What if we were told to spread it quickly at some future date. Everyone go out and try To get infected. Give people a chance to get their body strong enough to handle it before infection day. Would that end the virus or would that be worst how it is handled now?
People will mock you on this point, but I would not be surprised if this came about. After all, look at the mask thing. Dr. Fauci told us masks wouldn't matter, then 3 weeks later, he's telling us all to wear masks. This is why I trust nobody in the media. And make no mistake, Fauci is part of the media.
Nobody will do that. There would be huge numbers of sick people all at once, hospital beds fill up quickly, ventilators all spoken for quickly, everyone else who needs a ventilator and doesn’t get one dies. Absolutely horrific numbers of people dying - hundreds of thousands of American lives lost, if not millions. Maybe the survivors would have some sort of herd immunity? We don’t know for certain, since we don’t know how long the antibodies stick around.
I wouldn't be so sure. Some are saying that eventually we'll all be exposed to it no matter what we do, even if we wear masks, and even if we stay underground like cave hoppers.
So if that idea starts gaining traction and people begin to think it's inevitable to happen even in spite of our best efforts, and by the way, it's still going to take 18-24 months to come up with and fully test a vaccine that will have questionable effectiveness anyway, who's to say that somebody in the public sphere won't "come up" with this idea?
They could even give it a slick sounding name, like "Fast-Pathing Herd Immunity". The key to watch for is do they start reporting this on major media? Once you start seeing CNN breathlessly report on it, then it'll be about 3 days for all the major media to be telling us to "live life freely" because it's our responsibility to build herd immunity.
With the rise in numbers were any of them part of the looting and protesting last month?
And rioting. Don't forget the rioters. The ones I saw weren't wearing masks. Rioters must be automatically immune.
You're continuing to obfuscate.
Are you asserting the videos presented on broadcast national news of people going non-linear in stores when challenged for not wearing a mask were faked and manufactured?
If so, show your proof to back up your claim. Otherwise you're just spewing jibber-jabber.
Yes I am. I'm suggesting to you that your vaunted "national news" is not serving the country well. Not serving YOU well. No, I don't have to show proof. "He who is convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."
Besides, I think you're intelligent and I trust you to do intelligent and responsible research. But you must be brave enough to ask a lot of questions. You must be brave enough to approach it with an honest hunger for the truth, and you must be willing to go outside of the usual 3-character networks and newspapers that everybody is already familiar with. That's my "zen" way of saying that to find the truth, you must be willing to deviate from the beaten path (expose yourself to other news sources not "national" in nature).
And I can give you some anecdotal evidence to help you get started. MacRumors is an alternate source of information for each of us. We don't rely on CNN or the New York Times for Apple and other computing information. We come HERE. And we always have a lively conversation (like this one) about the day's news.
So take THAT sentiment with you to your research and consider using some unconventional sources. You may be surprised what you learn.
No, because you said “and” and the looters and protestors were not the same people.
Rioters, don't forget the rioters; some of them may be getting paid to riot!
She IS staying isolated from people who refuse be decent citizens who look out for each other. that is my point. Those who don't wear masks are prolonging the time she has to stay isolated because they don't accept that they have an equal responsibility. Do they think we aren't burdened by them? Your mask protects me and my mask protects you.
As I said in a prior post, I love your gran and don't want to see her die. But in no country in the world, and at no time in the world, has the human race been successful by holding "all individual lives" as "infinitely precious".
They are, of course, but society can never establish or enforce such a policy or attitude, and still be successful. If we tried to do that, we would be disallowing cars, gasoline, electricity in the home, playing in the sunshine, cooking in the home, sewing with needles, cutting with scissors, chopping wood with an axe, going to a job, buying groceries, eating groceries, using the bathroom, flushing a toilet, owning and running waste processing plants, having schools (let alone actually sending children to them!), and much much more.
Everything comes with a danger, even blowing your nose! We don't stop selling stoves because people could be burned. We don't stop flying because a plane could crash. We don't stop driving because you could roll it over or hit somebody. We don't stop getting out of bed because we could die. Any of those things could happen, but we STILL get out of bed and we still engage in economic activity. We must, or society will whither and die. And then nobody would be any good to your gran then.
We love your 91 year old gran! But using her to somehow make society guilty for doing what society must? That's not right. Yes, every life is infinitely precious. But real life is not Utopia and society can never operate this way or, and I submit to you that we would risk complete extinction.
