Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

Recommended Posts

Found this post for NOB. Thought it might offer something here. You decide for yourself.
 
I saw on the NBC "news" tonight that IF they open the schools in the fall, there would only be 12 students per classroom and the buses would run at 1/8 the capacity. NOT BELIEVING EVERYTHING I HEAR, I did some research of my own to find out the number of coronavirus deaths there have been in each age group. The results I found were ridiculously LOW in the age group 0-24. (I'm a nerd--I made a spreadsheet.) The narrative that schools will have to be closed or operated very differently (social distancing, masks, online learning, etc.), is completely unjustified. Think about what FURTHER financial effects this would have on families where both parents work (and don't have jobs where they can work from home). Is one parent going to be forced to quit their job in order to transport their child to/from school during staggered hours/days AND in order to teach their children at home on a part-time basis? If both parents continue to work and the child(ren) go to daycare when they are not in school, how will they pay for such a large expense? If children receive free breakfast and lunch at school because of the family's low income, what is their risk of going hungry at home? If young students don't have the internet at home, will they be able to do their school work or will they have have to wait until their parent gets home to use their cell phone? What about sports? What about extra curricular activities? Life needs to return to NORMAL for all of us, especially for children and teens. Last but not least--WHY are they making this decision in MAY??!! (You can screenshot the photo if you would like to share.) #questioneverything #numbersthatjustdontaddup #falsenarrative #wewantourlivesback
No photo description available.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since testing is so limited, we have no idea how many asymptomatic kids are out there, not getting sick but spreading the disease to people older than themselves. This is not just about protecting the kids from covid-19, but about preventing them from becoming vectors of the spread. That said, all of the downsides you mention are valid. We're in a pickle and will remain there until we have adequate, reliable, and widely accessible testing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who write these kinds of things have a huge problem following a thought to its logical conclusion. 

Children go home to their famiies after school, they don't live in apartments alone. Plenty of children test positive for the virus and can easily infect other people, who could get quite sick or die from the virus.

Why post senseless ramblings?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stay away from kids if that is worrying you. Pretty easy for us geezers to do. We normally don't have anywhere we HAVE to go so if your risk tolerance is low (which is fine) just hang out with your significant other or by yourself if that doesn't apply. Forget socializing for however long it takes you to feel comfortable.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pappysmarket said:

Stay away from kids if that is worrying you. Pretty easy for us geezers to do. We normally don't have anywhere we HAVE to go so if your risk tolerance is low (which is fine) just hang out with your significant other or by yourself if that doesn't apply. Forget socializing for however long it takes you to feel comfortable.

The article posted was trying to make a case for why schools should open. It wasn't about old expat geezers in Mexico being able to avoid coming in contact with children.

Not everything is all about you.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike Sweden, parents here in the US, Canada or Mexico have the option of not sending their children to school if they choose not to. Not so in Sweden, the state can take the children away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spreading the disease is how we achieve heard immunity. There are some experts saying today that the COVID 19 is already beginning to die off. Testing is nice for gauging lethality but does nothing to quell the pandemic. It does seem to indicate that this virus is only slightly more deadly than the seasonal flu virus. What we’ve seen is a “pandemic panic” that’s unprecedented. The panic has destroyed more lives than the virus. 

  • Like 3
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted some figures from Italy in another thread.  There the median age of those dying from CV is over 80!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Paco Loco said:

Spreading the disease is how we achieve heard immunity. There are some experts saying today that the COVID 19 is already beginning to die off. Testing is nice for gauging lethality but does nothing to quell the pandemic. It does seem to indicate that this virus is only slightly more deadly than the seasonal flu virus. What we’ve seen is a “pandemic panic” that’s unprecedented. The panic has destroyed more lives than the virus. 

Interesting how a number of people who espoused those same views are now dead from COVID.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...And just as many or more who argued for a complete shutdown. The virus doesn't care what your view is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People with pre existing conditions and those over 65 (the group with a high mortality rate) should quarantine. The general population (98%) are going to survive being infected, mostly without even showing symptoms.  The more the disease spreads, the more the heard inoculation occurs, and the disease morbidly decreases.

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Death rate is higher in younger people in emerging countries.

"A closer look at the data raises questions about the widely held idea that COVID-19 is mainly dangerous for the elderly.

Of Brazil's victims, 69 percent were aged 60 or older, compared with 95 percent in Spain and Italy, according to official statistics."

https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/05/22/in-brazil-covid-19-hitting-young-people-harder.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it’s a different strain of the virus that’s more lethal? Italy and Spain have been walking back their rates of morbidly from the virus because many patients who were elderly actually died from an existing condition not from the flu. Lots of statistics floating around out there that all need to be questioned and tested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sea said:

Death rate is higher in younger people in emerging countries.

"A closer look at the data raises questions about the widely held idea that COVID-19 is mainly dangerous for the elderly.

Of Brazil's victims, 69 percent were aged 60 or older, compared with 95 percent in Spain and Italy, according to official statistics."

https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/05/22/in-brazil-covid-19-hitting-young-people-harder.html

That makes perfectly good sense.  Remember those with health issues are more vulnerable and there are more of the younger people with problems of obesity and diabetes, for example.

