|
|
Post by **** on Jul 8, 2020 18:34:15 GMT -6
Per memo sent to Louisiana principals from executive director Eddie Bonine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2020 19:35:15 GMT -6
Per memo sent to Louisiana principals from executive director Eddie Bonine. We Will see what happens when somebody gets sick and or dies. And not just from corona virus. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 8, 2020 21:39:56 GMT -6
Of course Bonine and the rest of the LHSAA Administration is 100% committed to safe return. Without sports, their jobs are gone.
It should be an interesting fall, as the gaps in logic that have taken place over the last 100 or so days will be highlighted.
I just don't see how one can say that it is a best practice to stand 6 feet part in lines, or in stores, or in restaurants, or in waiting rooms, or in classrooms etc, but can line up face to face separated by only a neutral zone. Not to mention only separated by face masks when blocking/tackling, multi-player close quarters breathing in piles etc.
Pithy is right that SOMEONE will indeed get sick, but I am concerned because I don't think the correct discussion is being had. At least not in the right way. It is reductive to just say "at risk need to isolate, the rest of us go live our lives" because the at risk population can't feasibly just be isolated from society. While they may not be the one to go to a game, or restaurant, or the store...all the others "just living their lives" are interacting with SOMEONE that "at risk" person is going to come in contact with. So that makes it much more complex than just "isolate the at risk, have players sign waivers etc" argument I see on social media.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2020 21:49:11 GMT -6
My deal is simple. Let’s stop tippy toeing it. If we are going to play, lets play. If the risk is a thing, to each his/her own, then lets not bother. But the tippy toeing is going to cause more problems than the so said real danger.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachjm on Jul 9, 2020 4:42:00 GMT -6
Of course Bonine and the rest of the LHSAA Administration is 100% committed to safe return. Without sports, their jobs are gone. It should be an interesting fall, as the gaps in logic that have taken place over the last 100 or so days will be highlighted. I just don't see how one can say that it is a best practice to stand 6 feet part in lines, or in stores, or in restaurants, or in waiting rooms, or in classrooms etc, but can line up face to face separated by only a neutral zone. Not to mention only separated by face masks when blocking/tackling, multi-player close quarters breathing in piles etc. Pithy is right that SOMEONE will indeed get sick, but I am concerned because I don't think the correct discussion is being had. At least not in the right way. It is reductive to just say "at risk need to isolate, the rest of us go live our lives" because the at risk population can't feasibly just be isolated from society. While they may not be the one to go to a game, or restaurant, or the store...all the others "just living their lives" are interacting with SOMEONE that "at risk" person is going to come in contact with. So that makes it much more complex than just "isolate the at risk, have players sign waivers etc" argument I see on social media. I don't know Bonine or his history..... However to say any State Association is working to keep sports alive simply to keep their job is very short sighted. These decisions and impact of them have a huge ripple effect on many many people, our leaders are keenly aware of this. There are 2 arguments and like me, like our politicians, like our scientific community no one on this board has the answer to which one is right. Argument 1: This virus like many will be with us for a long long time, it is in our best interest to mitigate the risks to delay this the best we can so that therapies and eventually a vaccine (hopefully) can be developed to minimize the loss of life to it. However, eventually herd immunity will need to occur in which will require many to either get the disease or a vaccine. If we find out that it does not have long term immunity then also unlikely a vaccination the exposure that our bodies have will ultimately save lives through time. Additionally, our at risk population should isolate themselves as much as possibility and intensely mitigate as they can remain safe by doing these recommendations strictly. If this is the truth (note I have no idea and nobody else does either) then our folks with the strongest levels of immunity absolutely should continue on with life mitigation when possible should be taken in consideration because we don't want anyone sick but playing football, basketball, or going to a funeral or eating at a restaurant (with 6 feet social distancing) carries the same risk (that is what the charts say). Lets mitigate when we can lets play ball... Life must go on! Argument 2: This virus is having an impact like none other prior, people are dying and the virus is passing. Although it would be ideal to isolate our high risk population the reality of this virus is their are so many asymptomatic people that unintentionally they will get the at risk population ill. Any activity that increases risk of spread of the virus should not occur until we are post pandemic, the greatest minds in the world are all working on a vaccine and they believe that they will have one by the end of the year. Lets take a season off or move it to another time after a vaccine is developed to ensure that we can keep everyone safe. Ultimately, we should maximize our mitigation at all times as this will reduce transmission and in turn save lives we all need to do our part and not playing football seems like a small sacrifice to ensure our world is a safer