Strangest COVID-19 stuff you have witnessed

[quixoft]

37 minutes ago, ATXZJ said:

Finally

https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/required-all-texans-must-wear-face-coverings-gov-greg-abbott-orders/

“COVID-19 is not going away. In fact, it’s getting worse.”

wonder why that is?

 

This will be interesting

"Restrictions on outdoor gatherings are also included in the order. Gatherings can no longer be over 10 people and, with certain exceptions, groups over 10 must maintain six feet of social distancing."

 

Hockey is still happening for us. There have been 32 guys in the local beer leagues that have tested positive in the past couple weeks so we've had some changes like no spectators, limited time in the locker room, masks except when on the bench or ice, etc. We get updates from the league every time someone tests positive and which games they played in the past two weeks so we know who was around.

None of the guys that had it were hospitalized, none had any major issues, and all have been fine within a few days.  I've spoken with probably half of them and they said it feels like bad allergies. I'm guessing it's our highly developed immune systems from putting on all the disgusting, bacteria and virus filled gear that smells like death a few times a week!

Edited July 2, 2020 by quixoft

[Cafeend]

Vanilla Ice holding Friday concert on Lake Travis despite rising coronavirus cases
event maximum capacity: 450
tickets sold as of two days before the concert: 84
[update, Mr. Ice canceled the show.]

Cancelled ..
This is why we cant have Ice things

I'm not going," he said on Twitter. "I listen to my fans. I hear all you people out there. I didn't know the numbers were so crazy in Austin. We were hoping it would be a lot better by the Fourth of July. We booked this concert a long time ago. Basically, just want to stay safe. We do take it serious. We were just hoping for a good time but it turned into a big focal point on me and it's not about that. Anyway, happy Fourth of July and by New Years hopefully this corona crap will have a cure!"

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[ATXZJ]

21 minutes ago, Cafeend said:

 and by New Years hopefully this corona crap will have a cure!"

 

like a career comeback, very wishful thinking there ice

37 minutes ago, quixoft said:

None of the guys that had it were hospitalized, none had any major issues, and all have been fine within a few days.  I've spoken with probably half of them and they said it feels like bad allergies. I'm guessing it's our highly developed immune systems from putting on all the disgusting, bacteria and virus filled gear that smells like death a few times a week!

There is this^

100 years ago, that same robust immune system would've killed you.  Nature is friggin" random

 

Edited July 2, 2020 by ATXZJ

[AustinBike]

11 hours ago, Cafeend said:

Cancelled ..
This is why we cant have Ice things

I'm not going," he said on Twitter. "I listen to my fans. I hear all you people out there. I didn't know the numbers were so crazy in Austin. We were hoping it would be a lot better by the Fourth of July. We booked this concert a long time ago. Basically, just want to stay safe. We do take it serious. We were just hoping for a good time but it turned into a big focal point on me and it's not about that. Anyway, happy Fourth of July and by New Years hopefully this corona crap will have a cure!"

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

Best tweet I saw about this was that the event would not be an issue because the ordinance only limited events with over 10 people. Ouch.

[GFisher]

22 hours ago, quixoft said:

Hockey is still happening for us. There have been 32 guys in the local beer leagues that have tested positive in the past couple weeks so we've had some changes like no spectators, limited time in the locker room, masks except when on the bench or ice, etc. We get updates from the league every time someone tests positive and which games they played in the past two weeks so we know who was around.

None of the guys that had it were hospitalized, none had any major issues, and all have been fine within a few days.  I've spoken with probably half of them and they said it feels like bad allergies. I'm guessing it's our highly developed immune systems from putting on all the disgusting, bacteria and virus filled gear that smells like death a few times a week!

That is F'ed up. I wonder how many total people have been infected by this cluster. 

[quixoft]

44 minutes ago, GFisher said:

That is F'ed up. I wonder how many total people have been infected by this cluster. 

