# Trying to reach herd immunity is ‘unethical’ and unprecedented, WHO head says



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

By 
Antonia Noori Farzan and 
Miriam Berger
Oct. 13, 2020 at 9:46 a.m. MDT
The head of the World Health Organization said Monday that allowing the novel coronavirus to spread in an attempt to reach herd immunity was “simply unethical.”
The remark was a sharp rebuke of the approach amid mounting new infections around the world. Recent days have seen the most rapid rise in cases since the pandemic began in March.

“Never in the history of public health has herd immunity been used as a strategy for responding to an outbreak, let alone a pandemic,” WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a Monday media briefing. “It is scientifically and ethically problematic.”
In a public health context, herd immunity typically describes a scenario in which a large enough share of the population is vaccinated against a disease to prevent it from spreading widely, thereby providing default protection to a minority of people who have not been vaccinated.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/10/13/herd-immunity-coronavirus-unethical-who/


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

painterswife said:


> By
> Antonia Noori Farzan and
> Miriam Berger
> Oct. 13, 2020 at 9:46 a.m. MDT
> ...


That's hilarious coming from Tedros! They can't make up their minds....lol
What an idiot.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Didn't they just say yesterday that lockdowns should only be used in emergency situations because they were bad for the world economy?


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

painterswife said:


> By
> Antonia Noori Farzan and
> Miriam Berger
> Oct. 13, 2020 at 9:46 a.m. MDT
> ...


So what's your answer to this problem? Relying on a vaccine that may not ever materialize and will be dubiously effective due to the quickly mutating nature of this virus? Or do you have a better idea?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

They have to concentrate on treatments just like they did with HIV. They have yet to prove that that immunity can be conveyed by either vaccine or having had the virus.

No point on relying on herd immunity until you know it is even possible.


----------



## 101pigs (Sep 18, 2018)

RJ2019 said:


> So what's your answer to this problem? Relying on a vaccine that may not ever materialize and will be dubiously effective due to the quickly mutating nature of this virus? Or do you have a better idea?


To many people in this world now. Just forget about any cure and let anyone over 55 kick the bucket. Just think how many people will be on earth if the Vaccine works.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

nchobbyfarm said:


> Didn't they just say yesterday that lockdowns should only be used in emergency situations because they were bad for the world economy?


That is what I thought


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Dang. That is a thought. Hmm.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> They have to concentrate on treatments just like they did with HIV. They have yet to prove that that immunity can be conveyed by either vaccine or having had the virus.
> 
> No point on relying on herd immunity until you know it is even possible.


It has taken decades to find treatments for HIV and I can't imagine we can effectively lock the world down for that long. 

In my opinion, it seems incredibly unethical and inhumane to continue separating families by closed borders, denying people the right to properly bury their loved ones and locking elderly and infirmed away from the comfort of their loved ones for year or possibly decades.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Commentary about preventing our elderly from hugging their families yielded this quotation.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
C. S. Lewis


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Let me see if I get this straight. First the WHO says it is not airborne. Then they say lock down. Then they say don't lock down. Mask work, or was it they don't work? I can't keep that one straight. And America has fared worse than any nation on the planet because of gross negligence and ineptitude.

I am sure I missed a few more facts.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> It has taken decades to find treatments for HIV and I can't imagine we can effectively lock the world down for that long.
> 
> In my opinion, it seems incredibly unethical and inhumane to continue separating families by closed borders, denying people the right to properly bury their loved ones and locking elderly and infirmed away from the comfort of their loved ones for year or possibly decades.


Not sure why you responded to my post with that. I never talked about locking down. I talked about treatments.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Tedros is a joke. What he is saying is that we should turn our backs on thousands of years of human evolution under a constant barrage from novel viruses. Instead, we should trust him completely while he shakes the bones that tell us what we should do and who to make the check out to. The modern equivalent of a witch doctor.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

HDRider said:


> Let me see if I get this straight. First the WHO says it is not airborne. Then they say lock down. Then they say don't lock down. Mask work, or was it they don't work? I can't keep that one straight. And America has fared worse than any nation on the planet because of gross negligence and ineptitude.
> 
> I am sure I missed a few more facts.


I believe we were originally told that other than very specific masks, that were not to be used by the public made no difference at all. 

I you look closely at their comments, what you actually see is qualifiers associated with all their statements. 

My cousin's husband died many years ago, believing if that if a suitable bone marrow donor was found, he had a 70% chance of survival. 

Much like covid, what he didn't hear was the qualifiers. If we find a bone marrow donor, if you survive chemo, if you survive the transplant and if the transplant is actually a success, then you have a 70% chance of survival but in all reality, you actually have closer to a 7% chance of survival taking into account all the aforementioned qualifiers.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> Not sure why you responded to my post with that. I never talked about locking down. I talked about treatments.


I addressed you because you started a thread on a subject that interests me and made a bold statement that I felt warranted discussion. Isn't that how these things go?