place as the long term consequences for us sitting out one fall season is far less then someone losing their life. I have been very neutral on this as I really and truly don't believe our world knows the correct answer, myself included! With that stated, my opinion is now leaning to argument 1, based purely on my reading and research on the virus itself and my current belief that this can't be eradicated and we will need to live with it we should be doing everything to protect our at risk population but also while realizing that we can still visit and see this population by using mitigation tactics. The virus is repository and with the proper safeguards spread can be prevented. With all this stated I don't envy the role that any director of any association or college league commissioner is in. They will inevitably make a decision that will side one way or the other and tick all the people who strongly believe the other way off. The best thing we can do is support these people in what ever decision they do and educate and work with our teams and community to mitigate better. So many of our communities are no longer mitigating at all and if we can help educate our athletes alone on this I believe we would at lease reduce transmission rates playing football or not. If I was a betting man, I'd put all my money on us not playing in the fall! As a world we tend to error on the "safe side" my only worry is that ignores the consequences that we will all deal with that we probably are unaware of at this time. |
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Jul 9, 2020 6:31:09 GMT -6
Of course Bonine and the rest of the LHSAA Administration is 100% committed to safe return. Without sports, their jobs are gone. It should be an interesting fall, as the gaps in logic that have taken place over the last 100 or so days will be highlighted. I just don't see how one can say that it is a best practice to stand 6 feet part in lines, or in stores, or in restaurants, or in waiting rooms, or in classrooms etc, but can line up face to face separated by only a neutral zone. Not to mention only separated by face masks when blocking/tackling, multi-player close quarters breathing in piles etc. Pithy is right that SOMEONE will indeed get sick, but I am concerned because I don't think the correct discussion is being had. At least not in the right way. It is reductive to just say "at risk need to isolate, the rest of us go live our lives" because the at risk population can't feasibly just be isolated from society. While they may not be the one to go to a game, or restaurant, or the store...all the others "just living their lives" are interacting with SOMEONE that "at risk" person is going to come in contact with. So that makes it much more complex than just "isolate the at risk, have players sign waivers etc" argument I see on social media. I don't know Bonine or his history..... However to say any State Association is working to keep sports alive simply to keep their job is very short sighted. These decisions and impact of them have a huge ripple effect on many many people, our leaders are keenly aware of this. There are 2 arguments and like me, like our politicians, like our scientific community no one on this board has the answer to which one is right. Argument 1: This virus like many will be with us for a long long time, it is in our best interest to mitigate the risks to delay this the best we can so that therapies and eventually a vaccine (hopefully) can be developed to minimize the loss of life to it. However, eventually herd immunity will need to occur in which will require many to either get the disease or a vaccine. If we find out that it does not have long term immunity then also unlikely a vaccination the exposure that our bodies have will ultimately save lives through time. Additionally, our at risk population should isolate themselves as much as possibility and intensely mitigate as they can remain safe by doing these recommendations strictly. If this is the truth (note I have no idea and nobody else does either) then our folks with the strongest levels of immunity absolutely should continue on with life mitigation when possible should be taken in consideration because we don't want anyone sick but playing football, basketball, or going to a funeral or eating at a restaurant (with 6 feet social distancing) carries the same risk (that is what the charts say). Lets mitigate when we can lets play ball... Life must go on! Argument 2: This virus is having an impact like none other prior, people are dying and the virus is passing. Although it would be ideal to isolate our high risk population the reality of this virus is their are so many asymptomatic people that unintentionally they will get the at risk population ill. Any activity that increases risk of spread of the virus should not occur until we are post pandemic, the greatest minds in the world are all working on a vaccine and they believe that they will have one by the end of the year. Lets take a season off or move it to another time after a vaccine is developed to ensure that we can keep everyone safe. Ultimately, we should maximize our mitigation at all times as this will reduce transmission and in turn save lives we all need to do our part and not playing football seems like a small sacrifice to ensure our world is a safer place as the long term consequences for us sitting out one fall season is far less then someone losing their life. I have been very neutral on this as I really and truly don't believe our world knows the correct answer, myself included! With that stated, my opinion is now leaning to argument 1, based purely on my reading and research on the virus itself and my current belief that this can't be eradicated and we will need to live with it we should be doing everything to protect our at