no, the CDC and WHO plainly stated it was not an immediate danger and both predicted it would be contained.
Absolutely no one predicted it would be contained. That is pure delusion you manufactured to justify your earlier position.

Once again, you fail to grasp the meaning of "immediate." You specifically addressed people "wringing their hands" about this and repeatedly argued why they shouldn't be immediately concerned. We told you that it wasn't about the immediate concern and was about the near-future but you just doubled-down on how the flu was a bigger concern. It does not take a genius to know that the more immediate concern != the bigger concern. I mean... DUH.



...but let's just wait until it's not fine even when we know it's coming.

When they changed their minds, I changed mine.
They never changed their mind. You just failed to understand the "nuance" between immediate/current and future (well, now) concerns.

Of course more people had died of the flu than a brand new disease that wasn't even spreading in our country yet. How could that not be the case even if it had a 100% mortality rate? One only needed to look at what was happening where it was just getting started to know why it was INSANE to take comfort that more people here had died of flu. We're more people dying of the flu in Wuhan since it started spreading there? Nope. Only a delusional person would hide behind flu stats even at the very start of your participation in this thread.

You? You've lost your damn mind.

You literally are saying my recommendation to NOT panic buy masks was bad and caused the shortage???

How.
In.
The.
Fuck.

Wow. No. There's a fool in this thread and it ain't me.
...and now you don't seem know what the word "literally" means since you broke out that strawman again. I never said it was your recommendation alone. I said it was because of you and your ilk. You know it yet you made this defensive post anyway and called me a fool. "Delusional" is not flattering but I didn't stoop to calling you names. Maybe you aren't aware of the rule changes here?

Just stop defending the indefensible and admit: You were wrong. None of this easily disproven "CDC changed their mind so I did too." crap. You spread media lies about the flu being worse, mislabeled it "medical consensus," and you should be sorry.

Again. Every fucking medical expert from the CDC on down is telling Americans the use of masks is pointless and actually increases their chances of getting infected.

The only bone head here is you.

I've posted CDC statements from January stating the virus was not an immediate threat to the US.
I've posted articles from the CDC telling people NOT TO USE MASKS.

I sound stupid? I'm not the one constantly spouting advice contrary to expert opinion.

That would be you.

You most certainly are the one spouting advice contrary to expert opinion, even in this very post.

They said that it can reduce the likelihood of infection. You latched on to a statement about misuse and distorted that to say that it increases chances of infection, which is the opposite of what they said even in your own links.



Now, I already told you why the CDC is recommending against the general public wearing face masks today. Heck, the CDC already told you: to save them for healthcare workers because they are now in short supply.

Supplies weren't so short when you first started spouting your nonsense. It was mostly just Amazon and a few medical suppliers who were sold out since many foreign buyers hadn't figured out you could order from hardware stores, home improvements stores, contractor supply, etc. ..
but, no: CNN just had to misattribute the depletion of Amazon stock to Americans panic-buying and you were totally on-board to spread that false information and shame anyone for getting masks while they still could. Again: The media is not synonymous with experts. Hearing it from CNN in an article that cites the CDC and some doctor does not mean the CDC came to the same conclusions CNN. Where was the CDC telling Americans not to panic-buy masks back in January? They merely said you don't need them yet (DUH; that was January) while making it abundantly clear that the recommendation may change (IOW: don't let them all go to China).

Might as well stop taking so much pride in posting links to the CDC mask recommendations while you're at it. We saw and discussed those CDC articles while you were still in hiding. We noted how they would switch between referencing "face masks" in general and then discuss N95 and up without ever saying N95+ were ineffective (quite the opposite). Welcome to weeks ago. I haven't donned my N95 yet but when/if I do I will be shaving off the beard and reading up on proper technique.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Muse and killster1

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
53,866
6,869
126
What a cute strawman. I said it was a "consequence of your (...and CNN's, and others') bad advice from January." I never said you were exclusively to blame. You weren't even the only one in this thread saying that garbage.

Also, stop saying the CDC "still" recommends that people not run out and buy masks. The CDC did not advise against buying them back in January. That was CNN's take on what the CDC actually said. Back then the CDC merely said it wasn't necessary to wear them at that point unless you had an infected patient, and I agree because we didn't have community transmission in January. It's right there in the freakin' article you linked:


Unlike you, others here correctly identified the actual problem with mask supplies (hint: it wasn't American panic buying) and took correct action according to what the CDC *actually* said. They said it wasn't needed "at this point" (Jan) and we correctly asked ourselves how we would get them at a later point should the become needed. We knew that the bulk were going to China and major suppliers were already selling out. We also knew that they were recommending them for healthy people in contact with infected people.