What options would you suggest until those treatments are found? If working toward herd immunity is not acceptable, we have no vaccine or medically approved treatments, what other options are available at this time?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> I addressed you because you started a thread on a subject that interests me and made a bold statement that I felt warranted discussion. Isn't that how these things go?
> 
> What options would you suggest until those treatments are found? If working toward herd immunity is not acceptable, we have no vaccine or medically approved treatments, what other options are available at this time?


Yet you did not discuss my statement but something ing else.

Treatments are available and more is learned about how the virus attacks the human body daily. Already they have reduced the death rate of those hospitalised in half since April because they better understand how the virus attacks those infected.

I believe that and preventive measures such as masks and social distancing are the best measures we have right now.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> The head of the World Health Organization said Monday that allowing the novel coronavirus to spread in an attempt to reach herd immunity was “simply unethical.”


WHO cares?



painterswife said:


> Treatments are available and more is learned about how the virus attacks the human body daily.
> 
> *Already they have reduced the death rate of those hospitalised in half since April because they better understand how the virus attacks those infected.*
> 
> I believe that and preventive measures such as masks and social distancing are the best measures we have right now.


More claims without evidence.
Please show something *credible*.









CDC First Said Not to Wear Masks, Then to Wear Masks, Then Masks Were Better than Vaccines - Now New Evidence Shows Masks Are Ineffective


Six months ago Dr. Robert Redfield told the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee that healthy people should not wear face masks. CDC Director Robert Redfield on masks, 6 months ago, prior to the “new science”: pic.twitter.com/idEfQ2RpYF — Jordan Schachtel (@JordanSchachtel) September 16, 2020 Dr...




www.thegatewaypundit.com




*



CDC First Said Not to Wear Masks, Then to Wear Masks, Then Masks Were Better than Vaccines – Now New Evidence Shows Masks Are Ineffective

Click to expand...

*


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> *No point* on relying on herd immunity until you know it is even possible.


No point in *waiting *for a vaccine until you know it's even possible.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

painterswife said:


> Yet you did not discuss my statement but something ing else.
> 
> Treatments are available and more is learned about how the virus attacks the human body daily. Already they have reduced the death rate of those hospitalised in half since April because they better understand how the virus attacks those infected.
> 
> I believe that and preventive measures such as masks and social distancing are the best measures we have right now.


The statistics say the mortality rate is reduced by a large percentage since early on. But, they were skewed to begin with by certain governors shipping the virus into nursing homes and rest homes while hoarding PPE for photo ops.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

painterswife said:


> Yet you did not discuss my statement but something ing else.
> 
> Treatments are available and more is learned about how the virus attacks the human body daily. Already they have reduced the death rate of those hospitalised in half since April because they better understand how the virus attacks those infected.
> 
> I believe that and preventive measures such as masks and social distancing are the best measures we have right now.


With those effective personal safety measures in place how about the government letting others do what they think is best for their families ?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Redlands Okie said:


> With those effective personal safety measures in place how about the government letting others do what they think is best for their families ?


Would be nice. I believe that it has already been proven that some can not be trusted to do that. They have proven they dont use those safety measures or believe in them and infect coworkers and friends instead of just their families.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

It is obvious that those that got sick were not practicing good enough PERSONAL safety measures. Blaming others is ridiculous and showing that they are not willing to accept responsibility for themselves.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

I think, at the end of the day Darwin is gonna have to sort this all out for us despite our best efforts. We can debate on how to fix it until the end of time but the reality is, we can't. Even if there is an effective way to deal with this, something else will come along sooner or later to wipe some more of us out. It's just how nature works.

I see the value in vaccines. Really. But to vaccinate everyone wholesale, for illnesses that are relatively nom-lethal, is going to produce some SERIOUS consequences down the road where our immune systems are concerned. I don't believe for a second that artificial immunity from a constellation of not-very-deadly diseases is a sustainable way forward. Just saying. Scared? Then hide in your house. I do, but I kinda like doing that anyway.....


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Would be nice. *I believe that it has already been proven that some can not be trusted* to do that. They have proven they dont use those safety measures or believe in them and infect coworkers and friends instead of just their families.


*Show *your "proof", because as you say, some can't be trusted.



painterswife said:


> I never talked about locking down.


What do *you* think the OP article was about?
Which person here is constantly saying "we need time to find treatments or vaccines"?


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Collateral damage - 4 million unemployed. Significant disruption of daily life. Disruption in education.

No vaccine appears to be likely.

Let adults make their own decisions.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> “*Never in the history* of public health has herd immunity been used as a strategy for responding to an outbreak, let alone a pandemic,” WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a Monday media briefing.
> 
> *“It is scientifically and ethically problematic.”*


That also applies to shutting down the entire economy for months.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Redlands Okie said:


> It is obvious that those that got sick were not practicing good enough PERSONAL safety measures. Blaming others is ridiculous and showing that they are not willing to accept responsibility for themselves.


