Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Health and Fitness > Coronavirus and travel
Reload this Page >

COVID-19: Lounge thread for thoughts, concerns and questions

Old Mar 11, 2020, 10:13 am
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: Ocn Vw 1K
In order to reduce noise in the Coronavirus / Covid-19 : general fact-based reporting thread, and to create a central place to invite any member to ask a basic question about the impact of COVID-19 on travel, your moderators have decided to open this separate "lounge" thread for related discussion that isn't strictly fact-based reporting.
Any member who can provide a constructive, helpful answer to a question; or post constructively in reply to a member's point-of-view, is welcome to post.

All FT rules apply, including avoiding personalized, snarky, political, other off-topic, commercial, and repeatedly disruptive content.

Discussion of general economic impacts of Covid-19 belongs in the OMNI forum, not here.
Discussion and critique of political/government actions to aid the economy or which is far more political than related to COVID-19 is for the OMNI/PR forum, not here.

This is a protocol for posting adopted by the forum Moderator team:Please follow this protocol, based on FlyerTalk Rules and long-standing FlyerTalk best practices. Doing so will help keep the thread open, and allow our moderator team to aid members, rather than having to resort to discipline.

•Constructive, respectful posts, views, opinions, questions, and replies, related to the topic are welcome. Avoid commenting on members personally, or posting off-topic or political messages.

•While respectful disagreement of a posted view is allowed, don’t call-out posters to prove their points. FlyerTalk has never required discussion standards at the level of a Ph.D. dissertation defense, or a trial court witness cross-examination.

•After a reasonable exchange of views on a point, please yield the floor so that others may bring up different topics, questions or points.

•Especially important in this time of pandemic, when normal life and travel have been upended: please take regular breaks from the thread.
Please stay healthy,

your FT Coronavirus and Travel Moderator Team.








Print Wikipost

COVID-19: Lounge thread for thoughts, concerns and questions

 
Old Jun 16, 2020, 9:03 am
  #3136  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: En Route
Programs: Many
Posts: 6,798
Originally Posted by Smiley90
a) those "young" people will go home and get their parents and grandparents sick, and they WILL die. If this was only about personal risk, you'd have a point. What about people who are at-risk but HAVE to go out, to get groceries, go to essential jobs, etc.? The more people are outside irresponsibly, the larger their risk is. Should all doctors with pre-existing conditions stay home?

b) It might become a seasonal thing - the benefit we'll have then is that, if it's like the seasonal flu, we'll have 1) population immunity to protect a lot of them, 2) a vaccine, 3) treatment, 4) non-overloaded ICU capability because not the entire population is at risk of getting it at once and 5) a good understanding of disease management

If you're not happy with the way the disease precautions are being handled here, feel free to move elsewhere, that seems to be everyone's favourite argument all the time.

You've stated your exact same argument like ten times now and it's been rebutted every single time.
You never actually rebut the argument though, you just ignore portions of it. For example I have stated 100 times regarding "those 'young' people will go home and get their parents and grandparents sick, and they WILL die[,]" that at risk populations should be protected and people who live with or interact with those people should not go out. Other young healthy people who have no interactions with at risk people should be forced to stay home why? We are destroying the global economy why? The point is people should be allowed to DECIDE their own level of risk tolerance, we don't need the government to treat us like children and make our choices for us.

Regarding B, 1) how do you expect us to get to herd immunity if you want everyone to stay home and not get sick? 2) there may never be a vaccine, should we stay locked up for years if that's what it takes? 3) there are several treatments currently being utilized, 4) the hospitals in the US were never overwhelmed at any point. This bogeyman argument that we will suddenly turn into peak crisis Italy doesn't seem to be founded on any numbers or science.

I can't move anywhere else in case you haven't noticed, can't even leave the country for vacation. If you want to be overly cautious, that's fine, but stop pretending your view is the only acceptable argument.
GetSetJetSet is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 9:37 am
  #3137  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
Originally Posted by GetSetJetSet
Regarding B, 1) how do you expect us to get to herd immunity if you want everyone to stay home and not get sick?
So if we are playing the "long game" then to get immune we need small viral doses over long periods of time.
Not a large load at once which gives clinical infection and potential to spiral out of control in ICU at any age.

Herd immunity can come with much less of a price over a longer time if we get smaller exposures over longer time frames. Masks reduce, not eliminate load, so with 6 feet of distancing where possible, help get more people exposed without severe clinical infection, if that is the only option to immunity. Masks reduce risk of getting that massive dose in a short period of time.
Diplomatico, wrp96 and Stuttgart21 like this.
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 9:52 am
  #3138  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: En Route
Programs: Many
Posts: 6,798
Originally Posted by FlyBitcoin
So if we are playing the "long game" then to get immune we need small viral doses over long periods of time.
Not a large load at once which gives clinical infection and potential to spiral out of control in ICU at any age.