...and yet you lecture others here on "nuance."

If they weren't in short supply domestically then you absolutely would see mask recommendations for people in high-risk groups if they had to go out... and the people who care for them... if not everyone. There is no question that their current recommendation is to ration the limited supplies of N95+ masks for healthcare workers. They make that clear.


Absolutely no one predicted it would be contained. That is pure delusion you manufactured to justify your earlier position.

Once again, you fail to grasp the meaning of "immediate." You specifically addressed people "wringing their hands" about this and repeatedly argued why they shouldn't be immediately concerned. We told you that it wasn't about the immediate concern and was about the near-future but you just doubled-down on how the flu was a bigger concern. It does not take a genius to know that the more immediate concern != the bigger concern. I mean... DUH.



...but let's just wait until it's not fine even when we know it's coming.


They never changed their mind. You just failed to understand the "nuance" between immediate/current and future (well, now) concerns.

Of course more people had died of the flu than a brand new disease that wasn't even spreading in our country yet. How could that not be the case even if it had a 100% mortality rate? One only needed to look at what was happening where it was just getting started to know why it was INSANE to take comfort that more people here had died of flu. We're more people dying of the flu in Wuhan since it started spreading there? Nope. Only a delusional person would hide behind flu stats even at the very start of your participation in this thread.


...and now you don't seem know what the word "literally" means since you broke out that strawman again. I never said it was your recommendation alone. I said it was because of you and your ilk. You know it yet you made this defensive post anyway and called me a fool. "Delusional" is not flattering but I didn't stoop to calling you names. Maybe you aren't aware of the rule changes here?

Just stop defending the indefensible and admit: You were wrong. None of this easily disproven "CDC changed their mind so I did too." crap. You spread media lies about the flu being worse, mislabeled it "medical consensus," and you should be sorry.



You most certainly are the one spouting advice contrary to expert opinion, even in this very post.

They said that improper use CAN increase the chance of infection. You just said it does increase chances of infection, which is the opposite of what they said even in your own links.



Now, I already told you why the CDC is recommending against the general public wearing face masks today. Heck, the CDC already told you: to save them for healthcare workers because they are now in short supply.

Supplies weren't so short when you first started spouting your nonsense. It was mostly just Amazon and a few medical suppliers who were sold out since many foreign buyers hadn't figured out you could order from hardware stores, home improvements stores, contractor supply, etc. ..
but, no: CNN just had to misattribute the depletion of Amazon stock to Americans panic-buying and you were totally on-board to spread that false information and shame anyone for getting masks while they still could. Again: The media is not synonymous with experts. Hearing it from CNN in an article that cites the CDC and some doctor does not mean the CDC came to the same conclusions CNN. Where was the CDC telling Americans not to panic-buy masks back in January?

Might as well stop taking so much pride in posting links to the CDC mask recommendations while you're at it. We saw and discussed those CDC articles while you were still in hiding. We noted how they would switch between referencing "face masks" in general and then discuss N95 and up. We noted that they never said N95 masks were not effective. Welcome to weeks ago. I haven't donned my N95 yet but when/if I do I will be shaving off the beard and reading up on proper technique.
Wow. That was pathetic.

Fact: The CDC STILL recommends against people using masks to protect from being infected.

And I'm still waiting on a rational explanation of just how my recommendation that people DO NOT buy masks "caused the shortage." (Or even "my ilk" for that matter.) We told people NOT TO BUY THEM. How in the actual fuck does telling people to NOT BUY A FUCKING THING cause a shortage of that fucking thing?

You're just digging your hole deeper here.

And I'll recycle this for you here, because even the article you posted said more than just a mask is required for protection.


Guess who I trust more. The CDC and every single medical expert PLUS my years of bio-hazard training in the Army, or you?

Go on, guess.

Here is a hint: In a medical environment medical professionals who do not want to infect you wear masks, gloves and maybe a gown. That's it. That is effective in ensuring they do not infect their patients.

Medical professionals who are protecting themselves from being infected wear bio-hazard suits or, at a minimum, masks, face masks and fully taped and sealed gowns and undergo a full decon procedure after exposure before de-gowning.

A mask alone does not offer effective bio-hazard protection to the wearer and the vast majority of people will not use it correctly, and even if they do, it's NOT a bio-hazard protection.