Was this meant to be sarcasm? An infected person who knowingly goes out in public coughing and breathing on others is more like a drunk driver in rush hour traffic. 

So expecting herd immunity is unethical. At this stage of the game it appears to be all we have. There is no FDA approved and proven *treatment* for covid.








Coronavirus Drug and Treatment Tracker


An updated list of potential treatments for Covid-19.



www.nytimes.com




It is inhumane to keep the sick and elderly away from their families.
It is unethical to prevent willing and able people from earning a living and providing for their families.
It is unethical to force the closure and/or bankruptcy of hundreds of small businesses.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

painterswife said:


> Would be nice. I believe that it has already been proven that some can not be trusted to do that.


If it is Wednesday what is WHO's statement going to be?
They have already proven themselves to be contradictory and apparently prone to statements making no sense or only intended to confirm the idealogy of the day.
Continuing to quote them reflects a herd mentality, pun intended.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Danaus29 said:


> Was this meant to be sarcasm? An infected person who knowingly goes out in public coughing and breathing on others is more like a drunk driver in rush hour traffic.
> 
> So expecting herd immunity is unethical. At this stage of the game it appears to be all we have. There is no FDA approved and proven *treatment* for covid.
> 
> ...


We have had and are going to have drunk drivers. Other than your defensive driving skills your best chance of dealing with a accident from a drunk is your cars design and safety systems that protect you. Trying to keep a car space for every 10 mph is not going to do you any good. The drunks air bags are not going to do you any good. 

Someone that’s infected and going out and about in public is going to and has happened. Relying on them to protect yourself is just not a smart thing to do. You need to rely on your safety procedures and your safety systems to protect yourself.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Danaus said...


“It is inhumane to keep the sick and elderly away from their families.
It is unethical to prevent willing and able people from earning a living and providing for their families.
It is unethical to force the closure and/or bankruptcy of hundreds of small businesses.“

That is the answer.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Danaus said...
> 
> 
> “It is inhumane to keep the sick and elderly away from their families.
> ...


Those statements may hold true in some situations but not all.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Nope. It is pretty clear that in almost all cases it is inhumane and/or unethical.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

GTX63 said:


> Nope. It is pretty clear that in *almost all cases i*t is inhumane and/or unethical.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Those statements may hold true in some situations but *not all*.


Who *said* "all"?


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

And families, businesses and the country suffer for it.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Two options: you believe that the handling of the virus was correct, or you believe it wasn’t.

Option three: you believe that we don’t know yet. You believe that it’s ok to differ. You believe that snotty bickering causes more stress.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Yep. An opinion is one thing.
Telling me my business is kapoot via fiat, my parents are on lockdown for "good reason", based on speculation and changing narrative, yet not by my decision or choice, is well, nonsense.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Two options: you believe that the handling of the virus was correct, or you believe it wasn’t.


Some experts say the US response worked well, all things considered.


----------



## CKelly78z (Jul 16, 2017)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Some experts say the US response worked well, all things considered.


The MSM nightly news will never let that opinion/fact slip across their forked tongues, it doesn't meet their narrative !


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> Yet you did not discuss my statement but something ing else.
> 
> Treatments are available and more is learned about how the virus attacks the human body daily. Already they have reduced the death rate of those hospitalised in half since April because they better understand how the virus attacks those infected.
> 
> I believe that and preventive measures such as masks and social distancing are the best measures we have right now.


I heard much the same thing about HIV/AIDS and cancer as well and they still mention new treatments in the works but it seems none are sure fire solutions. 

I recognize the virus exists, I recognize it's a problem but I'm a pragmatic person and really don't feel we have a solution at this point and I really don't feel we can prevent people from dying. We haven't cured heart disease, cancer, HIV/AIDS, addiction issues, the common cold, seasonal flus or a litany of other human health ailments. 

The WHO tracks these things but they also don't seem to concerned about the other human casualties of this one and we need to find a balance and come to understand that if we can't save everybody from their eventual fate. We are literally born to die. 

I believe that social distancing and good judgement are the best measures we have at the moment but neither are considered treatments. One seems pretty simple but the other seems to be a challenge.

If good judgement played a part, churches and funerals would at least be allowed to entertain as many people as a pub, movie theater or night club.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

It's worth noting that we haven't cured the common cold, as it is also a coronavirus.


----------



## DJ in WA (Jan 28, 2005)

We’ve never done herd immunity? We have had outbreaks every year which end with herd immunity.
When did sick people dying from viruses become a new thing?

The longer we prolong the outbreak, the more total deaths we’ll have, as the vulnerable can’t hide forever. Not to mention collateral deaths not from virus.
As discussed elsewhere, the most ethical strategy is letting the young and healthy gain immunity so they don’t threaten the vulnerable, and it fades away, like it has for millions of years.
Sweden is done, while the U.S. wants to keep killing people.
As these scientists explain, allowing healthy to achieve herd immunity is basic public health practice.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> Those statements may hold true in some situations but not all.


