Dr. Anthony Fauci says staying closed for too long could cause ‘irreparable damage’

originally posted by: Phage

“But now is the time, depending upon where you are and what your situation is, to begin to seriously look at reopening the economy, reopening the country to try to get back to some degree of normal.”

www.cnbc.com...

Some places are doing well, others not so much. In some places the number of new cases is declining and has been. In some places it's flat. In some places it's rising.

I believe that is because just like any other virus it takes time for the coronavirus to get to some areas. Urban areas were hit pretty quickly, while it took time for the virus to make it to a lot of rural areas which are just beginning to see a rise in cases. The problem with that is governors are keeping entire states shut down rather than rolling mandates based on infection rates per area or county. "One size fits all" mandates just aren't working very well. It's almost like declaring martial law due to gun violence in the entire state of Illinois based on what happens in Chicago.

a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

I live in a world where I can't let myself believe I'm the only
one left with any sanity because that's a sure sign of insanity.
But the world keeps insisting relentlessly.

a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

Unlike Hawaii, it's pretty hard to monitor those who travel from county to county or from state to state on the mainland.

We're are doing very well here, considering there are a million people on a not very big island (Oahu). Statewide, as well.

health.hawaii.gov...

How does a Dr. end up deciding whether to close down an economy??
Wth is the chain of command these days?

a reply to: Asktheanimals

How does a Dr. end up deciding whether to close down an economy??

He didn't.

originally posted by: ketsuko
It spreads on surfaces -> It doesn't spread on surfaces.

Over 1 million will DIE! -> Initial reports were greatly exaggerated.

Masks do nothing -> Wear masks EVERYWHERE!

We must flatten the curve -> We must stay in until there is a vaccine.

We must shut down indefinitely -> Shutting down indefinitely will do irreparable harm.

How many times do we let these experts reverse themselves or contradict until we admit to ourselves they have no clue?

It’s Like what happens when you bend a paper club back and forth too many times. It eventually breaks.
It’s like they are trying to remove the foundations of trust, creating a trust void, a vacuum that will bring about something, someone, that will eventually fill that void......In God we Trust?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

Why now? When did Fauci become an economic advisor?

He has become a voice that people are listening too, I guess... Maybe he is seeing the numbers that suicides/drug overdoses are going up 3%, 200,000 people have cancer and do not know it as testing has dropped 80%, mental health issues are on the rise, depression, family member abuse is all on the rise with no one in the chain to notice, and many people are not going to the empty hospitals too that should be going for non-COVID-19 medical issues. Maybe not in the US but in other countries there is estimated 700 million more people in the world will be starving if not already.

We also know the initial models used to forecast deaths and transmission rates were totally screwed up. As other companies looked at the programming involved it is said the actual programming looks like a bowel of spaghetti, and if someone in their company did that they would be fired on the spot. This same model was used by many countries to lock down.

Lock down was to flatten the curve only because there is huge repercussions with the lock down too, and maybe now he actually sees that part.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Asktheanimals

How does a Dr. end up deciding whether to close down an economy??

He didn't.

Not directly, but the Governors are acting on his direction / data.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Asktheanimals

How does a Dr. end up deciding whether to close down an economy??

He didn't.

Who did?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Lock down was to flatten the curve only because there is huge repercussions with the lock down too, and maybe now he actually sees that part.

I think that what he is saying is in line with what he has said previously. When the number of new cases in an area declines enough, measures can transition from mitigation to containment. Given sufficient testing and contact tracing measures are in place.

From April 2: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Some places are getting to that point, others are not.

a reply to: Phage

It really does make a difference! Our numbers in Kentucky were very low until people started flocking here from other states even with a state wide travel ban. In the six years I've been here I have never seen so many license plates from New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania on the city streets. You expect them on the interstate but the only time I've seen this many in town is during the Derby activities- which have been put off until the Fall this year.

originally posted by: Phage

He didn't.

The lock down was sure preached by him, but the reality was that no Governor wanted to be first to lock down and when one finally did it was like lemmings jumping over the cliff as then none of them wanted to be the state that didn't lock down. On march 19 CA locked down, then everyone watched them for a few days and on the 23rd the lemmings started to jump off the cliff as NY/NJ locked down on the 22nd too.

Well opening back up has played out the same way, as everyone waited to see what state would do it first then watch them for a week or so and the trickle has started and is growing now very quickly from an over all negative view of opening up to a positive one.

Fauci has and is playing a much bigger roll in closing and opening than even the President is, so I would not dismiss him with a simple "he didn't".

a reply to: Xtrozero

Read what I answered. Fauci has not "decided" policy for anyone.

But he does make a handy boogeyman.

originally posted by: Phage

I think that what he is saying is in line with what he has said previously. When the number of new cases in an area declines enough, measures can transition from mitigation to containment. Given sufficient testing and contact tracing measures are in place.

Some places are getting to that point, others are not.

I think the initial tune was once we are past the point that would overrun the healthcare system, now its two or three weeks of a serious decline while hospitals stay empty still. I think there is a rather big difference in lock down time from the two statements.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Asktheanimals

How does a Dr. end up deciding whether to close down an economy??

He didn't.

Maybe he didn’t have the power to do it. But He did advise it.

Then the idiot said he would not recommend reopening until there isn’t one person infected.

He needs to be tarred and feathered. And that putting it lightly.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The idea was (and is) to keep the curve flattened (or better yet, declining). Or do you think it can't steepen again, for some reason? Do you think the virus has become less infectious?

a reply to: KKLOCO

Then the idiot said he would not recommend reopening until there isn’t one person infected.

He did not say that.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Phage

Read what I answered. Fauci has not "decided" policy for anyone.

But he does make a handy boogeyman.

Well to get nick picky he did decide the country should be closed down and expressed that everyday. Pushing policy to actually do that was not in the post you replied to. He decided that the country should be shut down... His decision did influence many Governors to push that policy, so....

I understand your point, but it is kind of derpy logic.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Turns out is was a good thing to do, actually. It has worked.

originally posted by: Phage

The idea was (and is) to keep the curve flattened (or better yet, declining). Or do you think it can't steepen again, for some reason?j Do you think the virus becomes less infectious because the numbers may go down?

The model data is extremely wrong, the programming was a total mess and so the reason for shutting down is no longer valid. The virus is the same, but social distancing will be effective in preventing our medical infrastructure from being overwhelmed. The curve will go up, but not as what past models predicted. The lock down was to prevent this and we saw in reality not just hospitals full, but workable as predicted, but most ended up being completely empty and laying off staff due to the excessive lock down that was not needed except in micro areas at best.