Herd immunity can come with much less of a price over a longer time if we get smaller exposures over longer time frames. Masks reduce, not eliminate load, so with 6 feet of distancing where possible, help get more people exposed without severe clinical infection, if that is the only option to immunity. Masks reduce risk of getting that massive dose in a short period of time.
So you envision this as a multi-year disruption of normal life? No thanks. I don't think anyone is against wearing masks, the issue is opening things up and letting us move around and live our lives like normal people.
susiesan and flyingcrazy like this.
GetSetJetSet is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 10:20 am
  #3139  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
Originally Posted by GetSetJetSet
So you envision this as a multi-year disruption of normal life? No thanks. I don't think anyone is against wearing masks, the issue is opening things up and letting us move around and live our lives like normal people.
The premise was no vaccine or a delayed vaccine.
Herd immunity worldwide is going to take a long time masks or no masks. Masks just get us there less painfully.
Loren Pechtel, wrp96 and ajGoes like this.
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 10:20 am
  #3140  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Herd immunity, absent a widespread vaccination campaign to get there, is still a far off pipe dream when it comes to this virus. The Swedish approach was a flop because the herd immunity and segregation-is-protection plan is a failed approach given huge numbers of “vulnerable” people don’t live in isolated bantustans in Sweden or just about anywhere else in the world that is on the beaten track for tourists and business travelers. Mask use by the public out and about in Sweden? Not more than 2% of people by measure of what I see at high traffic places in Stockholm and in southern Sweden.

Originally Posted by GetSetJetSet
I can't move anywhere else in case you haven't noticed, can't even leave the country for vacation.
Why can’t you move anywhere else or even leave the country for vacation? It’s not like all possibilities to leave or even vacation have been eliminated by most places where people can freely post to FT without concern about ending up locked up in a jail/prison for having a dissenting opinion from that of the governmental authorities. The options may be narrower, more financially costly or less ideal than before, but the options still exist for those able and willing to do so .... even if it’s in a different way than wanted earlier.

Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 16, 2020 at 10:34 am
GUWonder is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 11:04 am
  #3141  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: En Route
Programs: Many
Posts: 6,798
Originally Posted by GUWonder


Why can’t you move anywhere else or even leave the country for vacation? It’s not like all possibilities to leave or even vacation have been eliminated by most places .
Huh? You realize most countries are not allowing non-citizens/residents to enter right? I don't see 1. why you think it's valid to tell me I should leave the country because I don't agree with your argument or 2. how you don't understand that it is QUITE impossible to get to many places right now. For example, I have property in Europe and would LOVE to decamp now and spend the next few months over there, but pending an announcement on when Americans will be allowed in, I am not permitted to enter. This is the situation in much of the world.
GetSetJetSet is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 11:50 am
  #3142  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Truth or Consequences, NM
Programs: HH Diamond, Marriott Titanium, Hertz President's Circle, UA Silver, Mobile Passport Unobtanium
Posts: 6,192
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Herd immunity, absent a widespread vaccination campaign to get there, is still a far off pipe dream when it comes to this virus. The Swedish approach was a flop because the herd immunity and segregation-is-protection plan is a failed approach given huge numbers of “vulnerable” people don’t live in isolated bantustans in Sweden or just about anywhere else in the world that is on the beaten track for tourists and business travelers.
I learned a new word today, thanks. (I've never even seen the word before today.)

Now that I know the meaning, your use of the word to describe some place in Sweden is....interesting.
Diplomatico is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 1:08 pm
  #3143  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Posts: 14,162
Originally Posted by GetSetJetSet
You never actually rebut the argument though, you just ignore portions of it. For example I have stated 100 times regarding "those 'young' people will go home and get their parents and grandparents sick, and they WILL die[,]" that at risk populations should be protected and people who live with or interact with those people should not go out. Other young healthy people who have no interactions with at risk people should be forced to stay home why? We are destroying the global economy why? The point is people should be allowed to DECIDE their own level of risk tolerance, we don't need the government to treat us like children and make our choices for us.

Regarding B, 1) how do you expect us to get to herd immunity if you want everyone to stay home and not get sick? 2) there may never be a vaccine, should we stay locked up for years if that's what it takes? 3) there are several treatments currently being utilized, 4) the hospitals in the US were never overwhelmed at any point. This bogeyman argument that we will suddenly turn into peak crisis Italy doesn't seem to be founded on any numbers or science.