Perhaps you can give me some examples of those scenarios where you feel it is humane or ethical to deny the elderly access to the comfort of family, prevent people from earning a living or forcing businesses into bankruptcy?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> Perhaps you can give me some examples of those scenarios where you feel it is humane or ethical to deny the elderly access to the comfort of family, prevent people from earning a living or forcing businesses into bankruptcy?


Too simple.

When the business or living causes damage to more than it helps.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

What happened to my body my choice?


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

painterswife said:


> Too simple.
> 
> When the business or living causes damage to more than it helps.


I didn't know that you were in favor of euthanasia. In your world, who gets to decide?


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

painterswife said:


> Too simple.
> 
> When the business or living causes damage to more than it helps.


While I admire your perseverance......

The people working and living life should make the decision for themselves of when it’s to much risk or damage.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Sure, we should just let stores sell products full of salmonella and let the customers decide for themselves if they should take the chance. LOL


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> *Too simple.*
> When the business or living *causes damage to more than it helps*.


The shutdowns are causing more damage than the virus.



painterswife said:


> Sure, we should just let stores sell products full of salmonella and let the customers decide for themselves if they should take the chance. LOL


Proper handling and cooking solves that problem.
That's covered in grade school health classes.

We don't need the Govt to protect us from every little thing.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Every time a trip is made to the grocery store there is a chance of some type of health problem that might be encountered. As a shopper you have the choice of the type of product you buy that increase or decreases your chances of a problem. For example, buying ground meat is a risky choice compared to buying quartered or large slice meat. Buying a whole chicken versus one that has been processed into smaller cuts. Buying cut up lettuce in a salad product is more risky than buying a head of lettuce and making your own salad. A shopper has the choice of what they want to buy and the risk level they wish to take. 

Many instances of this covid issue is the same. Make a choice, and own it. Let others have the ability to do the same.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Redlands Okie said:


> Every time a trip is made to the grocery store there is a chance of some type of health problem that might be encountered. As a shopper you have the choice of the type of product you buy that increase or decreases your chances of a problem. For example buying ground meat is a risky choice compared to buying quartered or large a slice meat. Buying a whole chicken versus one that has been processed into smaller cuts. Buying cut up lettuce in a salad product is more risky than buying a head of lettuce and making your own salad. A shopper has the choice of what they want to buy and the risk level they wish to take.
> 
> Many instances of this covid issue is the same. Make a choice, and own it. Let others have the ability to do the same.


I see your tipping point but you don't speak for an entire country just as I dont.. The government is elected to speak for the whole and public health is part of that. They are working on understanding what the tipping point of the majority is. Mistakes are made on both sides.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

painterswife said:


> I see your tipping point but you don't speak for an entire country just as I dont.. The government is elected to speak for the whole and public health is part of that. They are working on understanding what the tipping point of the majority is. Mistakes are made on both sides.


You obviously are unfamiliar with our form of government. It is a constitutional republic, not a mob rule country. Though there are states where it is in doubt at the moment. Churches closed, casinos open. Beaches where people are arrested for sitting in the sand, statue demolition by mob is cool beans. It is obvious that mitigation is not the goal in certain areas. Rather it is subjugation of certain classes of people using "public health" as the excuse. 

As to your simple point:



painterswife said:


> Too simple.
> 
> When the business or living causes damage to more than it helps.



have you really thought that philosophy out at all?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> The government is elected to speak for the whole and public health is part of that.


No, they really aren't.



painterswife said:


> *They are working* on understanding what the tipping point of the majority is.


*They *aren't working on anything.
They are keeping millions of others from working though.

Americans have nearly reached their "tipping point".


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

painterswife said:


> Sure, we should just let stores sell products full of salmonella and let the customers decide for themselves if they should take the chance. LOL


We already do that.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Redlands Okie said:


> We have had and are going to have drunk drivers. Other than your defensive driving skills your best chance of dealing with a accident from a drunk is your cars design and safety systems that protect you. Trying to keep a car space for every 10 mph is not going to do you any good. The drunks air bags are not going to do you any good.
> 
> Someone that’s infected and going out and about in public is going to and has happened. Relying on them to protect yourself is just not a smart thing to do. You need to rely on your safety procedures and your safety systems to protect yourself.


There is only so much you can do to protect yourself. Saying that people who contracted covid have only themselves to blame is like saying innocent bystanders killed by drunk drivers have only themselves to blame. You can't do much when a drunk going 90 mph suddenly veers into your lane and hits you head on any more than you can prevent a covid infected person from jumping in front of you and coughing directly in your face. 