risk population but also while realizing that we can still visit and see this population by using mitigation tactics. The virus is repository and with the proper safeguards spread can be prevented. With all this stated I don't envy the role that any director of any association or college league commissioner is in. They will inevitably make a decision that will side one way or the other and tick all the people who strongly believe the other way off. The best thing we can do is support these people in what ever decision they do and educate and work with our teams and community to mitigate better. So many of our communities are no longer mitigating at all and if we can help educate our athletes alone on this I believe we would at lease reduce transmission rates playing football or not. If I was a betting man, I'd put all my money on us not playing in the fall! As a world we tend to error on the "safe side" my only worry is that ignores the consequences that we will all deal with that we probably are unaware of at this time. Should look up the 1968 pandemic. Sometimes I think we have lost our damn minds over all this... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2020 6:50:30 GMT -6
I don't know Bonine or his history..... However to say any State Association is working to keep sports alive simply to keep their job is very short sighted. These decisions and impact of them have a huge ripple effect on many many people, our leaders are keenly aware of this. There are 2 arguments and like me, like our politicians, like our scientific community no one on this board has the answer to which one is right. Argument 1: This virus like many will be with us for a long long time, it is in our best interest to mitigate the risks to delay this the best we can so that therapies and eventually a vaccine (hopefully) can be developed to minimize the loss of life to it. However, eventually herd immunity will need to occur in which will require many to either get the disease or a vaccine. If we find out that it does not have long term immunity then also unlikely a vaccination the exposure that our bodies have will ultimately save lives through time. Additionally, our at risk population should isolate themselves as much as possibility and intensely mitigate as they can remain safe by doing these recommendations strictly. If this is the truth (note I have no idea and nobody else does either) then our folks with the strongest levels of immunity absolutely should continue on with life mitigation when possible should be taken in consideration because we don't want anyone sick but playing football, basketball, or going to a funeral or eating at a restaurant (with 6 feet social distancing) carries the same risk (that is what the charts say). Lets mitigate when we can lets play ball... Life must go on! Argument 2: This virus is having an impact like none other prior, people are dying and the virus is passing. Although it would be ideal to isolate our high risk population the reality of this virus is their are so many asymptomatic people that unintentionally they will get the at risk population ill. Any activity that increases risk of spread of the virus should not occur until we are post pandemic, the greatest minds in the world are all working on a vaccine and they believe that they will have one by the end of the year. Lets take a season off or move it to another time after a vaccine is developed to ensure that we can keep everyone safe. Ultimately, we should maximize our mitigation at all times as this will reduce transmission and in turn save lives we all need to do our part and not playing football seems like a small sacrifice to ensure our world is a safer place as the long term consequences for us sitting out one fall season is far less then someone losing their life. I have been very neutral on this as I really and truly don't believe our world knows the correct answer, myself included! With that stated, my opinion is now leaning to argument 1, based purely on my reading and research on the virus itself and my current belief that this can't be eradicated and we will need to live with it we should be doing everything to protect our at risk population but also while realizing that we can still visit and see this population by using mitigation tactics. The virus is repository and with the proper safeguards spread can be prevented. With all this stated I don't envy the role that any director of any association or college league commissioner is in. They will inevitably make a decision that will side one way or the other and tick all the people who strongly believe the other way off. The best thing we can do is support these people in what ever decision they do and educate and work with our teams and community to mitigate better. So many of our communities are no longer mitigating at all and if we can help educate our athletes alone on this I believe we would at lease reduce transmission rates playing football or not. If I was a betting man, I'd put all my money on us not playing in the fall! As a world we tend to error on the "safe side" my only worry is that ignores the consequences that we will all deal with that we probably are unaware of at this time. Should look up the 1968 pandemic. Sometimes I think we have lost our damn minds over all this... totally different world in 1968. I wasn’t born, and I know it. This wouldn’t have been a thing in 1988. |
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Jul 9, 2020 7:37:36 GMT -6
To me, the fate of 2020 football lies in this question: What is the response when a player tests positive during the season? If it means the whole team (and possibly the last team you played) has to shutdown and quarantine and be tested and all that jazz, then I just don’t see how we play. If the response is to play anyway, then okay. Let’s roll.
