And Texas Caves In

[DallasSteve]

The last bastion of sanity has jumped on the "stay at home" bandwagon. They just sent me an email that they have closed all state parks to save the 1% who may die from the dreaded super virus. Texas was once a great state.

[DallasSteve]

winnietrey wrote:
I have been in the medical field for some 41 years. This is how I see it. Lets say knowledge is like a pond 6 ft deep. In my speciality I probably know it down to say 5 feet after 41 years. In areas out of my specialty I might know it down a foot or so. So for me to argue with someone who know it down to 6 feet is stupid.

See, the first few inches, everything seems so crystal clear. But the problem is, at two inches you don't know about the yeah buts, the maybes, the could be but, and the maybe nots.

When you don't know, what you don't know that is a huge problem. I say we go withwhat the boys at the CDC say, they are the ones that know the pond down 6 feet, not you or I

We've heard from the experts in this field and I believe them that the best way to stop the virus is to do the shutdown. But that doesn't mean that the shutdown is the best thing to do. Huh, you say? There may be side effects. You've heard of those.

What if shutting down the economy to this degree causes more deaths? Or what if shutting it down saves 100,000 lives but it costs 10,000 lives who would've lived otherwise. Do you have the right to trade one group of lives for another? Or as Captain Kirk said "Do the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many?"

We've heard from the scientists, but they are not the only voice that matters. We haven't heard from the economists. And we haven't heard from the ethicists. We just ran headlong into this shutdown out of fear. Fear of a 1% chance of dying. Everybody dies. The thing is to die well.

[Dutch_12078]

Etstorm wrote:
Okay for those “ everyone should stay home”

What are you planning on doing when the entire economy collapses because everyone was home and not out supporting businesses?

Still be alive to see my 78th birthday...

[fj12ryder]

JimK-NY wrote:
For those of you who think this is some sort of hoax, let me give a personal update from the Long Island suburbs 50 miles from NYC. The virus was spreading rapidly here. We are now 3 weeks into serious lockdown and social distancing. At least most of us are 3 weeks in. It took some people an initial week to get the drift. When I say serious lockdown, I mean it. Virtually everything is closed, streets are empty and people are at home.

I am probably about average for taking precautions. I do not abide by the 6 foot social distancing. It is 30 feet or more if downwind. I have not been in a store of any kind in 3 weeks. We are getting groceries delivered, after a long delay. We put on gloves and masks and then handle the food outdoors. We wipe down all the packages and then we wash them and set them aside for days. We also have similar procedures for handling items that need refrigeration, taking into account that Covid can likely live for years in the cold.

Today I went to one of the few "recreational" areas that is still open, an arboretum. With few people and big open areas it was still difficult to maintain suitable social distancing. I did have to put on a mask several times and some people constantly wore masks.

With all the precautions we are finally seeing some decline in the cases and death rate. Unfortunately there is no end in sight. Even at the relatively low current rates the healthcare system is swamped. Forget routine medical or dental care. It is not available. I have no idea if the death rate is 1/2%, 1% or 3%. That is almost secondary to trying to provide the care people need to get through this. Roughly 10% of those infected quickly need intensive care and respirators. The cost and the facilities needed are staggering. If the rate stays low enough and the State can add thousands of intensive care beds with staff, PPE and gear, we might get through this without people literally dying in the street.

You people who think this is a bad case of flu just do not have a clue. If or more likely when it comes your way you will find out.

When you cram those millions of people into small areas, and there are serious health issues, it suddenly becomes clear why millions crammed into a small area is a very bad idea. Big cities are having having a tough time of it, due to the simple fact there are too many people for the resources available. Even though the overwhelming number of people will be fine, the sheer numbers of the few percent who get very sick are too much for the limited resources for the area. Compare hospital beds to the number of actual people.

Cram people into very small areas and you'll see infections spread like wildfire.

[Charlie_D_]

jdc1 wrote:
You can't argue with Texas.....they just don't think enough for things to matter to them.

