anecdotal evidence does not always mean its irrelevant,or false. It plays a roll, and just because it's not coming from labeled experts doesn't mean it can be discarded as nonsense. It matters.
You can't shut down economies for months on end..years?..Can we at least get real on that? There's no on hand evidence as to the cost in lives if that action was continued. But there would nonetheless be a high cost in lives. I know, an anecdotal observation. But does it matter as much as lives lost from a virus?
You...Just....Can't.....Do .....That!....
We have to come out of our hole. We are still experiencing the effects of the Spanish flu of 1918. Should we still be in retreat for that one? There is no vaccine for that and I doubt there'll be one for this. There' probably will be a "flu" shot for it, but that's it......so, do we keep wringing our hands and sit around hiding? Or do we do what we can on a personal basis for protection of our health....and get back to work.....
"herd" exposure is probably the best way to permanently reduce infection rates. But just what do we do if ,in fact, that china report turns out to be true?......The " blood" thing came up the other day saying people with "O" blood have a smaller reaction to the virus.....lucky me, I guess....I certainly don't want to test the theory, but Im not hiding either.
Stay home if that is where your head is.....and that is NOT a condemnation of a choice. That choice should be respected.....so should others who hold a different view.
The reason I cited official statistics is to show that while some people have anecdotes that say one thing, others say a different thing, and only by viewing the whole picture can one get an idea of what is happening countrywide. I also wrote how some places are likely not affected, while some are hit hard.
As for "shutting down the economy," these measures were made to save lives. In other places, as I mentioned, they did them effectively and are reopening. Texas, a red state, just announced it was going to reverse its decision to allow bars to open. Florida, another red-perhaps-purple state, reported a record number of cases yesterday. The point is, and the point I made when suggesting comparing the USA to other countries, is that had the US taken a better coordinated approach not only would it have saved lives (36,000-86,000 according to a Columbia University study published a month ago), it would also mean that the US could be reopening. As it stands, the US will have to remain shuttered for weeks or months more. And the resistance to measures such as wearing masks is only extending that. While people of a certain political persuasion are clamoring about their "rights" none of them are talking about their responsibilities to their fellow citizens, including the elderly and infirm.
While I appreciate your thoughts on herd immunity, I'm going to read what epidemiologists have to say and follow their advice.
Regarding the story in the Hill: The Hill is a partisan paper that has been discredited for, among other things, allowing advertisers to write copy and interfering with editorial oversight in order to prevent criticism of Donald Trump. It is considered a mouthpiece of his administration. Trump himself said he wanted to stop testing because in his mind more tests = more cases, which is like saying if you don't get a pregnancy test then you can't be pregnant. I would suggest looking for better sources that have reported that the administration will defund and shut down testing sites in Texas, Illinois, New Jersey, Pennslyvania and Colorado. Try these:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/25/us-coronavirus-testing-sites-federal-support-cut-officials-alarmhttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-funding-covid-test-sites/But, if you read the story you posted, it says the same thing: the administration is defunding 13 testing sites. It's the Hill, so they quote an administration official who obfuscates and tries to make it sound like they aren't defunding but at the same time says that states will take over. That is the definition of losing federal support.
