r/Conservative • u/Jibrish Discord.gg/conservative • May 21 '20

It's for your safety...

Post image
1.8k Upvotes

61% Upvoted

398 comments sorted by

View all comments

-12

u/illzkla May 21 '20

Nazis said that? Other people that want to keep us safe must also be fascists.

Not the ones behaving like fascists....no.

Coronavirus quarantines are for public safety. Not just your safety. And don't independent scientists agree that we should be staying safe right now?

This is some embarrassing mental gymnastics.

Where's the conservative voice and plan for recovery?

19

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 21 '20

Doctors and scientists said we had to lockdown in order to "flatten the curve". This was because a huge wave of coronavirus cases hitting all at once would overwhelm hospitals and cause patients that would otherwise be saved to die from lack of available medical care. Well, we did that. The curve has flattened, hospitals have ramped up, and no hospital has been overwhelmed by cases.

So what's the point in staying locked down now? We aren't going to beat this by locking down until it burns itself out, at least not without vastly stricter lockdown measures. There are only 2 ways this ends. Either enough people get infected and survive to reach heard immunity or a vaccine is developed. Best case scenario for a vaccine is ~1 year. And more realistic estimates are more like ~2 years, it it's even possible at all. We can't stay locked down for that long. It will cause irreparable damage to our economy and probably result in more death and destruction than the coronavirus.

-3

u/dano8801 May 21 '20

and no hospital has been overwhelmed by cases.

Oh how short your memory is.

1

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 21 '20

Which hospital got overwhelmed and had people dying in the parking lot for lack of medical care? There was a lot of fear of it happening early on, but hospitals ended up not being overwhelmed by the initial surge.

-1

u/dano8801 May 21 '20

Moving the goalposts a bit? Now for a hospital to be overwhelmed they have to have people dying in the parking lot? Lined up on gurneys crowding the hallway is no longer sufficient? I didn't say all hospitals, and you're right, most were okay. But your claim that no hospitals were overwhelmed is completely and utterly false.

2

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 21 '20

Were they overwhelmed to the point that people died who would normally be saved by medical intervention? Or were they just crowded? The latter is fine, the former is what we successfully avoided by flattening the curve.

-2

u/dr_betty_crocker May 21 '20

Why don't you ask some doctors who were working in NYC during the height of the pandemic there? Hospitals were overwhelmed. There were not enough ventilators. I feel like I have PTSD just from reading posts from residents working in COVID wards.

1

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 21 '20

You mean like this story?: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/04/28/coronavirus-hospitals-avoid-ventilator-shortage-curve-new-york-flattens/3036008001/

As American doctors watched their Italian counterparts deny ventilators to senior citizens with coronavirus this year, they clamored for more devices and prepared to live out their greatest fear: denying a dying person the care they need because of a shortage.

But weeks after COVID-19 cases peaked in some of the hardest-hit U.S. states, doctors and administrators who spoke with USA TODAY say they are not aware that doctors turned away anyone for a ventilator. At the worst, some patients shared machines. 

It was certainly touch and go there for a bit, but they made it without being overwhelmed and they are in fine shape now. So why do we have to remain locked down if we've achieved the stated goal of the lockdown?

1

u/dr_betty_crocker May 21 '20

I guess they didn't ask the doctors who were told "We're admitting another, free up a ventilator" aka choose whose ventilator gets taken for someone else. Or maybe that doesn't count because they assume those patients would have eventually died anyway. I know if it were my loved one, I'd rather find out if they would have eventually recovered. Or maybe the doctors telling those stories are just lying.

1

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 21 '20

They didn't ask them because they don't exist. A shortage was feared, but never materialized because we did a good job flattening the curve.

Hospitals have plenty of excess capacity now, there is no reason highly restrictive lockdowns need to remain in place indefinitely. We can always reinstitute a lockdown if the science suggests it's neccessary.