But I will be honest with you: Unless my salary is cut significantly as a result, I don’t know that I even want to play football under these circumstances. The school year is going to be miserable enough as it is without having to follow all these COVID protocols out on the field too.
We all like to go to the beach but not when it’s raining.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2020 7:44:19 GMT -6
To me, the fate of 2020 football lies in this question: What is the response when a player tests positive during the season? If it means the whole team (and possibly the last team you played) has to shutdown and quarantine and be tested and all that jazz, then I just don’t see how we play. If the response is to play anyway, then okay. Let’s roll. But I will be honest with you: Unless my salary is cut significantly as a result, I don’t know that I even want to play football under these circumstances. The school year is going to be miserable enough as it is without having to follow all these COVID protocols out on the field too. We all like to go to the beach but not when it’s raining. if we have alll these protocols, why play. The cure, in this particular case would be worse than the disease. Full speed or don’t go. And this includes. If we don’t have paying customers, it’s a financial cliff more programs than not cannot survive.. Stanford just 11? Programs. And they lack resources. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jul 9, 2020 8:13:31 GMT -6
There's only 2 ways out of this thing- herd immunity and a vaccine. And a vaccine isn't probably happening until early 2021 at the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by canesfan on Jul 9, 2020 9:19:50 GMT -6
Do viruses get passed from team to team? I know we’ve had them passed in the locker room or at school, but haven’t really ever noticed them moving from team to team that’s playing.
Maybe that’s a crazy question and it happens all the time?
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 9, 2020 11:41:50 GMT -6
Of course Bonine and the rest of the LHSAA Administration is 100% committed to safe return. Without sports, their jobs are gone. It should be an interesting fall, as the gaps in logic that have taken place over the last 100 or so days will be highlighted. I just don't see how one can say that it is a best practice to stand 6 feet part in lines, or in stores, or in restaurants, or in waiting rooms, or in classrooms etc, but can line up face to face separated by only a neutral zone. Not to mention only separated by face masks when blocking/tackling, multi-player close quarters breathing in piles etc. Pithy is right that SOMEONE will indeed get sick, but I am concerned because I don't think the correct discussion is being had. At least not in the right way. It is reductive to just say "at risk need to isolate, the rest of us go live our lives" because the at risk population can't feasibly just be isolated from society. While they may not be the one to go to a game, or restaurant, or the store...all the others "just living their lives" are interacting with SOMEONE that "at risk" person is going to come in contact with. So that makes it much more complex than just "isolate the at risk, have players sign waivers etc" argument I see on social media. I don't know Bonine or his history..... However to say any State Association is working to keep sports alive simply to keep their job is very short sighted. These decisions and impact of them have a huge ripple effect on many many people, our leaders are keenly aware of this. I don't think it is necessarily short sighted. There job is to facilitate the HS sports in the state. If they are not fully 100% committed to working towards that, then there is no need for the administrative staff. That doesn't mean that their commitment is nefarious or suggesting that they would enact inappropriate measures just to get a paycheck. I agree with all of the above. Very well put. I do have some issues with the general public's interpretation of the two scenarios. Maybe I am just a curmudgeon, but I get frustrated when I see someone say "There are ways to do this 'safely'" Because no, there are not. There are no absolutes here. There are ways to reduce the risk, but not make things "safe". I think that perspective is important in making the decisions you mention. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 9, 2020 11:45:48 GMT -6
There's only 2 ways out of this thing- herd immunity and a vaccine. And a vaccine isn't probably happening until early 2021 at the best. And then, herd immunity will only exist if millions of people become infected. But here is the fun part, the testing is so inexact and still relatively scarce, and the virus existing and being transmitted asymptomatically that could already be the case. It makes for very challenging decisions. And the cherry on top very well might be there is no lasting "herd" immunity and one may be susceptible to the symptoms of the virus a few short months after a previous infection. Which again makes for challenging decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jul 9, 2020 12:02:25 GMT -6
There's only 2 ways out of this thing- herd immunity and a vaccine. And a vaccine isn't probably happening until early 2021 at the best. And then, herd immunity will only exist if millions of people become infected. But here is the fun part, the testing is so inexact and still relatively scarce, and the virus existing and being transmitted asymptomatically that could already be the case. It makes for very challenging decisions. And the cherry on top very well might be there is no lasting "herd" immunity and one may be susceptible to the symptoms of the virus a few short months after a previous infection. Which again makes for challenging decisions. We can't continue to shut down life for a .25% chance you could die. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2020 13:03:20 GMT -6