The majority of the people infected on that first quarantined cruise ship did nothing to put themselves at risk. The majority of patients infected at nursing homes did nothing to put themselves at risk.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

painterswife said:


> Sure, we should just let stores sell products full of salmonella and let the customers decide for themselves if they should take the chance. LOL


Try cooking your food sometime-- It's yummy. Proper food safety measures, good handling/cooking takes care of that problem. I for one dont need a nanny to tell me my uncooked chicken is dangerous if not properly cooked, ECT. Some of these modern day sheep might need their hand held but I do not. Furthermore, our efforts to totally sterilize our food supply creates an intolerance to small amounts of harmful bacteria which until fairly recently were pretty well tolerated in almost all people. 'Fixing' all the diseases and sterilizing all the food is not the answer.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The shutdowns are causing more damage than the virus.
> 
> 
> Proper handling and cooking solves that problem.
> ...


You beat me to it, I see


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

LOL, ever heard if samonella on salad. That was one example folks. I could give a thousand but it wont matter to you so I won't bother.

In your world, we don't need, food inspectors or laws about no arsenic in your flour.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

painterswife said:
Too simple.

When the business or living causes damage to more than it helps.



Redlands Okie said:


> While I admire your perseverance......
> 
> The people working and living life should make the decision for themselves of when it’s to much risk or damage.


See, the people can't be trusted to make the right decision.
WHO, CDC, the Federal government, they can be trusted.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

painterswife said:


> LOL, ever heard if samonella on salad. That was one example folks. I could give a thousand but it wont matter to you so I won't bother.


If they applied to the topic that may be of some benefit.
The mass lockdown fad has passed and even the apathetic can see it wasn't as it was portrayed.
The few who want to cling to the narrative can mop up and flip the lights when they are done.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Danaus29 said:


> There is only so much you can do to protect yourself. Saying that people who contracted covid have only themselves to blame is like saying innocent bystanders killed by drunk drivers have only themselves to blame. You can't do much when a drunk going 90 mph suddenly veers into your lane and hits you head on any more than you can prevent a covid infected person from jumping in front of you and coughing directly in your face.
> 
> The majority of the people infected on that first quarantined cruise ship did nothing to put themselves at risk. The majority of patients infected at nursing homes did nothing to put themselves at risk.


If you are wearing your mask and glasses then a cough to your face should not be a covid issue. 

A drunk at 90 mph is already breaking many laws that were created to prevent the problem. Your best hope in dealing with such a wreck is trying for whatever avoidance you can and in having selected a vehicle to drive that enhances your chances. 

Those on the ship seemed to have failed in a variety of things they could have done to help them self’s. 

I agree those in the nursing homes were victims. Just as they would have been when catching the flue or other illness from CAREGIVERS improperly doing their job and failing to follow already existing rules.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)




----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

According to everything the current swing is saying, your mask won't protect YOU. You wear a mask to protect others from getting your germs. If masks worked, the states where they are mandatory would not have increasing case numbers. 

Just like the drunk drivers, people who know they are infected and go out into the public anyway, are putting others at risk. At least the drunks have the argument of having impaired judgement on their side.

But you believe what you want to believe. I have worthwhile things to accomplish.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Danaus29 said:


> According to everything the current swing is saying, your mask won't protect YOU. You wear a mask to protect others from getting your germs. If masks worked, the states where they are mandatory would not have increasing case numbers.
> 
> Just like the drunk drivers, people who know they are infected and go out into the public anyway, are putting others at risk. At least the drunks have the argument of having impaired judgement on their side.
> 
> But you believe what you want to believe. I have worthwhile things to accomplish.


I still haven't received an answer on where I can purchase that special 1 way fabric. 

Logically, if something can sneak through the fabric of a mask from the outside, they should be able to sneak out from the inside. 

I see masks often being discussed as a positive way to control the virus but our two major cities that have very rigid mask laws are seeing a strong increase in infections and communities who are relying more on social distancing and hand santizer at the doors are seeing declines or no new infections. 

Perhaps rural logic is more effective than random, ill conceived laws.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> Too simple.
> 
> When the business or living causes damage to more than it helps.


I wouldn't consider that humane because that also includes those who have committed suicide, homes lost and a direct lack of concern for those seniors that don't want to be locked away from the comfort of family or to die alone. 

Collateral damage would be a much better term than humane.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> I wouldn't consider that humane because that also includes those who have committed suicide, homes lost and a direct lack of concern for those seniors that don't want to be locked away from the comfort of family or to die alone.
> 
> Collateral damage would be a much better term than humane.


I consider it humane to protect someone from something that will shorten their life. There is always a tipping point between where the good outweighs the bad. Ways have been found to address the need to protect them from the virus and still provide family comfort and prevent people from dying alone. Seems that your area is not doing well in that respect and you are railing at that. Here they are using the lessons learned since the advent of the virus. PPP, testing, masks, and social distancing. 

Then of course I may have a different perspective than you do because I have in the past experienced the need for all those things with sick family. Where we could not touch because of contagions and had to make do with other ways of keeping close. Our tipping point was to enable our loved ones to live a longer life with some short term loss of closeness. I can say it was worth it.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

This has not been a short term loss of closeness, unless you can call 7 months short term.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> In your world, we don't need, food inspectors or laws about no arsenic in your flour.


