Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Coronavirus


 

While I dislike seeing a dollar value placed on a human life, I wonder if someone is drilling deeper on this. What is the value of a human life aged 70+ residing in a nursing home or long term care facility. The cruel reality of COVID-19 is that it is taking the lives of the older, more vulnerable souls in our population. These people wouldn't have long life expectancies and also wouldn't be contributing by working etc. 

 

I get the feeling that the politicians trying to open up their states are trying to make this point without being insensitive. Further, those that are itching to "get back to normal" are probably, with some justification, believing that COVID-19 won't be much of a factor to them. After all, a majority of people effected don't need hospitalization and many don't even know they have it. This is even more true if one is younger and has none of the underlying conditions.

 

The fly in this particular ointment is that the same folks that don't even know they have the virus can and will spread it to everyone they come in contact with, including those vulnerable people that are much more likely to be hospitalized or pass away. Social distancing will be helpful and probably truly necessary for a long time for those that are vulnerable. Testing, as just about everyone agrees, is the real tool to limit the spread. When we have sufficient testing and tracking, it makes sense to amend or even end shelter-in-place orders. 

 

The way I see it, the elderly in nursing homes and other group facilities probably will have to continue in a near or total lockdown until a vaccine is in place. Others with underlying conditions would need to take every precaution as well.

 

To close this long post, I want to speak personally. I'm old enough to be at risk solely on my age. I have no other risk factors and I feel pretty confident that if I got the virus I would survive. I don't want to tempt fate, but I don't want to be shut in indefinitely. I have much appreciated the opportunity to play golf the last week and hope to see friends and family long before a vaccine is available. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I dislike seeing a dollar value placed on a human life, I wonder if someone is drilling deeper on this. What is the value of a human life aged 70+ residing in a nursing home or long term care facility. The cruel reality of COVID-19 is that it is taking the lives of the older, more vulnerable souls in our population. These people wouldn't have long life expectancies and also wouldn't be contributing by working etc. 

 

I get the feeling that the politicians trying to open up their states are trying to make this point without being insensitive. Further, those that are itching to "get back to normal" are probably, with some justification, believing that COVID-19 won't be much of a factor to them. After all, a majority of people effected don't need hospitalization and many don't even know they have it. This is even more true if one is younger and has none of the underlying conditions.

 

The fly in this particular ointment is that the same folks that don't even know they have the virus can and will spread it to everyone they come in contact with, including those vulnerable people that are much more likely to be hospitalized or pass away. Social distancing will be helpful and probably truly necessary for a long time for those that are vulnerable. Testing, as just about everyone agrees, is the real tool to limit the spread. When we have sufficient testing and tracking, it makes sense to amend or even end shelter-in-place orders. 

 

The way I see it, the elderly in nursing homes and other group facilities probably will have to continue in a near or total lockdown until a vaccine is in place. Others with underlying conditions would need to take every precaution as well.

 

To close this long post, I want to speak personally. I'm old enough to be at risk solely on my age. I have no other risk factors and I feel pretty confident that if I got the virus I would survive. I don't want to tempt fate, but I don't want to be shut in indefinitely. I have much appreciated the opportunity to play golf the last week and hope to see friends and family long before a vaccine is available.

 

Having had a parent in a nursing home, I’ll say I’m glad he doesn’t have to live through this. That said, many patients in nursing homes have directives to do nothing outstanding to prolong living. This goes beyond a dnr. We had such directives in place for my Dad. He would not have been treated for COVID-19 but kept comfortable until he passed. While you don’t want to let this spread to those most vulnerable, many are also likely not being treated per medical directives and it could one part of the equation for the high number of nursing home deaths. But yes, how they are being infected, that does bear taking a close look at and needs to be corrected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

While I dislike seeing a dollar value placed on a human life, I wonder if someone is drilling deeper on this. What is the value of a human life aged 70+ residing in a nursing home or long term care facility. The cruel reality of COVID-19 is that it is taking the lives of the older, more vulnerable souls in our population. These people wouldn't have long life expectancies and also wouldn't be contributing by working etc. 

 

I get the feeling that the politicians trying to open up their states are trying to make this point without being insensitive. Further, those that are itching to "get back to normal" are probably, with some justification, believing that COVID-19 won't be much of a factor to them. After all, a majority of people effected don't need hospitalization and many don't even know they have it. This is even more true if one is younger and has none of the underlying conditions.