I can't move anywhere else in case you haven't noticed, can't even leave the country for vacation. If you want to be overly cautious, that's fine, but stop pretending your view is the only acceptable argument.
You appear to be advocating second-class status for those more vulnerable to the disease in favor of heedless individuals who don't want restrictions on their activities during a pandemic.
PaulMSN is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 1:09 pm
  #3144  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Posts: 14,162
Originally Posted by Diplomatico
I learned a new word today, thanks. (I've never even seen the word before today.)

Now that I know the meaning, your use of the word to describe some place in Sweden is....interesting.
No, he described what Sweden does NOT have.
GUWonder likes this.
PaulMSN is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 1:22 pm
  #3145  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by Diplomatico
I learned a new word today, thanks. (I've never even seen the word before today.)

Now that I know the meaning, your use of the word to describe some place in Sweden is....interesting.
There aren’t isolated bantustans for the “vulnerable” or anyone else in Sweden.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 1:47 pm
  #3146  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: En Route
Programs: Many
Posts: 6,798
Originally Posted by PaulMSN
You appear to be advocating second-class status for those more vulnerable to the disease in favor of heedless individuals who don't want restrictions on their activities during a pandemic.
and you seem to be saying that we should keep the world closed, destroy the global economy for no reason and tell young, healthy people who are essentially at no risk to stay home just because people over 65 need to stay home.
GetSetJetSet is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 2:02 pm
  #3147  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: RNO
Programs: AA/DL/UA
Posts: 10,764
Originally Posted by PaulMSN
You appear to be advocating second-class status for those more vulnerable to the disease in favor of heedless individuals who don't want restrictions on their activities during a pandemic.
If young people are prevented from working (either directly by business shutdowns or indirectly by low demand), then the vulnerable population is going to have a tough time ahead with insufficient tax revenue that supports them.

Quarantining everyone is stupid and it needs to stop.
GetSetJetSet and the810 like this.
Kevin AA is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 2:49 pm
  #3148  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,079
Originally Posted by FlyBitcoin
So if we are playing the "long game" then to get immune we need small viral doses over long periods of time.
Not a large load at once which gives clinical infection and potential to spiral out of control in ICU at any age.

Herd immunity can come with much less of a price over a longer time if we get smaller exposures over longer time frames. Masks reduce, not eliminate load, so with 6 feet of distancing where possible, help get more people exposed without severe clinical infection, if that is the only option to immunity. Masks reduce risk of getting that massive dose in a short period of time.
Read somewhere that it would take ~70% of the population to be exposed to reach herd immunity. Is that fairly accurate? If so we have a very long ways to go.
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 2:58 pm
  #3149  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Programs: Aeroplan, IHG, Enterprise, Avios, Nexus
Posts: 8,355
Originally Posted by PaulMSN
You appear to be advocating second-class status for those more vulnerable to the disease in favor of heedless individuals who don't want restrictions on their activities during a pandemic.
The vulnerable in society whether that vulnerability is medical, financial, mobility, societal etc. do have second class status in one way or another. People who are immunocompromised for example have to take steps to protect themselves that the rest of us do not. There needs to be a balance between protecting people and allowing those at lower risk to resume normal activities. Extreme positions on either end aren't viable over the longer term.
the810 likes this.
Badenoch is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2020, 3:12 pm
  #3150  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Posts: 14,162
Originally Posted by GetSetJetSet
and you seem to be saying that we should keep the world closed, destroy the global economy for no reason and tell young, healthy people who are essentially at no risk to stay home just because people over 65 need to stay home.
Nope, nothing I wrote comes close to implying that, and you know that. I advocate doing what is necessary to save lives, and support a gradual and careful opening up where it practical without endangering lives. Your "essentially at no risk" is both irrelevant and false -- young people do occasionally die, and some will have health repercussions for the rest of their lives, but that doesn't matter -- people should do what is necessary to protect others, even if it causes some personal inconvenience. Selfishness is not a good basis for responding to a pandemic.

The global economy won't be destroyed -- trade has continued throughout the pandemic, though at lesser levels, even in many countries that have otherwise closed their borders. Chicken Little claims are not persuasive -- the world survived the Great Depression, which lasted for years -- less than four months is the blink of an eye. Note that the stock market rose over 500 points today -- people who know a lot more about money than you or me clearly don't believe your cries of calamity.
FAA1996 likes this.
PaulMSN is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.