[OutsiderFan]

My point, t1, is this.

Given the range of possibilities we have evidence to show could be facing society, with some of them being really, really catastrophic, it’s foolish to be making decisions without more known about the disease itself, and its implications for humanity.

There is overwhelming discussion about case growth, deaths, PPE, testing, treatments, and vaccine, but I see virtually zero public discussion focused on what the disease actually does and the aftermath implications of those who get it. Chicken pox stays in the body forever, but we know once we have it, that’s that, and it almost never causes any serious harm to us. Covid-19 may stay with those infected forever, but come back and do damage we don’t know about yet.

Discussions about how to lift NPIs* will be had in a much different light if this variable was factored into the equation. There has been evidence that shows reinfections. There has been evidence particularly younger people exposed to virus don’t develop enough antibodies to fight it, and also evidence exposure to it kills T-cells. It may not kill them on an ongoing basis like AiDS does, but what if reinfection kills more each time the body fights Covid19? We’ll start seeing many more people getting sick and dying in society than it is prepared to handle.

Shouldn’t the eyes of public discussion be much more wide open about how the virus actually works and the implications of spreading it to more of the population, before it is, because we never get a second chance to get our response right? IMO, the body politic should be calling for more research into this, rather than taking the typical human approach of trying to find a vaccine or cure, or assuming there will be one. 

The chief medical officer for Japan apparently said yesterday he doesn’t think the Olympics will be held next year either because he still sees Covid-19 ravaging the globe then. We only get one chance to contain spread. I’m of the mind more should be known or discussed about implications before we entertain when and how to deal with the crisis. The last thing I want is to see a worse disaster than we could have had, take 2, because people did not factor in the worst case scenarios in their return to normal impulses, and then hearing them bitching about it later. So many people saying it’s just the flu still, or thinking the biggest concern is economy because they may not know what they don’t know is even possible, and how bad it could be. Maybe some are incapable, but there should be some devil’s advocates gaining currency in public discussion on the issues I’ve raised so that position is represented. I don’t see it.

* The fact the preferred language used has been “opening the economy” instead of “lifting NPIs” (with the public knowing what NPIs means) is itself framing the issue we face as a short-term economic challenge much more than a medical emergency, and that in and of itself is a disservice to us as people trying to grapple with what we should be doing to deal with our new reality.

[OutsiderFan]

My point, t1, is this.

Given the range of possibilities we have evidence to show could be facing society, with some of them being really, really catastrophic, it’s foolish to be making decisions without more known about the disease itself, and its implications for humanity.

There is overwhelming discussion about case growth, deaths, PPE, testing, treatments, and vaccine, but I see virtually zero public discussion focused on what the disease actually does and the aftermath implications of those who get it. Chicken pox stays in the body forever, but we know once we have it, that’s that, and it almost never causes any serious harm to us. Covid-19 may stay with those infected forever, but come back and do damage we don’t know about yet.

Discussions about how to lift NPIs* will be had in a much different light if this variable was factored into the equation. There has been evidence that shows reinfections. There has been evidence particularly younger people exposed to virus don’t develop enough antibodies to fight it, and also evidence exposure to it kills T-cells. It may not kill them on an ongoing basis like AiDS does, but what if reinfection kills more each time the body fights Covid19? We’ll start seeing many more people getting sick and dying in society than it is prepared to handle.

Shouldn’t the eyes of public discussion be much more wide open about how the virus actually works and the implications of spreading it to more of the population, before it is, because we never get a second chance to get our response right? IMO, the body politic should be calling for more research into this, rather than taking the typical human approach of trying to find a vaccine or cure, or assuming there will be one. 

The chief medical officer for Japan apparently said yesterday he doesn’t think the Olympics will be held next year either because he still sees Covid-19 ravaging the globe then. We only get one chance to contain spread. I’m of the mind more should be known or discussed about implications before we entertain when and how to deal with the crisis. The last thing I want is to see a worse disaster than we could have had, take 2, because people did not factor in the worst case scenarios in their return to normal impulses, and then hearing them bitching about it later. So many people saying it’s just the flu still, or thinking the biggest concern is economy because they may not know what they don’t know is even possible, and how bad it could be. Maybe some are incapable, but there should be some devil’s advocates gaining currency in public discussion on the issues I’ve raised so that position is represented. I don’t see it.

* The fact the preferred language used has been “opening the economy” instead of “lifting NPIs” (with the public knowing what NPIs means) is itself framing the issue we face as a short-term economic challenge much more than a medical emergency, and that in and of itself is a disservice to us as people trying to grapple with what we should be doing to deal with our new reality.