 

The fly in this particular ointment is that the same folks that don't even know they have the virus can and will spread it to everyone they come in contact with, including those vulnerable people that are much more likely to be hospitalized or pass away. Social distancing will be helpful and probably truly necessary for a long time for those that are vulnerable. Testing, as just about everyone agrees, is the real tool to limit the spread. When we have sufficient testing and tracking, it makes sense to amend or even end shelter-in-place orders. 

 

The way I see it, the elderly in nursing homes and other group facilities probably will have to continue in a near or total lockdown until a vaccine is in place. Others with underlying conditions would need to take every precaution as well.

 

To close this long post, I want to speak personally. I'm old enough to be at risk solely on my age. I have no other risk factors and I feel pretty confident that if I got the virus I would survive. I don't want to tempt fate, but I don't want to be shut in indefinitely. I have much appreciated the opportunity to play golf the last week and hope to see friends and family long before a vaccine is available. 

Yes, I've always found the notion of measuring the value of a life in money to be morally repugnant. However, it seems to be a talking point for many people.

 

Here's some more thinking to be considered:

 

https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/economics-age-covid-19

 

I've looked at the Open Access version of this book; Gans raises some good points, which I won't summarize here and now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I dislike seeing a dollar value placed on a human life, I wonder if someone is drilling deeper on this. What is the value of a human life aged 70+ residing in a nursing home or long term care facility. The cruel reality of COVID-19 is that it is taking the lives of the older, more vulnerable souls in our population. These people wouldn't have long life expectancies and also wouldn't be contributing by working etc.

 

I get the feeling that the politicians trying to open up their states are trying to make this point without being insensitive. Further, those that are itching to "get back to normal" are probably, with some justification, believing that COVID-19 won't be much of a factor to them. After all, a majority of people effected don't need hospitalization and many don't even know they have it. This is even more true if one is younger and has none of the underlying conditions.

 

The fly in this particular ointment is that the same folks that don't even know they have the virus can and will spread it to everyone they come in contact with, including those vulnerable people that are much more likely to be hospitalized or pass away. Social distancing will be helpful and probably truly necessary for a long time for those that are vulnerable. Testing, as just about everyone agrees, is the real tool to limit the spread. When we have sufficient testing and tracking, it makes sense to amend or even end shelter-in-place orders.

 

The way I see it, the elderly in nursing homes and other group facilities probably will have to continue in a near or total lockdown until a vaccine is in place. Others with underlying conditions would need to take every precaution as well.

 

To close this long post, I want to speak personally. I'm old enough to be at risk solely on my age. I have no other risk factors and I feel pretty confident that if I got the virus I would survive. I don't want to tempt fate, but I don't want to be shut in indefinitely. I have much appreciated the opportunity to play golf the last week and hope to see friends and family long before a vaccine is available.

Healthcare is 17.8% of GDP https://www.statista.com/statistics/184968/us-health-expenditure-as-percent-of-gdp-since-1960/ and people 65+ spend the most on it. post-2738-0-72279600-1588091977_thumb.jpeg

 

So it depends on your horizon of Value, but when you are up for re-election this fall, people under 18 have zero value and people over 65 are also the larger voting population. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/03/millennials-approach-baby-boomers-as-largest-generation-in-u-s-electorate/

 

Man I am a horrible, terrible, no good, very bad person...:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Healthcare is 17.8% of GDP https://www.statista.com/statistics/184968/us-health-expenditure-as-percent-of-gdp-since-1960/ and people 65+ spend the most on it. attachicon.gifD11C18C9-CE0B-4CDA-83BA-CA9EF10DBAFB.jpeg

So it depends on your horizon of Value, but when you are up for re-election this fall, people under 18 have zero value and people over 65 are also the larger voting population. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/03/millennials-approach-baby-boomers-as-largest-generation-in-u-s-electorate/

Man I am a horrible, terrible, no good, very bad person...:

You left out 'rotten'. :)

 

The graph raises an important point but doesn't do a good job of expressing it. If you want to see a really sharp curve, find a chart of the medical costs for a person's final year of life. That correlates to the "65+" category of the graph, but there are plenty of healthy and active people receiving Social Security checks who are costing a fraction of what the graph shows.

 

Of course, this alternate way of organizing medicals costs also introduces a different statistical bias - a disease that could kill a 30-year old may prove to be very expensive too. You don't know when that kind of expense may strike; and heroic measures are called for in many cases.

 

But sometimes heroic measures are taken, when it's staving off the inevitable for only a few weeks. And that, unfortunately, seems to be where a lot of the medical costs come from, and is where a lot of the spike in that graph comes from.