32 infections out of about 1000 players since reopening in mid May? I hardly consider that a cluster. In fact I'd say that's showing that the rules the rinks have enforced are having a positive effect in slowing the spread in our community while still staying open. The only people allowed in the rink are the refs, players, and workers(most of which are also players). It's a 3.2% infection rate over a period of 6 weeks in a sport that is very close contact. I'd say that's pretty darn good at controlling things. Not a single case has been anything but very mild and the rinks are contact tracing heavily with almost daily updates.

* Only players, refs, and staff(usually only 2-3 people) are allowed in the building
* Temps are taken upon entry and no one at 100 or above gets in
* Masks are required at all times even on the ice now which really sucks trying to breath while playing but we're doing it
* Sanitation happens in between each game in the locker rooms and on the benches
* Players are only allowed in the building 20 minutes before game time and must leave within 20 minutes of the game ending to allow for sanitation time
* There is no handshake line post game
* Any team that has a player test positive is having their games pushed out two weeks from the date of the positive test so the team can quarantine. The opposing team as well.

The rules have made for some headaches and wonky scheduling but we're willing to follow the rules in order to keep playing. It's a good system and keeping the leagues up and running. They would fail and we would lose hockey in Austin if they completely shut down again because ice isn't exactly cheap to maintain in Texas and they need a consistent revenue stream from players.

I'm sorry you feel that this "F'ed up". I think we are doing a fantastic job of limiting contact and going above and beyond while still allowing our rinks to stay open and games to continue. Clearly with your response you disagree and that's okay. I respect your opinion and understand your alarm but I feel our efforts are more than responsible enough to continue to play. After all, the goal is to flatten the curve and keeps hospitals from being overloaded, not completely eliminate the virus.

 

Edited July 3, 2020 by quixoft

[GFisher]

10 minutes ago, quixoft said:

32 infections out of about 1000 players since reopening in mid May? I hardly consider that a cluster. In fact I'd say that's showing that the rules the rinks have enforced are having a positive effect in slowing spread while still staying open. The only people allowed in the rink are the refs, players, and workers(most of which are also players). It's a 0.32% infection rate over a period of 6 weeks in a sport that is very close contact. I'd say that's pretty darn good at controlling things.Not a single case has been anything but very mild and they are contact tracing heavily.

* Temps are taken upon entry and no one at 100 or above gets in
* Masks are required at all times even on the ice now which really sucks trying to breath while playing but we're doing it
* Sanitation happens in between each game in the locker rooms and on the benches
* Players are only allowed in the building 20 minutes before game time and must leave within 20 minutes of the game ending to allow for sanitation time
* There is no handshake line post game
* Any team that has a player test positive is having their games pushed out two weeks from the date of the positive test so the team can quarantine. The opposing team as well.

The rules have made for some headaches and wonky scheduling but we're willing to follow the rules in order to keep playing. It's a good system and keeping the leagues up and running. They would fail and we would lose hockey in Austin if they completely shut down again because ice isn't exactly cheap to maintain in Texas and they need a consistent revenue stream from players.

I'm sorry you feel that this "F'ed up". I think we are doing a fantastic job of and going above and beyond while still allowing our rinks to stay open and games to continue. Clearly with your response you disagree and that's okay. I respect your opinion and understand your alarm. 

 

Thanks for all the additional info. Doesn't sound as bad as I thought with more detail. Still sounds like we'd be better off if you guys gave it a rest at least while things are on such a trajectory, but I know we all have our own opinions.

Edited July 3, 2020 by GFisher

[Tree Magnet]

32 infections out of about 1000 players since reopening in mid May? I hardly consider that a cluster. In fact I'd say that's showing that the rules the rinks have enforced are having a positive effect in slowing the spread in our community while still staying open. The only people allowed in the rink are the refs, players, and workers(most of which are also players). It's a 3.2% infection rate over a period of 6 weeks in a sport that is very close contact. I'd say that's pretty darn good at controlling things. Not a single case has been anything but very mild and the rinks are contact tracing heavily with almost daily updates.

* Only players, refs, and staff(usually only 2-3 people) are allowed in the building
* Temps are taken upon entry and no one at 100 or above gets in
* Masks are required at all times even on the ice now which really sucks trying to breath while playing but we're doing it
* Sanitation happens in between each game in the locker rooms and on the benches
* Players are only allowed in the building 20 minutes before game time and must leave within 20 minutes of the game ending to allow for sanitation time
* There is no handshake line post game
* Any team that has a player test positive is having their games pushed out two weeks from the date of the positive test so the team can quarantine. The opposing team as well.