So yeah, keep calling all the experts "stupid."


If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with suspected 2019-nCoV infection.


CDC does not recommend that people who are well wear a facemask to protect themselves from respiratory illnesses, including COVID-19. You should only wear a mask if a healthcare professional recommends it. A facemask should be used by people who have COVID-19 and are showing symptoms. This is to protect others from the risk of getting infected. The use of facemasks also is crucial for health workers and other people who are taking care of someone infected with COVID-19 in close settings (at home or in a health care facility).
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
8,535
4,524
146
How much property do you have? What area? Any cool features of the property?

Just curious.
3 acres, a drain pond (no fish) and a small drainage creek thing. Have a half-built forge that I need to continue. Pretty good start to a garden, and probably going to start a veggie plot in the very near future. Plenty of space to work with. I'm very lucky, and I acknowledge that freely. Having said that, I had plenty of hobbies when I was in smaller homes on smaller/no property, and I always had far more things to do than time to do it. I couldn't be happier right now.

I'm not missing the point. You asked what a solution was and I mentioned one proposed earlier. That would protect them from folks they interact with in the world. Keep in mind that it appears that infected, asymptomatic people may be responsible for the majority if the spread so it's hard to identity who is spreading it. Testing is fine and good, but that's a point-in-time snapshot. I may be negative Monday and infected by Thursday and showing no signs. How often should I get retested?
Indeed, testing is difficult when you can spread asymptomatically, and that's why social distancing (or better, self-quarantine) is so important. A key thing to remember about these measures is that we don't necessarily have to become hermits for the next 5 years, just not have mass gatherings. So yeah, you can't gather for funerals maybe, but no reason you can't have friends over or go have a picnic at the park with friends or something.
You have a very narrow view of the world. There is an ENTIRE world out there to see and different cultures to experience. Have you ever actually been outside of your home country? Are you in the US?
In the US, spent 2 years in Germany when I was in the AF and loved it. Beautiful country. I've lived in 4 different states long-term (TX, GA, SC, and now NY), and don't feel as though I'm particularly limited in my exposure to countries, nor do I have a narrow view of the world. I haven't traveled as much as I'd like due to limited resources for such a thing but I have a pretty globalist view of humanity.

I understand how limiting the concept of social isolation is to most people, I also understand that we may have to be isolationists for a little while, unless we're willing to accept a very high casualty rate across the world (millions, tens of millions), as well as potential political fallback if the US just decides to be the flaming dicks of the planet, and refuse to isolate. We just won't be permitted into other countries. How's that for isolationist?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
10,614
1,146
126
The problem with wearing a mask in public is you'll be thought of as being infected with COVID-19. lol, it's probably a great way to clear the checkout line though.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,538
582
126
I understand how limiting the concept of social isolation is to most people, I also understand that we may have to be isolationists for a little while, unless we're willing to accept a very high casualty rate across the world (millions, tens of millions), as well as potential political fallback if the US just decides to be the flaming dicks of the planet, and refuse to isolate. We just won't be permitted into other countries. How's that for isolationist?
I understand and agree with isolation, but it's the scale we disagree on. A few months? Sure. Years? No way, and I promise you, Americans wouldn't be the only ones say NO to that isolation. Europe would too - remember, there are countries in Europe whose economy heavily depends on tourism. They won't be able to endure long without allowing visitors.

And believe me, I'm as introverted as they come and my wife even calls me anti-social to a degree - but we have gone overseas on average 2 times per year for the past several years and you can't replace those experiences.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
30,152
3,557
126
Expert saying probably over 1,000,000 infections in the USA presently:

"If you wait until you’ve seen lots of affected cases, you know you’ve waited too late, because the number of people who haven’t yet turned up in the health-care system but who are already infected is probably 100 times the number of cases you know about.”

I use simple arithmetic to get a million. The 10,000 known figure is conservative, a world wide tracking site has it over 11,000 for the USA.
The quote above is from here.

Edit: On news this very evening of this post, NBC reported 13,000+ confirmed cases in the USA. 100x that is 1.3 million infected right now. Gov. Newsom of CA called this evening for shelter in place for everyone in the state to head of a projected 25 million infected within 8 weeks in California alone, 56% of the populace.
 