 

I've heard an elderly person say, "ugh, I'm not going back to rehab", and yet back to rehab she went when it became necessary. She would have chosen something else, except that the law didn't permit it. I don't think she was particularly unique.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I find it unfortunate that there seems to be no room for people to put forward alternate, thoughtful ideas, without the price of a life argument being thrown at them.
It’s a false equivalence and a lot of people with reasonable ideas are unfortunately being accused of it.

Guilty  :) 

This is just another in a long line of issues that this generation says is settled. All those smarter than us have decided. How dare you. I suppose you also deny the existence of man made climate change? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I've been impressed with how well the state has handled the situation so far.   Here is an exception. I hope this gets fixed. Bureaucracy gets us nowhere.

 

https://kstp.com/news/minnesota-nurses-furloughed-while-out-of-state-nurses-imported-during-covid-19-crisis-april-27-2020/5711952/?cat=1 

 

Can someone explain this more? Why would hospitals bring in medical professionals from elsewhere while furloughing their own staff? Is it a union issue? The "why" really isn't explained at all in the story, just that it's happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone explain this more? Why would hospitals bring in medical professionals from elsewhere while furloughing their own staff? Is it a union issue? The "why" really isn't explained at all in the story, just that it's happening.

I’m not exactly sure what this is about, but it’s not a union issue, at least not union induced. It sounds like some hospitals are not being used for COVID patients and their services have been cut back and employees furloughed. The nurse in this story works for Children’s Hospital and they have cut back on all their elective services, so she was furloughed. But her contract is with that hospital, so if she goes to work elsewhere, she has to leave her position with that hospital to go and fill a temporary spot in another hospital. When she does that, leaves her current job, she may not be guaranteed of a job to come back to, because she left it, I would think the union would/should ask for guarantees if employees of one hospital want to go and help elsewhere, that they would be rehired when they return. That’s what this situation sounds like to me, but I’m not sure who is the one to fix it ... hospital administration, or maybe the union can step in to renegotiate? I heard a report recently, they interviewed some nurses who went to help in NYC, and all of them said they may not have jobs to go back to and will have to find employment elsewhere if the hospitals they left won’t or aren’t able to rehire them. And I’m not sure how hospitals are hiring temporary medical staff, if it’s for so many weeks and done, or what? What the temporary contracts run. I also know that in Chicago, to ramp up, they put a call out and hired a lot of furloughed workers from other states.

 

This was just my guess so have no idea how close I am to the correct answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This looks promising.

 

“Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo (p<0.001). Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who received placebo. Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (p=0.059).”

 

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-clinical-trial-shows-remdesivir-accelerates-recovery-advanced-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR3-cmyMZn3kkQT6qNBL4UxG3lrCx669NYLyf09dYaONg-UhdG5KBsy5Jy8

 

 

Time buys us discovery, discovery buys us hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I find it unfortunate that there seems to be no room for people to put forward alternate, thoughtful ideas, without the price of a life argument being thrown at them.
It’s a false equivalence and a lot of people with reasonable ideas are unfortunately being accused of it.

If I've done that, I apologize. I've tried to focus most of my arguments around misinformation, not preaching a singular solution. Maybe I've drifted into the former at times but as a CEO told a friend of mine, "we're erring on the side of humanity".

 

That's an almost immovable statement, and a damned good one.

 

I don't have a solution. I don't think any of us do. But in a situation where few facts are available, we need to cling to those facts and build more. That's how knowledge works.

 

I'm in favor of what solution saves the most people. From the little I do know, "this is just like the flu" is not an actual solution, nor is it fact. It's the opposite and it's terribly damaging to us all because every keystroke, thought, and research put into that line of thinking is a keystroke, thought, and research not put into factual analysis of solving the problem at hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I've done that, I apologize. I've tried to focus most of my arguments around misinformation, not preaching a singular solution. Maybe I've drifted into the former at times but as a CEO told a friend of mine, "we're erring on the side of humanity".

 

That's an almost immovable statement, and a damned good one.

 

I don't have a solution. I don't think any of us do. But in a situation where few facts are available, we need to cling to those facts and build more. That's how knowledge works.

 

I'm in favor of what solution saves the most people. From the little I do know, "this is just like the flu" is not an actual solution, nor is it fact. It's the opposite and it's terribly damaging to us all because every keystroke, thought, and research put into that line of thinking is a keystroke, thought, and research not put into factual analysis of solving the problem at hand.