The rules have made for some headaches and wonky scheduling but we're willing to follow the rules in order to keep playing. It's a good system and keeping the leagues up and running. They would fail and we would lose hockey in Austin if they completely shut down again because ice isn't exactly cheap to maintain in Texas and they need a consistent revenue stream from players.

I'm sorry you feel that this "F'ed up". I think we are doing a fantastic job of limiting contact and going above and beyond while still allowing our rinks to stay open and games to continue. Clearly with your response you disagree and that's okay. I respect your opinion and understand your alarm but I feel our efforts are more than responsible enough to continue to play. After all, the goal is to flatten the curve and keeps hospitals from being overloaded, not completely eliminate the virus.

 

I gotta say that it sounds like you guys are trying to do it right. The contact tracing and limiting exposure looks like an example of how it should be done.

We still haven’t started our kids back doing gymnastics or climbing but eventually we’re going to have to find a risk level that works for us. Right now, it just feels like the spread is just too rampant and the risk is too high so we’re sitting out a while longer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheX]

"Most people are more likely to wind up six feet under because of almost anything else under the sun other than COVID-19.

The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.


"Until now, we have been ridiculed for thinking the death rate was that low, as opposed to the 3.4% estimate of the World Health Organization, which helped drive the panic and the lockdowns. Now the CDC is agreeing to the lower rate in plain ink.

Plus, ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomatic cases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.

More importantly, as I mentioned before, the overall death rate is meaningless because the numbers are so lopsided. Given that at least half of the deaths were in nursing homes, a back-of-the-envelope estimate would show that the infection fatality rate for non-nursing home residents would only be 0.1% or 1 in 1,000. And that includes people of all ages and all health statuses outside of nursing homes. Since nearly all of the deaths are those with comorbidities.

The CDC estimates the death rate from COVID-19 for those under 50 is 1 in 5,000 for those with symptoms, which would be 1 in 6,725 overall, but again, almost all those who die have specific comorbidities or underlying conditions. Those without them are more likely to die in a car accident. And schoolchildren, whose lives, mental health, and education we are destroying, are more likely to get struck by lightning.

To put this in perspective, one Twitter commentator juxtaposed the age-separated infection fatality rates in Spain to the average yearly probability of dying of anything for the same age groups, based on data from the Social Security Administration. He used Spain because we don’t have a detailed infection fatality rate estimate for each age group from any survey in the U.S. However, we know that Spain fared worse than almost every other country. This data is actually working with a top-line IFR of 1%, roughly four times what the CDC estimates for the U.S., so if anything, the corresponding numbers for the U.S. will be lower.

As you can see, even in Spain, the death rates from COVID-19 for younger people are very low and are well below the annual death rate for any age group in a given year. For children, despite their young age, they are 10-30 times more likely to die from other causes in any given year.

While obviously yearly death rates factor in myriad of causes of death and COVID-19 is just one virus, it still provides much-needed perspective to a public policy response that is completely divorced from the risk for all but the oldest and sickest people in the country."
 

[JMR]

Yep

Edited July 4, 2020 by JMR
No need

[TheX]

Stanford doctor: Coronavirus fatality rate for people under 45 'almost 0%'

Stanford University's disease prevention chairman slammed using statewide lockdown measures as a response to the coronavirus, saying they were implemented based on bad data and inaccurate modeling.

 www.washingtonexaminer.com

World-Leading Infectious Disease Expert Explains Why Government Lockdowns Should End | Jon Miltimore

In 2010, The Atlantic said that Dr. John Ioannidis “may be one of the most influential scientists alive.” He has authored some of the most cited medical journal articles in history. Today, Ioannidis has become perhaps the leading medical voice against COVID-19 alarmism and government lockdowns...

fee.org

Drs. Ioannidis, Bhattacharya, Levitt, and other stood firm in exercising reasoned intelligence, even as spawn of their very institution, Silicon Valley elite's social media platform [sentiment manipulators] actively worked to undermine these ideals.