Last edited:

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
30,152
3,557
126
The problem with wearing a mask in public is you'll be thought of as being infected with COVID-19. lol, it's probably a great way to clear the checkout line though.
It's not what crosses my mind. I figure they don't want to get infected, or that they are doing what they see their peers doing. Anyway, I'm sheltering in place right now, fingers crossed that I am not infected.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
8,535
4,524
146
I understand and agree with isolation, but it's the scale we disagree on. A few months? Sure. Years? No way, and I promise you, Americans wouldn't be the only ones say NO to that isolation. Europe would too - remember, there are countries in Europe whose economy heavily depends on tourism. They won't be able to endure long without allowing visitors.

And believe me, I'm as introverted as they come and my wife even calls me anti-social to a degree - but we have gone overseas on average 2 times per year for the past several years and you can't replace those experiences.
I get it, I wish I was able to travel like that. And yeah, there's a whole lot of places around the world that are going to lose a shitload of money as a result of this. That might be something we need to come to terms with though, that maybe tourist economies are inherently risky and prone to 'overnight' collapse in the event something like this happens, then those (and other) industries need to plan accordingly. Running the knife-edge of productivity might not be the name of the game moving forward, or at least until everyone forgets about this in a decade or two (it'll never happen to us!).

Rest assured, most current small players in tourism and probably dining are not going to survive this. Nature abhors a vacuum, so there'll be new players soon, but the important part is people need to remember this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse

njdevilsfan87

Platinum Member
Apr 19, 2007
2,091
119
106
Is quarantine even possible for people in apartment buildings? I would imagine that's not that much better than a cruise ship...
It depends. I think in mine it would work because our doors go directly outside (as opposed into a corridor that connects to a lobby and then out). We also have no shared vents. But the apartment on the other side of the alley has corridors and an entrance lobby so I could see that being a problem.

Expert saying probably over 1,000,000 infections in the USA presently:

"If you wait until you’ve seen lots of affected cases, you know you’ve waited too late, because the number of people who haven’t yet turned up in the health-care system but who are already infected is probably 100 times the number of cases you know about.”

I use simple arithmetic to get a million. The 10,000 known figure is conservative, a world wide tracking site has it over 11,000 for the USA.
The quote above is from here.
This news could go either way. If a million truly are infected, the actual CFR should be much lower than what is currently reported. But if it's a million just entering their incubation phases then who knows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger Wilco

Roger Wilco

Senior member
Mar 20, 2017
953
571
136
Interesting fact: Hubei's population is very similar to Italy's, although Hubei is much more densely populated and likely less elderly. I know I'm beating a dead horse, but I seriously doubt China's numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: killster1

Roger Wilco

Senior member
Mar 20, 2017
953
571
136
Why is nobody talking about Germany? They currently only have a CFR of %.30, and that's out of 14,544 confirmed cases.

Is this a case of super aggressive testing similar to South Korea?
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,178
841
126
Wow. That was pathetic.

Fact: The CDC STILL recommends against people using masks to protect from being infected.

And I'm still waiting on a rational explanation of just how my recommendation that people DO NOT buy masks "caused the shortage." (Or even "my ilk" for that matter.) We told people NOT TO BUY THEM. How in the actual fuck does telling people to NOT BUY A FUCKING THING cause a shortage of that fucking thing?
Are you admitting that you are somehow still this misinformed?

We told you in January: the early shortages at Amazon and some online medical suppliers were misattributed to Americans panic buying when, in demonstrable fact, they were being sent overseas to foreign buyers using services that let them buy from the United States. You and CNN started discouraging Americans from buying them back in January when that was really the only chance for most of us. Once foreign buyers realized they were also at home improvement stores, hardware stores, contractor supply, etc, they cleaned those out too. Now we don't have enough for out healthcare workers unless we discourage everyone else from using them. If we had bought them ourselves in January then they would still be here and everyone else wouldn't be competing with healthcare workers for a limited supply if we choose to ignore the suggestion that they not buy/use them.

How many more times am I going to have to answer that question? You dismissed the reality of the situation when you said I sounded like Alex Jones for mentioning it before and it sounds like you still haven't accepted the truth. A huge chunk of our available supply went to China while you, CNN, and others were telling us not to buy based on some misguided notion that Americans already were panic-buying masks.

Newsflash: We weren't. That was the Chinese.

You're just digging your hole deeper here.

And I'll recycle this for you here, because even the article you posted said more than just a mask is required for protection.


Guess who I trust more. The CDC and every single medical expert PLUS my years of bio-hazard training in the Army, or you?

Go on, guess.
Another strawman. If it didn't provide any protection then it wouldn't be part of an ensemble that offers more protection. No one said the masks offered full protection and you look more and more silly Everytime you try to take (devolve) the argument there.