To be honest, we’re not going to eliminate that thought from the people who want to propagate it. Personally it’s time to move away from giving that notion any airtime, let alone brain power. It’s not the flu, there is plenty of data out there in many forms to safely make that statement.

 

There is gathering data in many other areas as well imo. I think more is being learned and known about the virus daily, which I believe is useful and solid enough to help guide decision making. It strikes me that so many people are still highly focused on infection prevention for everyone at all costs, as opposed to infection management. Getting a handle on outbreaks and slowing the rate of transmission was essential, and I think in many places that has been accomplished. In doing that, a number of things have consistently revealed themselves across the board, and other information is beginning to look more likely with the passage of time.

 

There is a definite demography to the virus, there is no doubting that and while it isn’t just the elderly, age most certainly plays an important role. In my country, 95% of deaths have occurred in people over the age of 60. Among those, 80% were residents of long term care facilities. In the province I live in, the highest rate of confirmed infections came from males between 20-29, followed closely by females in the same demographic, zero hospitalizations. I would hope that if we had an opportunity at a do over on the response to this, we would have learned who the most vulnerable really are, everywhere.

 

I certainly don’t have all the answers, I don’t pretend to. I would just like the focus to be more about what we do know and what are most likely to be the outcomes. That still needs to be done with a healthy dose of restrictions and safeguarding, but at some point the narrative need to shift from we’re all at risk from dying from this, to a lot of people are going to get this, how do we prevent it from being the people with the most to lose. There is an emotional and psychological toll to this that is going to grow the longer we decide that the message is nobody is safe.

There is no minimizing the raw numbers when it comes to fatalities, it’s an almost incomprehensible number. There is much to learn from it though and lessons are continuing to be learned. I hope we can start to use some of those lessons to move forward without it having to be about how much a life is worth. Besides, there are many perspectives to look at that question from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

To be honest, we’re not going to eliminate that thought from the people who want to propagate it. Personally it’s time to move away from giving that notion any airtime, let alone brain power. It’s not the flu, there is plenty of data out there in many forms to safely make that statement.

There is gathering data in many other areas as well imo. I think more is being learned and known about the virus daily, which I believe is useful and solid enough to help guide decision making. It strikes me that so many people are still highly focused on infection prevention for everyone at all costs, as opposed to infection management. Getting a handle on outbreaks and slowing the rate of transmission was essential, and I think in many places that has been accomplished. In doing that, a number of things have consistently revealed themselves across the board, and other information is beginning to look more likely with the passage of time.

There is a definite demography to the virus, there is no doubting that and while it isn’t just the elderly, age most certainly plays an important role. In my country, 95% of deaths have occurred in people over the age of 60. Among those, 80% were residents of long term care facilities. In the province I live in, the highest rate of confirmed infections came from males between 20-29, followed closely by females in the same demographic, zero hospitalizations. I would hope that if we had an opportunity at a do over on the response to this, we would have learned who the most vulnerable really are, everywhere.

I certainly don’t have all the answers, I don’t pretend to. I would just like the focus to be more about what we do know and what are most likely to be the outcomes. That still needs to be done with a healthy dose of restrictions and safeguarding, but at some point the narrative need to shift from we’re all at risk from dying from this, to a lot of people are going to get this, how do we prevent it from being the people with the most to lose. There is an emotional and psychological toll to this that is going to grow the longer we decide that the message is nobody is safe.
There is no minimizing the raw numbers when it comes to fatalities, it’s an almost incomprehensible number. There is much to learn from it though and lessons are continuing to be learned. I hope we can start to use some of those lessons to move forward without it having to be about how much a life is worth. Besides, there are many perspectives to look at that question from.

Damn, that is a great post. Thank you, twinsnorth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who like long articles exploring many corners of the current situation, this one from the Atlantic yesterday is pretty good, and contains a ton of web links that let you read further:

Why the Coronavirus Is So Confusing

 

I can't possibly summarize it*, but if you read it and find you didn't learn anything new, you should quit your day job and start writing for major publications too.

 

* I suppose the closest I can come is "the Scientific Method is messier than they teach in schools."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is a definite demography to the virus, there is no doubting that and while it isn’t just the elderly, age most certainly plays an important role. In my country, 95% of deaths have occurred in people over the age of 60. Among those, 80% were residents of long term care facilities. In the province I live in, the highest rate of confirmed infections came from males between 20-29, followed closely by females in the same demographic, zero hospitalizations. I would hope that if we had an opportunity at a do over on the response to this, we would have learned who the most vulnerable really are, everywhere.