I am listing prior posts related to this --

April 19... Stanford MD, DSc, and NIH awardee Dr Ioannidis, expert in epidemiology and healthcare metrics, is also co-director of the Santa Clara study with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

• He stated based on their data, given trends in numbers of probable untested infected people who are either asymptotic or not experiencing acute symptoms, there is a case for moving on to phased opening while under trend surveillance.

As early as April 27 the "reality of the lethality" was clear to me:

• "New research on Death Rate by way of infections beyond treated and admitted cases is being conducted primarily by universities [e.g. the Stanford "Santa Clara" study] and similar research institutions, seemingly "outside" of the federal government's task force. That's ponderous!"
• "If the nascent death rate studies adhere to the current trend, and more data validates said trend, the actual death rate is multiple orders of magnitude lower than the assumed death rate [upon which our plan of action has been based]."

April 21... USC numbers buttress Stanford's landmark Santa Clara results. This doesn't shift the government and media narrative, and is quickly ignored,

• Early antibody testing suggests COVID-19 infections in L.A. County greatly exceed documented cases
• USC and L.A. County Department of Public Health officials have released the preliminary results of their antibody tests, which show a surprising number of residents have been infected with the coronavirus.
• “We haven’t known the true extent of COVID-19 infections in our community because we have only tested people with symptoms, and the availability of tests has been limited,” said lead investigator Neeraj Sood, professor of public policy at the USC Price School for Public Policy and senior fellow at the USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics. “The estimates also suggest that we might have to recalibrate disease prediction models and rethink public health strategies.”

Mayor Garcetti: were you listening? Hellz nopes!


April 28... Still gobsmacked by stubborn agenda-driven, purposeful avoidance!

• Yup, we need more statistically relevant sample sets akin to Stanford U Santa Clara study. Inclusive of asymptomatics, and people who just rode it out with OTC meds like you do with the flu.
• Why the USG isn't broadly and vigorously pursuing the Stanford approach beggars the mind...

May 1... No one in public service did this well:

• "A statistically relevant randomized sample set is required, and not being systematically pursued (why?). Only the Stanford U Santa Clara and USC LA County studies have attempted to characterize, to yield a more accurate Death Rate, and some international ones."

May 6... Even after Dr. Michael Levitt, professor of structural biology at Stanford Medical School and winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize in chemistry stated,

• "There is no doubt in my mind that when we come to look back on this, the damage done by lockdown will exceed any saving of lives by a huge factor"

... our public health bureaucracy persisted with their ostrich repose:
 

Fauci’s Vaccine Dream: “I hope we don’t have so many people infected (with COVID19) that we actually have that herd immunity.” 

May 10... Scott W. Atlas, MD, David and Joan Traitel Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and the former chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center, proclaims 'The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation'

Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of dying from COVID-19.

Fact 2: Protecting older, at-risk people eliminates hospital overcrowding.

Fact 3: Vital population immunity is prevented by total isolation policies, prolonging the problem.

Fact 4: People are dying because other medical care is not getting done due to hypothetical projections.

Fact 5: We have a clearly defined population at risk who can be protected with targeted measures.

The appropriate policy, based on fundamental biology and the evidence already in hand, is to institute a more focused strategy like some outlined in the first place: Strictly protect the known vulnerable, self-isolate the mildly sick and open most workplaces and small businesses with some prudent large-group precautions. This would allow the essential socializing to generate immunity among those with minimal risk of serious consequence, while saving lives, preventing overcrowding of hospitals and limiting the enormous harms compounded by continued total isolation. Let’s stop underemphasizing empirical evidence while instead doubling down on hypothetical models. Facts matter.


No one...
No person paid by taxpayers did the rigorous thinking required by positions of public trust.
Not a single one.

May 15... Their ascent of even a gently sloping learning curve is questionable. Actually, I lay direct blame at Dr. Fauci, who has been the smoothest criminal, via sins of omission.
 

I remain enormously frustrated because we are not engaged in widespread regionalized yet randomized statistically-relevant serum testing for anti-bodies.