No one but you has said any such thing.



painterswife said:


> *I could* give a thousand but it wont matter to you so *I won't bother.*


You use that line a lot too.



painterswife said:


> Then of course* I may have a different perspective than you* do because I have in the past experienced the need for all those things with sick family.


You do love to think you are "special". 

Divert and distract.
It's what you do when you run out of facts pertaining to the real topic.
Patterns...........


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

RJ2019 said:


> You beat me to it, I see


I'll try to type more slowly in the future.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> I consider it humane to protect someone from something that will shorten their life. There is always a tipping point between where the good outweighs the bad. Ways have been found to address the need to protect them from the virus and still provide family comfort and prevent people from dying alone. Seems that your area is not doing well in that respect and you are railing at that. Here they are using the lessons learned since the advent of the virus. PPP, testing, masks, and social distancing.
> 
> Then of course I may have a different perspective than you do because I have in the past experienced the need for all those things with sick family. Where we could not touch because of contagions and had to make do with other ways of keeping close. Our tipping point was to enable our loved ones to live a longer life with some short term loss of closeness. I can say it was worth it.


My area is no different than anyplace else. We are certainly allowed to see our family member if they are within a certain number of days of death with no restrictions but what about the months before? Family visits to people in extended care facilities are restricted to a certain number of very specific family members so those from larger families have to pick and chose who can't visit but that doesn't account for the collateral damage from the last several months does it? 

Not everybody in extended care declines before they die and I know quite a few that have died alone in the last several months. I call the collateral damage and I really don't feel it was humane, even if it can be justified in some manner. 

You also neglected to address the other collateral damages I mentioned. Do you truly feel those who lost businesses and the families of those who committed suicide look upon the experiment as humane? I don't think they do. 

I accept that you think it was justified and mabe it was but I don't accept the idea that it was as humane as you claim.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

I think it's inhumane to try to dictate to someone else what they can and cant be doing with their own life. Within reason, I suppose serial killers shouldn't be allowed to run free but most of the rest is a bunch of BS. I just LOVE it when some elitist thinks they know what's best for me.....


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

I don't believe any collateral damage is justified nor did I ever say that. I however am realistic. Collateral damage will happen no matter what choice is made. No shutdowns and people in those jobs and businesses will also die because they get infected. Medical staff will be overwhelmed and face PSTD because they can't save people and see them die without their loved ones. Medical staff have already committed suicide because of what they were faced with and went through. Businesses will be lost because of the deaths of the owners.

There is a tipping point and everyone is working on solutions to balance the good with the bad. Mistakes are made on both sides. You post like you think that others are inhumane because they are struggling to find the path that does the least damage. No, they are just human and don't have all the answers.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> I don't believe any collateral damage is justified nor did I ever say that. I however am realistic. Collateral damage will happen no matter what choice is made. No shutdowns and people in those jobs and businesses will also die because they get infected. Medical staff will be overwhelmed and face PSTD because they can't save people and see them die without their loved ones. Medical staff have already committed suicide because of what they were faced with and went through. Businesses will be lost because of the deaths of the owners.
> 
> There is a tipping point and everyone is working on solutions to balance the good with the bad. Mistakes are made on both sides. You post like you think that others are inhumane because they are struggling to find the path that does the least damage. No, they are just human and don't have all the answers.


I understand collateral damage and the only reason we headed down this path was because I asked you for clarification on your comment indicating that these and other issues were in your opinion, humane. 

I consider them all casualties of ill conceived notions and knee jerk reactions by officials trying to prove to the public they are somehow safer with complex rules that punish some at the expense of a perceived greater good.


----------



## RobertDane (Feb 14, 2020)

wr said:


> I understand collateral damage and the only reason we headed down this path was because I asked you for clarification on your comment indicating that these and other issues were in your opinion, humane.
> 
> I consider them all casualties of ill conceived notions and knee jerk reactions by officials trying to prove to the public they are somehow safer with complex rules that punish some at the expense of a perceived greater good.


Nothing too complex about wearing a mask and keeping six feet away from people. Kansas has stats that show

when Laura, our governor, implemented those rules the infection rate went down. Problem is with the whiners

that think they no better than the scientists and Doctors. A brand new deadly disease and the medical community

has had their ups and downs on presenting good data. Because they couldn't come out with the definitive answers

right off the bat, some people declared they didn't know what they were talking about. Such ignorance..


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Wr wrote “Because they couldn't come out with the definitive answers
right off the bat, some people declared they didn't know what they were talking about.”

Respectfully, “Not having the definitive answers,” flip flopping recommendations, and abusing the elderly by sequestering them indicated that “they didn't know what they were talking about.”


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> I however am realistic.














painterswife said:


> No shutdowns and people in those jobs and businesses *will also die because they get infected*


That's simply ridiculous.
97% of those infected survive



painterswife said:


> There is a tipping point


Get a new catch phrase.
You've pushed this one past it's tipping point.



painterswife said:


> You post like you think that others are inhumane because they are *struggling to find the path that does the least damage*. No, they are just human and don't have all the answers.


