Covid confusion

[hsmamato2]

This exactly. I think people quote IFRs as evidence that we shouldn’t worry about it, but they don’t take into account the fact that some people get seriously, and maybe permanently, sick and there doesn’t seem to be a lot of rhyme or reason sometimes as to who does get hit hard. Scary stuff.

exactly. All the quoting of numbers to create stats (of various types) means nothing to me, when you understand that b/c we now so little still, except that this is highly contagious, spreads fast,and WILL kill some who catch it. A large number IMHO. And the rest who catch it will either experience not much or some debilitating random symptoms that can't be managed.
When you're truly concerned about not just yourself and your own comfort, but those around you too, is when this changes your attitude on how to view this virus. All I know is a steady stream of people have died in the past 8 months, (3rd biggest kiiler in US) from a disease that is CONTAGIOUS. (the other two are not) therefore it is cause to be alarmed.
SO yes, I'm confused by all the conflicting info out there too, but I'm not confused by the steadily growing numbers of people in the hospital with this illness in my state ,nor the death of an acquaintance last weekend from Covid.(apparently a road trip to visit family was the cause) I can clearly see it's a bad thing,and I need to be careful.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

I think what you say is very true. But I will continue to wear a mask. I do think it helps.

But I am getting sick of the fear mongering and downright lies that hype this virus up.

Our schools did NOT go back yet. We have had 3 teen suicides in our county in the last 4 weeks. They are the ones that I know of. Why can't we go back to school? I didn't think this way in the beginning, but it is really starting to wear on people in a way that may be worse than the virus itself.

What exactly are the "downright lies" you heard? I know two people that died, and two others in their 40s so not that old that are experiencing what may be permanent issues, one now has heart issues never had before, and the other 7 months later has lung and breathing problems. So what is the lie bc we should expose lies if they are lies. But bc the media tells us this be aware media has agendas. What we should do is get rid of all the bs bias media outlets and have all real news stations that are unbiased for a change that don't put on opinion pieces as their main thing bc it makes them the most money.

 

[dez1978]

But that is literally why pre-symptomatic spread is a problem. If you get a test you are supposed to quarantine until test results come back, regardless of the reason for getting the test. I find it hard to believe that any state health guideline states that it's ok to get tested and go about your business until results are received.

Here's the thing that I think a lot of people don't understand. Where I work is a secure forensic facility. Meaning our 300 patients are murders, rapists, etc who were found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity. We HAVE to have staff and be staffed at a certain level 24/7. We don't close bc of COVID. Even pre-covid, we are understaffed, just like corrections is. (our state is down over 900 corrections officers which is very dangerous). So we are required that 20% of the staff get randomly tested every week. Best case scenario, if we were fully staffed and 20% of the employees were taken out of coverage for 2 days every week, then other staff are working overtime to cover those positions, which costs a lot of $. Taxpayers don't like that. The budget set by the gov doesn't like that. We are never fully staffed because the nature of where we work, not tons of ppl are clamoring to work with these types of ppl. Then you take out the number of staff out on work comp bc they've been assaulted by a patient, the staff who are normal sick (not covid) and the staff who are off on military orders, etc. so we are down even further. Now on top of that, you want to take another 20% of the staff out of work for 2 days a week to quarantine after they've been randomly tested, and have NO SYMPTOMS. Who covers these shifts then? Do you want staff working 80 hrs a week? Because thats not safe... Do you want us to let these patients out? Thats not safe either. Should we send them to prison where they won't get the treatment they need? Thats inhumane. Whats the solution for this? I understand the premise of what you are saying. I'm saying its just not feasible even under the best circumstances.

 

[ShirikiUtundu]

Here's the thing that I think a lot of people don't understand. Where I work is a secure forensic facility. Meaning our 300 patients are murders, rapists, etc who were found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity. We HAVE to have staff and be staffed at a certain level 24/7. We don't close bc of COVID. Even pre-covid, we are understaffed, just like corrections is. (our state is down over 900 corrections officers which is very dangerous). So we are required that 20% of the staff get randomly tested every week. Best case scenario, if we were fully staffed and 20% of the employees were taken out of coverage for 2 days every week, then other staff are working overtime to cover those positions, which costs a lot of $. Taxpayers don't like that. The budget set by the gov doesn't like that. We are never fully staffed because the nature of where we work, not tons of ppl are clamoring to work with these types of ppl. Then you take out the number of staff out on work comp bc they've been assaulted by a patient, the staff who are normal sick (not covid) and the staff who are off on military orders, etc. so we are down even further. Now on top of that, you want to take another 20% of the staff out of work for 2 days a week to quarantine after they've been randomly tested, and have NO SYMPTOMS. Who covers these shifts then? Do you want staff working 80 hrs a week? Because thats not safe... Do you want us to let these patients out? Thats not safe either. Should we send them to prison where they won't get the treatment they need? Thats inhumane. Whats the solution for this? I understand the premise of what you are saying. I'm saying its just not feasible even under the best circumstances.

I understand that facilities feel like they need to do something. I get it. I just wanted to point out that snapshot testing isn't really super reliable. The White House realized this.

 

[monsterkitty]

I understand that facilities feel like they need to do something. I get it. I just wanted to point out that snapshot testing isn't really super reliable. The White House realized this.

I agree that snapshot testing isn't 100% reliable. However, it's better than nothing.