Here is a hint: In a medical environment medical professionals who do not want to infect you wear masks, gloves and maybe a gown. That's it. That is effective in ensuring they do not infect their patients.
Totally incorrect. Even the CDC says so. Read your own links. They admitted that surgical masks (not necessarily N95) help the infected limit spreading to others so that people infected will wear them if they have to go out. They admitted that N95 provides some protection to the infected but gave several reasons why we should leave them for healthcare workers. The reasons that aren't supply-related are obviously addressable and only there to discourage use for the supply-related concern.

Medical professionals who are protecting themselves from being infected wear bio-hazard suits or, at a minimum, masks, face masks and fully taped and sealed gowns and undergo a full decon procedure after exposure before de-gowning.

A mask alone does not offer effective bio-hazard protection to the wearer and the vast majority of people will not use it correctly, and even if they do, it's NOT a bio-hazard protection.

So yeah, keep calling all the experts "stupid."


If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with suspected 2019-nCoV infection.

Where did I call them "stupid?" Where did I say that a mask alone provided protection equivalent to a biohazard suit? I didn't. Another strawman!

CDC does not recommend that people who are well wear a facemask to protect themselves from respiratory illnesses, including COVID-19. You should only wear a mask if a healthcare professional recommends it. A facemask should be used by people who have COVID-19 and are showing symptoms. This is to protect others from the risk of getting infected. The use of facemasks also is crucial for health workers and other people who are taking care of someone infected with COVID-19 in close settings (at home or in a health care facility).
You keep ignoring context.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: killster1

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
17,248
6,250
136
I'm fine with their response, mostly, it was what worked for them. But you are correct in that it never should have gotten to that point to begin with.
I'm not. They're the reason we have it now.

Those of you who think this is mostly an old folks disease might want to rethink your position.
It looks like a broad average of ~82% of people remain asymptomatic or have mild upper respiratory problems. Those that get it bad in their lungs go into "stage 2" and "stage 3" where their own immune system permanently scars lung tissue. Even if you're young. The old are just more likely to die at that point.

but its SUPER wild for you to say every place with bad handling techniques will be shut down
You might want to study formal debate tactics. I never said that every place with poor food handling would be shut down. I'm saying that that sort of thing is rare enough that, thanks to county/city health officials, most of those places already find it hard to do business, and there are extensive public records of "restaurant report cards" available too.

The vast majority of eateries didn't have that problem before Covid-19, and it won't start now.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
30,152
3,557
126
Great access to ventilators is not a metric we should be aiming for. It’s like telling the troops that they will have access to the best prosthetic legs in your pre-battle pep talk.
Really, that analogy is absurd. The president calls this "war," but he's an asshole.

Ventilators will be the line between life and death for people with advanced double pneumonia and they will be many. If 75% of those won't be put on a ventilator because there's no free one, those will die in great numbers, or suffer incurable chronic conditions in many cases. Yes, we want to have enough ventilators to go around. But we won't, not this round.
 
Nov 8, 2012
19,599
4,378
136
Update on my end: Today made a stop to pick up an order I had made like...2 weeks ago for some clothes. Went in and out there - very easy, no issues.

Next it was to the grocery store before the rapture I mean apocalypse. My goal: Stock up on stuff for minimal 2 weeks without needing to return for at least that amount of time. We have a few brands of grocery stores in our area.... one of them is only letting in a certain number of people at a time, and another one across the street lets people come in and out at will. While I get the point of only letting a certain number in at a time, I think it's incredibly stupid to sit outside in a single file line as you all sit there next to one another for 30 minutes. It defeats the purpose of trying to remain more sanitary inside.

So I opted for the other grocery store... Surprisingly, the produce looked absolutely full for the most part. Lots of bread, bakery stuff, sandwich meat, etc. The meat was a bit picked over - but they still had plenty of ground beef, steaks, sausage, and pork. Main thing I didn't see a lot of was stuff like fresh chicken breasts (though there were full chickens and frozen varieties). Most people seemed chill - even to the point of stopping by eachother and talking to neighbors.

So overall this brought me to 2 questions:



1) How much do you guys think that the US population is just mostly oblivious to COVID-19 - or that think it's not a big deal? While people like us our freaking out - keep in mind plenty of people in this country are too stupid to even know the current news, or if/when it's election day.


2) Do you think down the line in a few weeks we will start to see things like produce take a hit? Once it hits countries like Mexico and LATAM, I would think that would very much affect what we see in the grocery store more, no?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY