Zeedman
Garden Master
There are two conflicting points of view on how to deal with Covid, and I can sympathize with both.
Those who want to make their own decisions regarding whether to wear a mask or not, without government (or anyone else) forcing them one way or the other. As a people, we take our freedom seriously, so I get that. Some have just made a conscious decision not to live in fear, or wait for an effective vaccine that may or may not become available some time in the distant future. Plus, it's summer, and wearing a mask for an extended period is uncomfortable... and when there is a high heat index, probably unhealthy.
And those who believe (rightly) that masks are only effective if worn by everyone while in the close proximity of others. They want to feel safe, and see those who fail to wear masks as being inconsiderate. Having felt that way when people cough around me without covering (even before Covid) I get that too. If everyone wore a mask around others, it would enable a return to at least some semblance of normalcy. But if masks are not worn by everyone, the only safe choice for those at high risk is to stay home... and they want to break out of isolation as well.
For the most part, both philosophies have things in common... a desire to break out of isolation, to reclaim their lives, and the belief that things will only return to normal (if they ever do) when the population reaches herd immunity. The media & government tell us that will only happen when a vaccine immunizes the population. Even assuming such a vaccine is 100% effective - and that's a big "if", considering the track record of the flu vaccine - the only solution being offered until then is to prevent it from spreading. It's just natural that an independent people begin to resist the long-term loss of freedom imposed by that approach.
However, there is another pathway to herd immunity which IMO has been largely glossed over in our national debate - which is an effective treatment to mitigate the symptoms, and lessen the chance of death. At present, only Remdesivir is approved as a treatment against Covid 19. It costs thousands of dollars for a treatment, if you can find it... it seems some are profiting mightily from this pandemic.
Effective or not, it certainly doesn't appear to be saving many lives. It might be enlightening to "follow the money" for possible conflicts of interest.
In other countries, the use of Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and zinc proved to be effective. Numerous doctors both here & abroad have testified that the regimen worked, vastly reducing both hospitalization & mortality if administered at an early stage. Both drugs are cheap, have been proven safe for years, and generic versions of Hydroxychloroquine could be rapidly produced in quantity. For some odd reason, though, in spite of previously being declared safe & being widely prescribed for decades for other purposes, the FDA suddenly declared Hydroxychloroquine to be unsafe. A U.S. trial declaring Hydroxychloroquine to be ineffective against Covid 19 was only done on patients who were already hospitalized - long after the point where the treatment would have been effective. There is published evidence that the NIH knew long ago that Chloroquine (closely related to Hydroxychloroquine) was highly effective against corona viruses. It smells like politics of the worst kind, if a proven treatment that saves lives is being withheld from the public on false pretenses.
It is not the Corona virus that is keeping us in lockdown, or pitting neighbor against neighbor... it is the fear of dying from it, or passing it on to someone we know at greater risk. If a treatment can be proven to greatly reduce the chance of death, it would no longer be necessary for all but the most vulnerable to self isolate. The disease would spread; but without massive mortality - and even without a vaccine - herd immunity would soon follow. Fear would diminish, and we could all begin the task of returning to normalcy. I still hold out hope that will happen, but given election year insanity, I'm not holding my breath.
Those who want to make their own decisions regarding whether to wear a mask or not, without government (or anyone else) forcing them one way or the other. As a people, we take our freedom seriously, so I get that. Some have just made a conscious decision not to live in fear, or wait for an effective vaccine that may or may not become available some time in the distant future. Plus, it's summer, and wearing a mask for an extended period is uncomfortable... and when there is a high heat index, probably unhealthy.
And those who believe (rightly) that masks are only effective if worn by everyone while in the close proximity of others. They want to feel safe, and see those who fail to wear masks as being inconsiderate. Having felt that way when people cough around me without covering (even before Covid) I get that too. If everyone wore a mask around others, it would enable a return to at least some semblance of normalcy. But if masks are not worn by everyone, the only safe choice for those at high risk is to stay home... and they want to break out of isolation as well.
For the most part, both philosophies have things in common... a desire to break out of isolation, to reclaim their lives, and the belief that things will only return to normal (if they ever do) when the population reaches herd immunity. The media & government tell us that will only happen when a vaccine immunizes the population. Even assuming such a vaccine is 100% effective - and that's a big "if", considering the track record of the flu vaccine - the only solution being offered until then is to prevent it from spreading. It's just natural that an independent people begin to resist the long-term loss of freedom imposed by that approach.
However, there is another pathway to herd immunity which IMO has been largely glossed over in our national debate - which is an effective treatment to mitigate the symptoms, and lessen the chance of death. At present, only Remdesivir is approved as a treatment against Covid 19. It costs thousands of dollars for a treatment, if you can find it... it seems some are profiting mightily from this pandemic.
Effective or not, it certainly doesn't appear to be saving many lives. It might be enlightening to "follow the money" for possible conflicts of interest.In other countries, the use of Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and zinc proved to be effective. Numerous doctors both here & abroad have testified that the regimen worked, vastly reducing both hospitalization & mortality if administered at an early stage. Both drugs are cheap, have been proven safe for years, and generic versions of Hydroxychloroquine could be rapidly produced in quantity. For some odd reason, though, in spite of previously being declared safe & being widely prescribed for decades for other purposes, the FDA suddenly declared Hydroxychloroquine to be unsafe. A U.S. trial declaring Hydroxychloroquine to be ineffective against Covid 19 was only done on patients who were already hospitalized - long after the point where the treatment would have been effective. There is published evidence that the NIH knew long ago that Chloroquine (closely related to Hydroxychloroquine) was highly effective against corona viruses. It smells like politics of the worst kind, if a proven treatment that saves lives is being withheld from the public on false pretenses.
It is not the Corona virus that is keeping us in lockdown, or pitting neighbor against neighbor... it is the fear of dying from it, or passing it on to someone we know at greater risk. If a treatment can be proven to greatly reduce the chance of death, it would no longer be necessary for all but the most vulnerable to self isolate. The disease would spread; but without massive mortality - and even without a vaccine - herd immunity would soon follow. Fear would diminish, and we could all begin the task of returning to normalcy. I still hold out hope that will happen, but given election year insanity, I'm not holding my breath.
Well said, thank You Zeedman.