And then, herd immunity will only exist if millions of people become infected. But here is the fun part, the testing is so inexact and still relatively scarce, and the virus existing and being transmitted asymptomatically that could already be the case. It makes for very challenging decisions. And the cherry on top very well might be there is no lasting "herd" immunity and one may be susceptible to the symptoms of the virus a few short months after a previous infection. Which again makes for challenging decisions. We can't continue to shut down life for a .25% chance you could die. bingo! |
|
|
|
Post by kylem56 on Jul 9, 2020 18:20:35 GMT -6
Of course Bonine and the rest of the LHSAA Administration is 100% committed to safe return. Without sports, their jobs are gone. It should be an interesting fall, as the gaps in logic that have taken place over the last 100 or so days will be highlighted. I just don't see how one can say that it is a best practice to stand 6 feet part in lines, or in stores, or in restaurants, or in waiting rooms, or in classrooms etc, but can line up face to face separated by only a neutral zone. Not to mention only separated by face masks when blocking/tackling, multi-player close quarters breathing in piles etc. Pithy is right that SOMEONE will indeed get sick, but I am concerned because I don't think the correct discussion is being had. At least not in the right way. It is reductive to just say "at risk need to isolate, the rest of us go live our lives" because the at risk population can't feasibly just be isolated from society. While they may not be the one to go to a game, or restaurant, or the store...all the others "just living their lives" are interacting with SOMEONE that "at risk" person is going to come in contact with. So that makes it much more complex than just "isolate the at risk, have players sign waivers etc" argument I see on social media. I don't know Bonine or his history..... However to say any State Association is working to keep sports alive simply to keep their job is very short sighted. These decisions and impact of them have a huge ripple effect on many many people, our leaders are keenly aware of this. There are 2 arguments and like me, like our politicians, like our scientific community no one on this board has the answer to which one is right. Argument 1: This virus like many will be with us for a long long time, it is in our best interest to mitigate the risks to delay this the best we can so that therapies and eventually a vaccine (hopefully) can be developed to minimize the loss of life to it. However, eventually herd immunity will need to occur in which will require many to either get the disease or a vaccine. If we find out that it does not have long term immunity then also unlikely a vaccination the exposure that our bodies have will ultimately save lives through time. Additionally, our at risk population should isolate themselves as much as possibility and intensely mitigate as they can remain safe by doing these recommendations strictly. If this is the truth (note I have no idea and nobody else does either) then our folks with the strongest levels of immunity absolutely should continue on with life mitigation when possible should be taken in consideration because we don't want anyone sick but playing football, basketball, or going to a funeral or eating at a restaurant (with 6 feet social distancing) carries the same risk (that is what the charts say). Lets mitigate when we can lets play ball... Life must go on! Argument 2: This virus is having an impact like none other prior, people are dying and the virus is passing. Although it would be ideal to isolate our high risk population the reality of this virus is their are so many asymptomatic people that unintentionally they will get the at risk population ill. Any activity that increases risk of spread of the virus should not occur until we are post pandemic, the greatest minds in the world are all working on a vaccine and they believe that they will have one by the end of the year. Lets take a season off or move it to another time after a vaccine is developed to ensure that we can keep everyone safe. Ultimately, we should maximize our mitigation at all times as this will reduce transmission and in turn save lives we all need to do our part and not playing football seems like a small sacrifice to ensure our world is a safer place as the long term consequences for us sitting out one fall season is far less then someone losing their life. I have been very neutral on this as I really and truly don't believe our world knows the correct answer, myself included! With that stated, my opinion is now leaning to argument 1, based purely on my reading and research on the virus itself and my current belief that this can't be eradicated and we will need to live with it we should be doing everything to protect our at risk population but also while realizing that we can still visit and see this population by using mitigation tactics. The virus is repository and with the proper safeguards spread can be prevented. With all this stated I don't envy the role that any director of any association or college league commissioner is in. They will inevitably make a decision that will side one way or the other and tick all the people who strongly believe the other way off. The best thing we can do is support these