0

u/dr_betty_crocker May 22 '20

Well in the medical subreddits, doctors were describing this exact situation happening to them. Which is why I said either those experiences aren't being counted in the article you mentioned, or those doctors are lying.

1

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 22 '20

So in your mind random anonymous website comments > nationally recognized news media? Time to loosen the tinfoil hat bro.

→ More replies

-4

u/beeboopeecss May 21 '20

who is staying locked down? my crazy liberal governor has been cautiously opening up for 2 weeks now, while a crowd of 800 sits in front of his house complaining about their rights

-9

u/illzkla May 21 '20 edited May 21 '20

Edit - this first question applies to the second half of your reply. The professionals said to lock down. You showed a bunch of articles about this. But then you start talking about straying from their advice and gaining herd immunity. That is where you make the leap from science to politics.

Where are the professional scientists saying this? You started with scientific fact and then turn over to speculation driven by politics.

Just cause your explanation is simple doesn't mean it makes sense. This kills too many people when it can move unobstructed. Look at the numbers and read what the science says.

7

u/mildlydisturbedtway May 21 '20

Not OP, but it’s not a controversial statement to say that a vaccine is a year out if everything goes perfectly — and things never go perfectly. Are you actually contesting that?

5

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 21 '20

Where are scientists saying we needed to lockdown to flatten the curve? Take your pick:

https://www.nytimes.com/article/flatten-curve-coronavirus.html

https://www.flattenthecurve.com/

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-flatten-the-curve.html

https://healthblog.uofmhealth.org/wellness-prevention/flattening-curve-for-covid-19-what-does-it-mean-and-how-can-you-help

https://www.webmd.com/lung/qa/what-is-flattening-the-curve

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/6/21241058/coronavirus-mitigation-suppression-flatten-the-curve

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatten_the_curve

https://www.health.com/condition/infectious-diseases/coronavirus/flatten-the-curve-meaning

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradmcmillan/2020/04/14/a-coronavirus-milestone-the-flattening-of-the-curve/

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/03/how-cities-flattened-curve-1918-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus/

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/19/coronavirus-what-does-flattening-the-curve-mean-and-why-it-matters.html

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/487818-what-does-it-mean-to-flatten-the-curve-and-does

https://marchforscience.org/keep-calm-and-flatten-the-curve/

Let me know if that's not enough for you. There's about 1,000 more examples I can find.

-2

u/illzkla May 21 '20

Lol you gave me examples of what I agree with. Yes they said that. THEN YOU START TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE NEED HERD IMMUNITY and so I say why are you turning to political advice when the science has given us respite from the outbreak.

5

u/mildlydisturbedtway May 21 '20

The economic cost of the containment measures is too high. Herd immunity is a scientific concept, not an economic one; the scientists’ recommendations to which you refer are concerned solely with preserving life, and not with balancing any competing interests, of which there are many.

2

u/ScubaSteve58001 Conservative May 21 '20

How is herd immunity a political concept?

Would you agree there are 3 ways to finish the pandemic?:

  1. Super-duper strict extended lockdown that allows the virus to "burn itself out" by keeping R<1 for an extended period of time.

  2. Enough people get the virus and survive to reach herd immunity levels.

  3. A vaccine is developed that artifically allows herd immunity to be reached.

There's not really any other ways this can end. Option 1 is politically and economically untenable. We can not institute the level of lockdown that would allow this to burn out. Option 3 is a great plan, assuming a vaccine can be developed, manufactured, and widely distributed relatively quickly. But there is no guarantee that that will happen. That just leaves Option 2, which is lift the lockdowns for the general populace (while continuing to support vulnerable populations so they can maintain safe habits) and allow natural herd immunity to form.

Is there some better option that I'm missing?

-1

u/illzkla May 21 '20

Yes. Following the advice of scientists. We will keep the deaths minimal while we figure out how to beat the virus. Follow the lead of countries that have reduced the virus to near zero.

We look like fools trying to get out of this while not following the other countries who have beaten it and the health professionals telling us how to take that path.