I think it is a good guess there will be significantly more younger people affected and die from it in most if not all of Latin America, including Mexico.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't see, in the original post, any of the stats now widely available regarding the children developing a syndrome mimicking Kawasaki disease, which is a growing population. If you felt your children were invulnerable you could cheerfully send them off to school. Since many doctors in Mexico have admitted that the published numbers for Mexican infections from Covid 19 are a substantial undercount, again, mingle. What do you have to lose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pappysmarket said:

...And just as many or more who argued for a complete shutdown. The virus doesn't care what your view is.

It doesn't matter what you say, it matters what your actions are. People who stayed isolated and took other precautions have avoided infection. Many of those who ignored the directives and went out and about assuming it was no big deal have gotten the virus and sometimes died from it. It's a pretty simple reality.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Paco Loco said:

Spreading the disease is how we achieve heard immunity.

Ummmm…..wow.    1st of all, it is "herd" not "heard".     

2nd of all, herd immunity means thinning the herd, survival of the fittest.    That is no one's goal in this thing.....do YOU want to be the one in the herd, who gets "thinned"?

Get real.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you even read the article you posted, or do you just like to shout "herd immunity" a lot?

It clearly states and supports keeping and increasing physical distancing measures, until vaccines are widely available.      

They write in BIG BOLD LETTERS:

Why is getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 to “get it over with” not a good idea?

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone remember that photo from the fish market in GDL posted a few days before Easter Sunday?

It was a mob scene of unmasked Mexicans out shopping for Friday dinner, with few exceptions totally ignoring the "rules."

Sometimes I think we forget this is a culture that distrusts and hates government by a very wide margin and generally ignores them whenever possible, be it speeding on the carretera and other roads or be it wearing masks and social distancing.  How many times have some of you reminded the rest of us that we live in Mexico and we are not going to change the place or the people?  Do you think this time it will be different?

You will NOT get Jose Seis Pac to cooperate or listen to government for the most part.  You have two choices:  Move to a place where people are more willing to follow the directions or understand your only real option is to really look out for yourself.  This is really no different than what we all know about avoiding crime, we are responsible for our own personal security.  

The good news is that basically if you focus on social distancing and wearing your own mask, plus avoid prolonged exposure to infected people, your chance of getting the bug is pretty low.  There are a lot of things you can do on your own that make a big difference in exposure potential like shopping at the slow times, staying out of any places where a number of people gather in close proximity (like restaurants and dance bars) and in general just observing heightened attention to sanitation.  I am reading they are finding the transmission from surfaces is much less than initially thought and that momentary encounters with the infected are similarly less likely to pass it to you.

The majority of the people here clearly are much more concerned about where their next meal is coming from than the CV.  This is a culture that has endured and survived unimaginable disasters and pandemics.  They don't frighten easily and they don't pay much attention to those that do.

And here's some common sense from the BBC:

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52758024?SThisFB&fbclid=IwAR3AjjbIaZVk7JAF9px-qk2hSaQ75AhE7ukHciSV5ht4uImA8n7U4YG6lEU

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mudgirl said:

It doesn't matter what you say, it matters what your actions are. People who stayed isolated and took other precautions have avoided infection. Many of those who ignored the directives and went out and about assuming it was no big deal have gotten the virus and sometimes died from it. It's a pretty simple reality.

It's not that simple, really. Do you honestly think that people who have to work for a living are going to stay isolated for long enough that a vaccine will be found, produced, and be available to them? I don't think so. The whole idea of isolation was to smooth out the cases and thus not overwhelm the hospitals with everyone getting sick at the same time. Many, if not most, people who must work among other people will probably get it. Many, if not most, will either have no symptoms or mild symptoms. Obviously some will die. It happens every year with the flu. If all the actual "workers" isolated until a vaccine is available we would all die of starvation. To me that is the simple reality. Let's just agree to disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually for the most part it is that simple.  We can reduce our personal risk to very small numbers by relatively simple actions we take to protect ourselves.  Where the problem comes in is when some think they can rely on government or forcing other people to do that for them.  They actually think that they can control others to the point where they will be safe.  That is neither simple nor feasible.  Particularly as most of us are members of the high risk category we must be much more vigilant about personal safety and risk management than, say, your average healthy 20 year old who is in greater danger from being hit by lightning.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pappysmarket said:

It's not that simple, really. Do you honestly think that people who have to work for a living are going to stay isolated for long enough that a vaccine will be found, produced, and be available to them? I don't think so. The whole idea of isolation was to smooth out the cases and thus not overwhelm the hospitals with everyone getting sick at the same time. Many, if not most, people who must work among other people will probably get it. Many, if not most, will either have no symptoms or mild symptoms. Obviously some will die. It happens every year with the flu. If all the actual "workers" isolated until a vaccine is available we would all die of starvation. To me that is the simple reality. Let's just agree to disagree.

I wasn't suggesting that everyone could stay isolated for some indeterminate period of time. Of course people need to get back to work at some point. Many places of business have made modifications to their physical set-up and employee behavior and protections to try to mitigate the spread of the virus. If people who need to work in close quarters to each other wear a mask, wash their hands a lot, maintain as much distance as possible, that's going to be a lot better than if people behave like it's nothing to concern themselves with and all stand around maskless with their heads together looking at a photo on someone's cell phone. Understanding this is what's simple and important, but it still seems to be far too complicated a concept for some people. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...