people in what ever decision they do and educate and work with our teams and community to mitigate better. So many of our communities are no longer mitigating at all and if we can help educate our athletes alone on this I believe we would at lease reduce transmission rates playing football or not. If I was a betting man, I'd put all my money on us not playing in the fall! As a world we tend to error on the "safe side" my only worry is that ignores the consequences that we will all deal with that we probably are unaware of at this time. good points J. People way smarter than me will make the decision and I/our program/community etc. will have to life with it for the time being. My thought as coaches is what CAN we do for our student-athletes during this time? What can we teach them about how to handle a terrible situation? How can we educate our student-athletes on how they can help the situation? How can we continue developing our program whether we play in 2020 or not? How can we continue to help instill values for those kids that come from at-risk homes that rely on coaches and teachers for that guidance? And before someone jumps down my throat saying "I'm a ball coach not someones parent", For those of you who have been allowed to conduct workouts, how has your attendance been? I'm not saying this to brag but ours has been over 95%, talking to several other area coaches, they are all at or over 90%, mainly because the kids want to be out of the house and belong to something again. So whether you like it or not, your program is a mode of influence on the young people you are responsible. Anyway, in the meantime, I am looking forward to the next workout session because it could be our last, or just 1 of many more to come, but all I know is that no sport season is safe right now and we are just a couple bad days away from being "locked down" again. |
|
|
|
Post by coachjm on Jul 9, 2020 20:45:18 GMT -6
good points J. People way smarter than me will make the decision and I/our program/community etc. will have to life with it for the time being. My thought as coaches is what CAN we do for our student-athletes during this time? What can we teach them about how to handle a terrible situation? How can we educate our student-athletes on how they can help the situation? How can we continue developing our program whether we play in 2020 or not? How can we continue to help instill values for those kids that come from at-risk homes that rely on coaches and teachers for that guidance? And before someone jumps down my throat saying "I'm a ball coach not someones parent", For those of you who have been allowed to conduct workouts, how has your attendance been? I'm not saying this to brag but ours has been over 95%, talking to several other area coaches, they are all at or over 90%, mainly because the kids want to be out of the house and belong to something again. So whether you like it or not, your program is a mode of influence on the young people you are responsible. Anyway, in the meantime, I am looking forward to the next workout session because it could be our last, or just 1 of many more to come, but all I know is that no sport season is safe right now and we are just a couple bad days away from being "locked down" again. Brilliant! You have it figured out! Keep Rolling! |
|
|
|
Post by coachjm on Jul 9, 2020 20:49:52 GMT -6
I don't know Bonine or his history..... However to say any State Association is working to keep sports alive simply to keep their job is very short sighted. These decisions and impact of them have a huge ripple effect on many many people, our leaders are keenly aware of this. I don't think it is necessarily short sighted. There job is to facilitate the HS sports in the state. If they are not fully 100% committed to working towards that, then there is no need for the administrative staff. That doesn't mean that their commitment is nefarious or suggesting that they would enact inappropriate measures just to get a paycheck. I agree with all of the above. Very well put. I do have some issues with the general public's interpretation of the two scenarios. Maybe I am just a curmudgeon, but I get frustrated when I see someone say "There are ways to do this 'safely'" Because no, there are not. There are no absolutes here. There are ways to reduce the risk, but not make things "safe". I think that perspective is important in making the decisions you mention. I appreciate you giving my thoughts consideration..... I do believe "Safe" is something we all strive for that can't fully be attained! Therefor your goal of having more safety is something I agree with and hope we can attain! |
|
|
|
Post by coachjm on Jul 9, 2020 20:53:14 GMT -6
There's only 2 ways out of this thing- herd immunity and a vaccine. And a vaccine isn't probably happening until early 2021 at the best. And then, herd immunity will only exist if millions of people become infected. But here is the fun part, the testing is so inexact and still relatively scarce, and the virus existing and being transmitted asymptomatically that could already be the case. It makes for very challenging decisions. And the cherry on top very well might be there is no lasting "herd" immunity and one may be susceptible to the symptoms of the virus a few short months after a previous infection. Which again makes for challenging decisions. Although I agree with your premise, herd immunity ideally will be enhanced when we have the introduction of a effective vaccine as well. My worry that I think you elude to is that is no gaurentee, so at somepoint we will need to make significant choices that could lead to greater loss of life... |
|
