Originally Posted by BoilerUP

Infections don't matter.

There, I said it - now let me qualify it.

Infections don't matter when virulence is such that disease doesn't overwhelm health system capacity or cause significant mortality. This is reflected in outcomes with common colds and seasonal influenza.

Which demographics have seen the highest hospitalization rates, longest hospital stays, highest ICU admissions, and most deaths from SARS-CoV-2? The 65+ age demographic. The 65+ age demographic represents about 16.5% of the US population but 81% of COVID deaths.

What is more difficult to achieve and causes more social and economic harm for nonmedical intervention of a virus with a estimated IFR of less than 0.4% - isolating 16.5% of the population, or 100% of the population sans "essential workers"?

That isn't to say the 14-64 demographic wouldn't experience some severe disease and death...but the incidence of it would be such to not overwhelm health system capacity (which was the entire point of "flattening the curve")because you don't have a bunch of seniors filling your hospital beds for WEEKS at a time.

But to the point of "protecting the most vulnerable" and allowing the the other 83.5% of population to basically do our normal thing and circulate disease...that ship sailed a LONG time ago and ain't coming back. Instead, we've lengthened the period of the pandemic by "flattening the curve" to buy time toward vaccines, and are now vaccinating these higher age demographics first in an effort to harm reduce while vaccine supply is scarce.

We can argue the merit of 'lockdowns' over the last year until the cows come home but that won't change what happened - we need to be eyes forward as to what's happening and what's coming. Kids need to get back in schools ASAP, economic restrictions need to be further eased, and many younger people (say, those in the 18-55 range especially) need to stop being completely irrational about their individual risk from this virus.

Originally Posted by block30

Trouble is, as we are eyes forward I see more of that last year put on repeat as if we've learned nothing from the last 12 months. And thats by the "experts" own words.

Originally Posted by Regularguy

So what point are you trying to make?

Fauci is worth millions and the prize is about his tv appearances. Maybe he should get an Emmy!

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/ar...th-and-salary/

If the article is somewhat correct his annual income is near $1 million. “When you combine his annual dividends, $400k salary salary and book royalties, Fauci likely earned over $1 million in 2019, and perhaps as much in recent years.”

Originally Posted by rickair7777

Now the good Doctor expects the CDC to ease restrictions for vaccinated people??? Makes sense, but man can that guy change his tune on a dime...


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKBN2AN17G

Originally Posted by BoilerUP

Infections don't matter.

There, I said it - now let me qualify it.

Infections don't matter when virulence is such that disease doesn't overwhelm health system capacity or cause significant mortality. This is reflected in outcomes with common colds and seasonal influenza.

Which demographics have seen the highest hospitalization rates, longest hospital stays, highest ICU admissions, and most deaths from SARS-CoV-2? The 65+ age demographic. The 65+ age demographic represents about 16.5% of the US population but 81% of COVID deaths.

What is more difficult to achieve and causes more social and economic harm for nonmedical intervention of a virus with a estimated IFR of less than 0.4% - isolating 16.5% of the population, or 100% of the population sans "essential workers"?

That isn't to say the 14-64 demographic wouldn't experience some severe disease and death...but the incidence of it would be such to not overwhelm health system capacity (which was the entire point of "flattening the curve")because you don't have a bunch of seniors filling your hospital beds for WEEKS at a time.

But to the point of "protecting the most vulnerable" and allowing the the other 83.5% of population to basically do our normal thing and circulate disease...that ship sailed a LONG time ago and ain't coming back. Instead, we've lengthened the period of the pandemic by "flattening the curve" to buy time toward vaccines, and are now vaccinating these higher age demographics first in an effort to harm reduce while vaccine supply is scarce.

We can argue the merit of 'lockdowns' over the last year until the cows come home but that won't change what happened - we need to be eyes forward as to what's happening and what's coming. Kids need to get back in schools ASAP, economic restrictions need to be further eased, and many younger people (say, those in the 18-55 range especially) need to stop being completely irrational about their individual risk from this virus.

Originally Posted by BoilerUP

I disagree.

I don't see mass lockdowns, businesses across most industries shuttered, etc. I do see schools starting to return to in-person instruction (some MUCH slower and obstinate than others), easing of restrictions even in places like NY/CA/MI.

Being asked to wear a mask in public as vaccinations continue, TO ME, does not constitute "last year".

Of course we're being told "You shouldn't do X or Y, even if vaccinated" and I personally feel that messaging sucks...but slowly over the last few weeks there has been a perceptible shift in media stories on this topic from telling us what there is NO PROOF the vaccine will do, to cautious optimism still speckled with "we don't knows".

Objectively, we as a country are nearing the post-pandemic phase but we aren't there yet...though better messaging and a cessation of irrational fears would certainly speed that along as much as doubling the vaccine supply.

Originally Posted by Seneca Pilot

We killed our economy and millions of jobs and our children lost a year of education for no good reason. It is ok to admit that. It is ok to look at other countries that didn't do those same stupid things and admit that it was wrong.