Testing only symptomatic and walk-ups is a GIGO data strategy, yielding out-of-context analytics and information that doesn't enable actionable intelligence or generate sufficient situational understanding for informed decision making.

There's not discussion or even acknowledgement that an "analysis of alternatives" is necessary as part of the minimum entry criteria to adequate decision making. It's not being broached by Fed experts, and certainly not being put to them by the fourth estate.

You wouldn't pass 'go' elsewhere without these conditions being met, yet such conditions being disregarded as related to our HHS, NIH, CDC expert-driven public health policy is being squelched? In favor of dum-dum gotcha questions?!

Retorts come easily: “listen to the experts” “follow the science.”

Yet established science is not made upon expert opinion not matter how eminent the voices. Science is made upon hammering out various hypotheses. Science is deliberative, a controlled process of evaluating unfolding evidence, and the competing interpretations of such evidence. Science doesn't happen when you don't bring inherently conflicting ideas to the table... ideas which may spur a new directions in thinking, caste aside accepted wisdom, etc.

Why haven’t we sought plurality in this matter?

We’ve seen decades worth of evidence that distributed decision making, crowd sourcing, transparent exposure of open source systems and models help accelerate and improve our knowledge base and decision making capabilities = across many domains and fields of endeavor? Hell, we fall over ourselves to tout this! Where is the 'diversity of thought improves everything' mantra nowadays?

Time to apply these axioms to our current situation, not exclude them!

To me, it appears we are leaning heavily on a small cadre of anointed experts who are too staid, too long in the bureaucracy, too comfortable working the levers of power than affecting disruptive change. It would be one thing if they invited and moderated open dialog, using the power vested in them on behalf of the People to mediate and converge upon a well-reasoned path. But we are relying upon them to call the shots.

What would be the harm of exploring below, in terms of open discussion and serious consideration?

• Based antibodies in serologic evidence: high rate of recovered asymptomatic population. Not being tested, therefore not represented in official counts.
  • Death rate between 0.1- 0.5% orders of magnitude lower than model projections used for decision making.
  • Containment strategies not effective [too late], virus too widespread to eradicate.
  • Containment could backfire via test avoidance, if positive results require forcible quarantine.
  • Lockdowns simply delay full spread. Herd infection is inevitable.
  • Lockdowns bring enormous health impacts, economic collapse would intensify.
  • Vaccine roadmap still open-ended, shouldn't factor into intermediate strategy.
  • Proceed with phased, regional reopening. Focus on at-risk populations. Tamp down flare-up i.e. focused micro-containments not mass lockdowns shutdowns.

[AustinBike]

11 hours ago, TheX said:

"Most people are more likely to wind up six feet under because of almost anything else under the sun other than COVID-19.

The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.

.......
 

 

Eh, that is not *exactly* what the CDC said. What you are looking at is a cut and paste from a financial site, not from the CDC.

Here is the actual CDC info for the latest week with relation to COVID, influenza and pneumonia: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

And while we are on the CDC, let's not forget the "excess deaths" issue that every country is seeing. Here's the CDC take on that:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

If you want to play fast and loose with the data, that is fine. But don't attribute it to the CDC because there are two big issues that are NOT comprehended in the "official" data. First the data is based on "known" cases and the CDC is quick to talk about how we are not doing enough testing and we really don't know the full scope of this issue. In reality they tell us the infection pool is MUCH larger than we know. Part of the way you get to lower death rates is by making assumptions about the total death rate being larger.

Secondly, there is the "excess deaths" issue that needs to be addressed. While we know how many deaths have officially been attributed to COVID, there are also a huge number that are suspected but not officially attributed. Every country sees a regular death rate that is pretty consistent, it varies by the season. But everyone saw big unexplained spikes in March and April. Here are the US numbers from the CDC:

Notice the "excess" at the right end. The CDC cannot explain these, so any number that you believe is lower will not include these.

Additionally, let's not lose sight of the fact that COVID convinced a lot of people not to seek medical attention and so some of that excess might not have been COVID but might have been people who died from COVID second hand because it prevented them from getting the care that they need.