Same old empty, melodramatic rhetoric.

The "experts" say our response has been very good.
I'm still waiting to see some real facts from you.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

wr said:


> I still haven't received an answer on where I can purchase that special 1 way fabric.
> 
> Logically, if something can sneak through the fabric of a mask from the outside, they should be able to sneak out from the inside.
> 
> ...


I have said repeatedly that if masks worked the covid cases would be dropping, not rising, in areas where mask use is required.

But then, maybe masks would work if people wore them properly. Hand washing might work if done properly. Social distancing might work if done properly.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

painterswife said:


> I don't believe any collateral damage is justified nor did I ever say that. I however am realistic. Collateral damage will happen no matter what choice is made. No shutdowns and people in those jobs and businesses will also die because they get infected. Medical staff will be overwhelmed and face PSTD because they can't save people and see them die without their loved ones. Medical staff have already committed suicide because of what they were faced with and went through. Businesses will be lost because of the deaths of the owners.
> 
> There is a tipping point and everyone is working on solutions to balance the good with the bad. Mistakes are made on both sides. You post like you think that others are inhumane because they are struggling to find the path that does the least damage. No, they are just human and don't have all the answers.


Those that go to their job or business by choice and die as a result, no problem whatsoever. 

Medical staff that might have to deal with PSTD because they went to work of their on free will? It’s their choice and they should own it. As in many professions, if they do not wish to deal with the possible problems, then they should do something else. If they went to work of their on free will trying to help others, and they could not handle it, then perhaps they should be given some assistance to deal with it. The medical field does not deserve anymore than the military or law enforcment for a couple examples. End of sympathy.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

If the mask issue is so important then why after all of this time are mask of actual use to the person WEARING them not commonly available for the public after all of this time? Why are the documents about the mask we have available so full of terms such as could, should, probably, etc. Many do not seem to realize they are being played.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

RobertDane said:


> Nothing too complex about wearing a mask and keeping six feet away from people. Kansas has stats that show
> 
> when Laura, our governor, implemented those rules the infection rate went down. Problem is with the whiners
> 
> ...


I don't find the laws consistent and that's what bothers me. If could explain why restaurants reopened before playgrounds, golf courses opened before people in extended care facitlites were allowed out for a breath of fresh air or why a bar can host more people than a funeral or church service, I'd be grateful. 

I've asked several times and nobody has been able to answer my question about masks. Can you explain the special qualities of the cheap masks that most are relying on for safety. Any science I've read indicates that they don't keep the virus in or out. 

Perhaps the news is different in the US but we have daily reports of major outbreaks and last I heard, we have as many people in ER now as we did when we were locked down but oddly the same mess is considered under control now but not under control in March. What is the difference?

Additionally, I would ask why, you feel the need to insult anyone who finds fault in policies or decisions that make no sense?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Masks slow down transmission of airborne viruses. It is proven science. Masks are just one part of a mitigation process and not a single magic bullet. It has been posted many times in other threads.

Social distancing, hand washing and masks are each another layer of protection.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

I am not claiming any real knowledge. This is speculation.

Restaurants are occupied primarily by adults and each table and the items on the table are sanitized before the next customer. Playgrounds are occupied by kids running into each other and putting grimy hands on things, then putting grimy hands in their mouths.

Golf courses are open air, the players transport themselves in their own vehicles or walk. Nursing home residents are primarily transported or escorted outside, and it would take more staff than they had. (the logical solution was to allow family members, but.... hey... logic isn't in use in 2020)

What is it that you want to know about cheap masks that hasn't already been said?

The difference between now and March is the news media has changed their refrain (many times), the scientists, experts (haha), and doctors have changed their recommendations (many times), and after six months we still are doing what we do based on our own perceptions. (which is what we do all the time)


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Can face masks protect against COVID-19?


Face masks can help slow the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Learn about mask types, which masks to use and how to use them.




www.mayoclinic.org





"Can face masks help slow the spread of the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) that causes COVID-19? Yes, face masks combined with other preventive measures, such as frequent hand-washing and social distancing, help slow the spread of the virus.


So why weren't face masks recommended at the start of the pandemic? At that time, experts didn't know the extent to which people with COVID-19 could spread the virus before symptoms appeared. Nor was it known that some people have COVID-19 but don't have any symptoms. Both groups can unknowingly spread the virus to others.

These discoveries led public health groups to do an about-face on face masks. The World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now include face masks in their recommendations for slowing the spread of the virus. The CDC recommends cloth face masks for the public and not the surgical and N95 masks needed by health care providers"


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Social distancing, hand washing and masks are each another layer of protection.


Keeping your job is a "layer of protection" too.



painterswife said:


> The CDC recommends *cloth face masks* for the public and not the surgical and N95 masks needed by health care providers"


Yet they know those masks don't add much protection, and around 85% of those infected say they wore masks.
If masks work, end the unnecessary shutdowns.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Trust the science.