 

First of all, that was a great post.  I will just quote this part though.

 

This article at KSTP puts into context some of what is going on in Minnesota.  It also shows how resources were put to use.  It's is still tragic, but it's real and gives our leaders good data needed to make decisions on how to proceed.

 

https://kstp.com/coronavirus/new-hope-long-term-care-facility-confirms-47-residents-have-died-from-covid-19/5715574/?cat=1

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been impressed with how well the state has handled the situation so far.   Here is an exception. I hope this gets fixed. Bureaucracy gets us nowhere.

 

https://kstp.com/news/minnesota-nurses-furloughed-while-out-of-state-nurses-imported-during-covid-19-crisis-april-27-2020/5711952/?cat=1 

  

Can someone explain this more? Why would hospitals bring in medical professionals from elsewhere while furloughing their own staff? Is it a union issue? The "why" really isn't explained at all in the story, just that it's happening.

My previous ‘guess’ can be thrown out the window. Here is an article that delves into it a bit further. Hospitals in the U.S. are business entities. Without elective procedures, business managers have had to cut expenses. Yep, during a pandemic, the bottom line is the bottom line. That said, hospitals hope to hire back furloughed employees, but it may be a while before people feel ‘comfortable’ going to the doctor and having things done.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52476128?fbclid=IwAR1-vkCEAIJagU6rHQ3dBEqH2HTf8kcY8akvKPYNjda5w7JhBD9VL_Eh-40

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got to eyewitness some news with regard to diagnostic testing at work today. A local company has a PCR test that can detect SARS-CoV-2 using an oral rinse and a minimally-invasive nasal swab. It is self-administered under the direction of a professional.

 

It is currently being used to test second-line health care workers at at least one major provider of elective procedures, and will be used on that company's patients starting next week. That's the only client I know of personally, there are probably others.

 

It's interesting that this testing company hasn't gone out of its way to draw attention to its test. Maybe they don't know exactly how good the test is, and this is something of a trial here? Perhaps it's a great test and they don't have enough capacity to benefit from publicity? Is this part of Walz's "Minnesota moonshot"? I wish I knew more about it, but I wasn't in a position to ask too many questions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see MDH start reporting the number of deaths that had DNR/DNI orders associated.  I think that data matters for a true picture.  A life that was lost with no attempt at intervention seems a bit different than one where there was intervention.

 

I know this would be true about any health condition, but we aren't being pushed data and news on any of those conditions on a minute-by-minute basis either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see MDH start reporting the number of deaths that had DNR/DNI orders associated.  I think that data matters for a true picture.  A life that was lost with no attempt at intervention seems a bit different than one where there was intervention.

 

I know this would be true about any health condition, but we aren't being pushed data and news on any of those conditions on a minute-by-minute basis either.

You raise a valid point. I think I mentioned this much further back in this thread. Having had a parent in a LTC facility, and knowing how things worked there, there is a context to those numbers that is missing. Not only did my Dad have a DNR order, but he also had medical directives in place not to go to great lengths to treat, and was removed from many of his medications in the last 6 months (palliative care). If he were still alive, and had come down with COVID-19, no extraordinary measures to keep him alive would have been taken. That is important context to know when we see these high numbers.

 

But also, through experience and seeing how the inside of some of these places work, some are operated better than others, and that is not to say, the more you pay the better it is, because that isn’t necessarily how it works. Some places are just not run well, administratively, and if they are ‘for profit’ institutions, the bottom line is the priority, not the care. They often run a bare minimum of staff, because, well, cost control, and that staff isn’t always trained very well, and minor things get missed regularly that become major issues. Just from the basics of hand washing, even. How many people live within a certain area, are the rooms double or single rooms? While part of the equation is medical directives, I think there could also be a lacking of upholding the quality of daily care and sanitation. We moved my Dad from one place to another, partly because there had been tOo many administrative turn overs that too much was being missed in basic care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are blessed in our local town to have someone who is overqualified in a pandemic working at the hospital in their crisis response. He has a doctorate in health sciences, but he's well-versed on pandemic behavior and spread.

 

Anyway, the conversation he and I had recently was around the numbers. I recently took the time to put percentages to all the counties in the state (South Dakota) as far as testing. It revealed that less than 2% of the state had been tested and only one county locally had even cleared 2% with most being around 1%. He stated that this is exactly why the death rate right now is going to be deceptive. The hospitalization rate, he believes, can be accurate. Let me try to explain, by summarizing his words.