 

The TL;DR - don't pop the champagne cork just yet. Deaths look ugly so far and they are not getting better. What IS happening is a.) more younger people are getting it and they have a lower mortality rate and b.) we're learning not to immediately put people on ventilators which is a big thing because the survival rate was only ~20% when people were ventilated. 

The good news is the death situation is getting better, but only because we are learning and it takes a lot of body bags to learn these lessons.

 

 

[quixoft]

3 hours ago, AustinBike said:

Notice the "excess" at the right end. The CDC cannot explain these, so any number that you believe is lower will not include these.

Clearly those deaths at the end of the graph are April Fools pranks gone wrong just as the Jan 1 deaths are all alcohol and firework related! 2019 New Year was a helluva party! 🙂

Edited July 4, 2020 by quixoft

[TheX]

 

[TheX]

Todays stats from Worldometer. No fluff, no emotion, no fear mongering...just numbers.

 

[quixoft]

14 minutes ago, TheX said:

Todays stats from Worldometer. No fluff, no emotion, no fear mongering...just numbers.

 

I'm guessing it's probably because most of the new cases are the under 50 crowd which are extremely safe according to everything I've read. 

[ATXZJ]

Like it or not, masks are now mandatory. Figured if I'm gonna have to wear one, at least it should offer me some protection as well as others. Have a handful of these N95s that I've been using. After a while, it gets a little funky and then there's also the issue of contamination. Found some hacks online and we shall see. So far the mask does smell better, and that's already a win as far as im concerned🤣

https://www.fastcompany.com/90521484/how-to-decontaminate-an-n95-mask-in-just-3-minutes

 

 

 

Edited July 4, 2020 by ATXZJ

[TheX]

 

[TheX]

https://babylonbee.com/news/state-governor-mandates-everyone-wear-snorkels-in-case-they-fall-in-a-pool

[TheX]

Look at page 6 of 6. This is from the county website. This is why the numbers are bullshit. You are being lied to.

 

https://eagenda.collincountytx.gov/docs/2020/CC/20200518_2481/48410_Explanation.pdf

[TAF]

On 7/5/2020 at 6:59 PM, TheX said:

Look at page 6 of 6. This is from the county website. This is why the numbers are bullshit. You are being lied to.

 

https://eagenda.collincountytx.gov/docs/2020/CC/20200518_2481/48410_Explanation.pdf

I’m starting to think you are somewhat batshit crazy. Good grief.

[JMR]

So...where are we? I’ve read that hydroxychloriquine (or whatever it’s called) actually works to prevent COVID. Also have read that the numbers of infections has been mixed with numbers of antibodies (or whatever it’s called) so that’s wrong. Recently, there seems to be a lot of holes shot in the fear factor of covid. Like, maybe it’s not as big of a deal that Dr Fauci had hoped. I’ve also read that Iran has a lot of cases, yet, they wear masks as part of their attire.... I’m sure I’m wrong. I’m sure all you educated folks will set me straight!! Let’s hear it!

[Tree Magnet]

2 hours ago, JMR said:

 I’m sure all you educated folks will set me straight!! Let’s hear it!

I'm done with this argument.  I don't understand what you get out of it and I sure as hell don't get anything out of trying to explain my side.  No one is convincing anyone of anything in this thread.  You do you man. 

[AustinBike]

6 hours ago, Tree Magnet said:

I'm done with this argument.  I don't understand what you get out of it and I sure as hell don't get anything out of trying to explain my side.  No one is convincing anyone of anything in this thread.  You do you man. 

The world is pretty simply falling into two buckets:

The "we bucket" that believes we have a huge global pandemic and it is not getting better. We are all in this together and when you piss in the pool I swim in your piss.

The "me bucket" that believes this is somehow overblown or not happening. I can decide where I want to piss and you can't say anything about it.

Neither side is going to change, don't waste your time trying to convince anyone to change their position. Just keep yourself as safe as possible and vote in November.

[JMR]

We’re all in the “we” bucket. I was just curious if everyone has heard the same news that I had. I wasn’t trying to change any minds.