Surely you jest. Statements like that from California are to be laughed at and discarded as a model for anything.:)

[fj12ryder]

I guess part of my problem is the lack of faith/belief in the government, no matter who is in charge. I was in the Army during Vietnam, and we finally heard most of the lies about that thing revealed much later. Then the lies about the Contras and the CIA operating clandestinely in South America. Then the nonsense about Noriega and Panama and the Contras. A decade doesn't go by when there aren't more lies being revealed coming from Washington DC. They all swear it's true, but then later you find out, not so much.

I guess I'm just gunshy about any information coming from Washington DC, when they swear it's the truth, and it's all for your own good. "We're from the government and we're here to help you". Color my cynical beyond belief.

[JimK-NY]

For those of you who think this is some sort of hoax, let me give a personal update from the Long Island suburbs 50 miles from NYC. The virus was spreading rapidly here. We are now 3 weeks into serious lockdown and social distancing. At least most of us are 3 weeks in. It took some people an initial week to get the drift. When I say serious lockdown, I mean it. Virtually everything is closed, streets are empty and people are at home.

I am probably about average for taking precautions. I do not abide by the 6 foot social distancing. It is 30 feet or more if downwind. I have not been in a store of any kind in 3 weeks. We are getting groceries delivered, after a long delay. We put on gloves and masks and then handle the food outdoors. We wipe down all the packages and then we wash them and set them aside for days. We also have similar procedures for handling items that need refrigeration, taking into account that Covid can likely live for years in the cold.

Today I went to one of the few "recreational" areas that is still open, an arboretum. With few people and big open areas it was still difficult to maintain suitable social distancing. I did have to put on a mask several times and some people constantly wore masks.

With all the precautions we are finally seeing some decline in the cases and death rate. Unfortunately there is no end in sight. Even at the relatively low current rates the healthcare system is swamped. Forget routine medical or dental care. It is not available. I have no idea if the death rate is 1/2%, 1% or 3%. That is almost secondary to trying to provide the care people need to get through this. Roughly 10% of those infected quickly need intensive care and respirators. The cost and the facilities needed are staggering. If the rate stays low enough and the State can add thousands of intensive care beds with staff, PPE and gear, we might get through this without people literally dying in the street.

You people who think this is a bad case of flu just do not have a clue. If or more likely when it comes your way you will find out.

[rk911]

Lantley wrote:
Sorry camping is not a foolproof or shall I say virus proof activity.
Every interaction creates a chance for spread.
The idea of shutting down won't eliminate the virus but it will slow the spread to a manageable level and keep the hospitals being overwhelmed.
In order to go camping you need food and fuel at a minimum. At some point you need to interact to obtain those items. Worst case scenario you get a flat and require assistance or you simply fall and require assistance.
Now I agree the chances of these worst case scenarios happening all minimal.
But there are fire houses stationed in every town because we know unexpected injuries happen.
Coach net, AAA and Good Sam's are all thriving roadside plans because there will be break downs.
But none of this happens If you stay home. There's no what if gamble.
Shutting down the campground forces everyone to stay home which is the objective.
Social distances does not mean going to a distant, area and then isolating yourself. It's the getting there that creates the potential for spread.
Now if there is spread say, from a New Yorker going camping in some Rhode Island to get away from it all.
You created a big mess and a worse case scenario by potentially contaminating some small town with limited resources.
None of this happens if you stay home.
Unfortunately we can't trust the public to voluntarily stay home so the government has to enact measures to force them to stay home.

but that still doesn't address the needs of fulltimers who ARE home and snowbirds trying to GET home. if the parks close...which they are...and those folks are given the boot just where are they 'sposed to go??

[wa8yxm]

The 1% the Original Poster claim may die... Well. i'm not sure it is 1% but my job for 25 years... was opposed to people dying (The VERY First responder when you have an emergency is not a Police officer, Fireman or EMS. it's a voice on the phone.. for 25 years MINE was one of those voices).

THus I'll say no more about that because to me 1 person is 1 too many (not one percent)

But closing RV parks makes absolutly NO sense. None at all
The pool yes
The family center yes
The "Gathering places" Yes
The parking sites NO

Where are full timers supposed to park????

[Etstorm]

Okay for those “ everyone should stay home”

What are you planning on doing when the entire economy collapses because everyone was home and not out supporting businesses?