 

Those who are not going to pass but will require hospitalization will likely end up hospitalized in this first wave, which is why working on the curve is important, but will end up with many hospitalizations that end up going home, as seen by the state's current sub-1% mortality rate. However, this virus is not done. The population most at risk is the one we've seen recently have "hot spots" - nursing homes, senior care facilities. Restrictions on visitation for grandma and grandpa will be reduced, and people will want to see their loved one. In those closed quarters, it will simply take one person getting sick to quickly spread it through the facility, and it will lead to very high death rates in those places. He estimates that you could easily see a second wave with fewer hospitalizations but a notably higher death rate.

 

One thing we both have noticed is that there is not a consistent reporting requirement on unattended deaths. Four have occurred in our county in the last two weeks, and often the county would see a half-dozen over an entire year, according to the county coroner. We could have a number of deaths that we find that are from the illness later on when a person is found or we may have deaths being found at home that are never reported as virus-related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brief interview with Dr. Michael Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

 

A very good reality check on just where we are with this. His analogy that we are just in the foothills right now and have mountains to go, and that this is ‘the big one’ were certainly just that, a reality check.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I checked out of daily covid 19 updates over the last week or 2... Felt like I needed to do that for mental health purposes after weeks of hope followed by no hope.

 

I’ve voluntarily quarantined and practice social distancing for the last 2 months. And at this point, I’m lost on what marker I’m looking for to signal that it’s “over.” Some folks have been laser focused on reopening the businesses in their cities. For me, that wasn’t the sign I was looking for to signal we’re on the other side of this. Texas has been open for over a week... I haven’t felt the urge to go sit and eat in a restaurant, or go to a mall.

 

I was concerned before about states opening up too fast. My new concern is our adjustment period after states open up, and what that looks like. We’ve all changed as a result of this situation, being at home isolating ourselves from friends and family for a long time.

 

When are we going to feel comfortable booking flights? Hotel rooms? Or going to an event with a large gathering? When are we going to feel comfortable simply hugging our friends?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for when will this be ‘over’ ... couldn’t tell you. Reopening guidelines included a caveat that a decline of cases for two weeks ... most states that are reopening (think GA, FL, TX) have not yet seen any decline. Another was medical supplies and capabilities in the event of a (likely) resurgence. We still are not ramping up supplies like we should as a nation. I could go into more details on that, but, well, reopening is happening despite not doing anything that is recommended to best manage this thing.

 

As for ‘when will I feel comfortable’ again ... that’s all individual and relative. My work is looking at possibly January before we have a live audience again. But it will all be how things are managed. They are not being managed, at all, on a national level. Some states are doing quite well, some not. Florida opened some of its beaches and is now looking to close them again, at least locally, where I am, because people refuse to follow guidelines and protocols. People refuse to wear masks in public or distance themselves and cough down the aisles and over the produce at the grocery store. When your citizens can’t even comply on some of the most simple things, and your leaders defy some of these very basic things, too, can’t say comfort will return to most of us soon. I’ve never been concerned for myself, but I don’t want to spread this to anyone. When people are being forced back to work without proper safety and sanitation gear (think meat packing plants) because their workers’ lives don’t matter compared to the bottom line, I can’t speak to comfort. It will be what you think you can do. It’s relative. You’re young and will probably be fine, but then I’d keep my distance from people who are more at risk and compromised. I’ll be flying home on Wednesday ... I’ll let you know how I felt. Even if it was a ‘comfortable’ experience, I don’t know when I’ll be able to go back to see my Mom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a couple things I know in my small quarantined world.

 

1. I work at one of the largest hospitals in the state and talk to doctors and nurses in passing. I can tell you one thing and that is they are all extremely nervous about this fall. Talking to an infectious disease doctor he mentions that it will be significantly worst than it is now because the virus will be piggy backing the flu. This hospital is roughly 80% full when it comes to their icu. They will not be able to handle the influx of patients when the flu hits.

 

2. My girlfriend is a therapist for Optium who handles a multiple of clients and hospitals across the Midwest and the clients she is talking too are telling her that people off all ages continue to get affected and that rate of infection is increasing.

 

The inability of our government to mandate a total lockdown is going to have terrible consequences. We are heading into a perfect storm and it is going to be frighting.

 

Walz mentioned on his daily speech on Thursday that unemployment will run out in October and if that happens not only are we dealing with people getting sick, we will be dealing with people trying to survive on pennies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

Featured Video

×
×
  • Create New...