“The study found [that most Covid patients] 74.2% reported wearing masks “always” while 14.5% wore masks “often,” or 85% almost always wore masks.”

Also, 61% of the patients had a “co-morbidity” condition. 









New CDC Study Finds Majority of Those Infected with COVID-19 ‘Always’ Wore Masks - California Globe


Once again it appears there are conflicting facts, data and plenty of opinions about the efficacy of wearing masks to prevent contracting the Coronavirus.




californiaglobe.com


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> “The study found [that most Covid patients] 74.2% reported wearing masks “always” while 14.5% wore masks “often,” or *85% almost always wore masks.”*


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

So which statement made by the CDC was a lie? The statement that masks must be saved for medical personnel since they were in short supply or the statement that they didn't realize how easily covid could be spread?

The jury is still out on the effectiveness of face mask use by real people in real life; the same people who go out in public when drop dead sick and/or refuse to wash their nasty hands.

The CDC knew back in March how easily and rapidly covid could be spread. They also repeatedly said the extremely limited supply of masks must be reserved for those in the medical community. Even in this interview with NPR, the "experts" mention the shortage and how easily covid is spread by asymptomatic people.








Should We All Be Wearing Masks In Public? Health Experts Revisit The Question


There are rumblings that U.S. health officials may start encouraging Americans to wear face masks to cut down on asymptomatic spread. But with continued shortages, it's not clear how we'd do that.




www.npr.org


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

I would like to see some scientific studies on the effectiveness of masks as a disease preventative as masks are worn now, by the general public, on day 190 of 15 days to flatten the curve. It would be easy to perform, just offer $100 for a cashier's chin diaper, or the dirty mask out of someone's change cavity in their console where they store it between uses. Then just culture them and see what grows.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Which statement is a lie? Hmmmmm. Not sure. My crystal ball is cloudy. (and yes, I do have one)


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Which statement is a lie? Hmmmmm. Not sure. My crystal ball is cloudy. (and yes, I do have one)


My daughter wants one but told me a lady she was going to buy one from said to keep it covered or else you can catch your house on fire. Still not sure if the daughter was messing with me but it cost her a crystal ball if she was


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Masks slow down transmission of airborne viruses. It is* proven science*.











Masking lack of evidence with politics - The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine


Tom Jefferson, Carl Heneghan The increasing polarised and politicised views 1 on whether to wear masks in public during the




www.cebm.net







https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/332293/WHO-2019-nCov-IPC_Masks-2020.4-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y











Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures


Pandemic Influenza—Personal Protective Measures




wwwnc.cdc.gov













The Year of Disguises


"It boggles my mind when there is some notion that by wearing a face covering you are actually doing a 'service' to your neighbor and therefore everyone has to protect everyone by this. Actually, the opposite is true. You are now becoming an additional potential source of environmental...




www.aier.org


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

GTX63 said:


> painterswife said:
> Too simple.
> 
> When the business or living causes damage to more than it helps.
> ...


I almost spit coffee all over my machine when I ran into this one. I am convinced this is sarcasm at it's best.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

MJsLady said:


> I almost spit coffee all over my machine when I ran into this one. I am convinced this is sarcasm at it's best.


How would you feel If I told you that person actually feels like that statement is true?


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

RJ2019 said:


> How would you feel If I told you that person actually feels like that statement is true?


EDIT... the phrase from Painterswife is not what I was replying to. I know they believe that. While I disagree I would not comment on her specific post BECAUSE is disagreed. The one I tried to quote was... Now I can not find it. It was short by GTX I think but did not include PW's quote. 
Sorry for the irritation. 
I would feel they need to better express themselves then. I would never purposely hurt someone's feelings.
My feelings don't matter. Feelings, in general are fluid. Logic and facts are not.
Either way, speaking as one who is "high risk" for catching this particular form of "almost certain death", I don't feel it is MY job to make others uncomfortable in order to keep me safe. I and my husband are both at risk. We take precautions, recommended by his infectious disease specialist and move on.
That said, a good stiff flu might take me out too. Chances are probably even or tipped on the flu side.
I would like to see numbers of ACTUAL deaths of covid vs flu. From what I have seen locally and read the numbers are all messed up.Both TX and FL have had issues with accurate testing numbers. Double counts, mixed tests, some blank swabs testing positive. I know of one persons family who waited in line for a test, NEVER got one, left because they had to be somewhere, and were notified later they were positive for covid.
My point is, we don't have enough solid info. One day masks help, the next they don't. Then well they help YOU not spread but don't stop you from contracting.
Not enough solid ground, it is at the moment a mixed bag of swamp and sand.
The bedrock is, people have died and are dying. I feel for them and I feel for their families but basing policy on what we know now, at this minute is like building a castle in a swamp andn ot expecting it to sink.


----------