[rexlion]

There is a whole lot about this situation that is odd. I've heard from people living in small rural towns whose grocery stores were cleaned out of TP and other stuff a bit before the scare really hit, and the cashiers and folks noted that the shoppers were all strangers, many with out of state plates. I found a youtube video of a family with a spanking new Jeep pickup and $30k trailer, buying up all the N95 masks in Florida stores and laughing because people were clueless (at that time). Another youtube video was of people who live near hospitals featured on the news as being hard-hit with long lines and tons of virus patients, but these people went to see and there were just empty waiting rooms and no lines of people. I've also seen video evidence that the MSM had recycled a scene from an Italian hospital and claimed it was a NY hospital.

Yesterday I read an article in an online medical publication (AAPS) by an immunologist, Martin DuBravec MD of Cadillac MI, saying the numbers don't support this radical isolation policy, the high panic level is being fueled by the media, and the vast majority of folks who do contract the virus don't get seriously ill. He says the risk to those under age 65 with no significant health problems is miniscule, so we should reopen schools and people should go back to work. Obviously not everyone in the medical community is on board with the PC message.

The extreme people are saying this global full-stop event is being used to inject centralized global control, and shortages and loss of freedoms will be the norm from now on. I don't know if there's truth to that. But whatever's going on, it smells mighty fishy to me.

[TomG2]

Lantley wrote:
Sorry camping is not a foolproof or shall I say virus proof activity.
Every interaction creates a chance for spread.
The idea of shutting down won't eliminate the virus but it will slow the spread to a manageable level and keep the hospitals being overwhelmed.
In order to go camping you need food and fuel at a minimum. At some point you need to interact to obtain those items. ....snip,,..\

Don't we need food to eat and fuel to go shopping,even when staying home? Probably less interaction with total strangers in a campground than with family and friends at home.

[6door74]

Lantley wrote:
Sorry camping is not a foolproof or shall I say virus proof activity.
Every interaction creates a chance for spread.
The idea of shutting down won't eliminate the virus but it will slow the spread to a manageable level and keep the hospitals being overwhelmed.
In order to go camping you need food and fuel at a minimum. At some point you need to interact to obtain those items. Worst case scenario you get a flat and require assistance or you simply fall and require assistance.
Now I agree the chances of these worst case scenarios happening all minimal.
But there are fire houses stationed in every town because we know unexpected injuries happen.
Coach net, AAA and Good Sam's are all thriving roadside plans because there will be break downs.
But none of this happens If you stay home. There's no what if gamble.
Shutting down the campground forces everyone to stay home which is the objective.
Social distances does not mean going to a distant, area and then isolating yourself. It's the getting there that creates the potential for spread.
Now if there is spread say, from a New Yorker going camping in some Rhode Island to get away from it all.
You created a big mess and a worse case scenario by potentially contaminating some small town with limited resources.
None of this happens if you stay home.
Unfortunately we can't trust the public to voluntarily stay home so the government has to enact measures to force them to stay home.

Well said.

[Lwiddis]

The Corona virus isn’t “cute,” DallasSteve.

[Lwiddis]

The old and convenient “they,” fj.

[Lantley]

Sorry camping is not a foolproof or shall I say virus proof activity.
Every interaction creates a chance for spread.
The idea of shutting down won't eliminate the virus but it will slow the spread to a manageable level and keep the hospitals being overwhelmed.
In order to go camping you need food and fuel at a minimum. At some point you need to interact to obtain those items. Worst case scenario you get a flat and require assistance or you simply fall and require assistance.
Now I agree the chances of these worst case scenarios happening all minimal.
But there are fire houses stationed in every town because we know unexpected injuries happen.
Coach net, AAA and Good Sam's are all thriving roadside plans because there will be break downs.
But none of this happens If you stay home. There's no what if gamble.
Shutting down the campground forces everyone to stay home which is the objective.
Social distances does not mean going to a distant, area and then isolating yourself. It's the getting there that creates the potential for spread.
Now if there is spread say, from a New Yorker going camping in some Rhode Island to get away from it all.
You created a big mess and a worse case scenario by potentially contaminating some small town with limited resources.
None of this happens if you stay home.
Unfortunately we can't trust the public to voluntarily stay home so the government has to enact measures to force them to stay home.