stirs

Many have been talking about it for a couple weeks. Just depends on the trials. Tons of companies with tons of trials already begun on many directions.

https://news.yahoo.com/antibody-tests-key-ending-covid-19-lockdowns-162305617.html They are finally getting to this also

Pence and Trump were not in the video. Just Carlson talking to doctors and others. Not sure where the vid is now, but no participation button for you.

Starting at about 11 minutes in, and running to 21 minutes, they start questioning what I was questioning a week or so ago. What do the numbers say, and should we have gone a different direction by quarantining the folks at risk, would the total deaths be less and the economy still be running? At least I am not the only one to think this way.

France had a really bad day. 1355 deaths https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52131940

https://www.wsj.com/articles/italys-coronavirus-death-toll-is-far-higher-than-reported-11585767179

I am surprised nobody said that the online courses, with the better teachers, could not be broadcast within the school classroom. Maybe certain kind of math teachers, or science teachers are in short supply. Then take the best in the state, have them teach the lessons, and show it to classes around the state. No question and answer or individualized attention, but it could be that having the most talented and proven teachers do the lesson, would lessen the need for the extra attention.

Yep, that is why I said the social aspects of school, beyond bullying, were very good. Like L George, I don't see it as an all or nothing endeavor. With so many crises of the past, we learn things when forced into situations. The question was, how do you think it might change. We obviously don't want to go backwards.

Question was A, B or C You answered NO It is just a discussion

True, but China has had to lower their prices to compensate for the tariffs. I should have been more clear

Changing subjects again, just a bit. How will this change education? Anyone see a day when school, at least for certain grades is totally online? What changes would it make for budgets? If schools were at home, it would be well cheaper than running buses, maintaining and building schools, etc, etc. But, the teachers could be laid off by the thousands and the same broadcasts could be sent to kids in different districts and different states. Kids would not miss school if they were a bit sick, even weather related closures might mean school goes on anyway. There are pros and cons to any idea, and I think the social aspects of being with other kids are very good, although the bullying would subside. School sports would be impacted, how to grade an assess a students aptitude by not having the one on one could be problematic. But, each child could get a free computer and such easily for the money saved. School lunch programs are another issue. Anyway, just throwing a couple topics out there for "post corona" America.

I feel like there will be a financial impact to China. People will initially want to get some sort of payback for their part in this episode. Will it last? No, not unless laws are enacted. We will enact something for drugs being made here, but, will also have to enact something so pricing does not skyrocket. Without legislation, nobody with good intentions and "Made in America" logos will last long. People will buy it from lowest seller. Now, if we continue to buy from them and keep the tariffs in place, they will essentially be funding our government somewhat which might in the end help pay for some of the stuff we are having to shell out currently. As I am writing this, I am not certain if I have thought it through that clearly so no piling on, haha. Will be a fine line to walk

What will the worlds reaction to China be once this is all over? Nobody has time to worry with it now, but do you think China will suffer economically by the world turning its back on them?

Numbers and risks More men dying than women, diabetes, vaping. Lots of do's and don'ts https://www.foxnews.com/health/coronavirus-who-is-more-likely-to-die

China starts virus, then cashes in by selling the world bad kits and supplies. https://www.foxnews.com/world/netherlands-becomes-latest-country-to-reject-china-made-coronavirus-test-kits-gear

Had heard last week that the China tests were only about 60% accurate. Probably because they were in such a hurry

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/can-you-catch-coronavirus-twice-you-ll-probably-be-immune-n1171976

Looks like we have been vulnerable for vent shortages for quite a while Again, unless you actually have run into something like this, then most people will not stockpile for things that might never happen. Can't really blame the people through the years. But from now one, I expect there will be stockpiling of all sorts of things. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/federal-agencies-warned-of-ventilator-shortages-for-nearly-two-decades

People recovered from the virus could hold a lot of keys The plasma is already being used to help sick victims. Another reason that I'd love to see he test implemented in a hurry which shows if you have already had the virus. Blood drives could be more important very soon.

Agreed, cat's out of the bag now, so we will watch and wait and hope.

Here are some other groups, probably full of elderly, acting stupid. Every responsible congregation should be live streaming and cut the crap about your religious liberties. It is not banned but put on hold for a bit. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/some-megachurches-are-still-packing-in-crowds/ar-BB11SBxU

You can ask me direct instead of the "in front of the whole class" thing. When this things passes, in 3 months, or 6 months or whatever, then we will get all sorts of info and scenarios. I would bet that if the 65 and older, at risk folks had been kept safe, and out of harms way, they would be hating everyone involved and saying there was no need to trample their rights, because not that many in the world died. And duh, NOBODY has said it is just an old person disease, but does KILL them way disproportionately. The whole, "lets treat em after they get it" might not have been the best approach. The harsher measure should have been put in place for them early on, but again, they might complain. Someone in this thread even suggested it was a Nazi method. They are still being treated just like everyone else at this stage as far as anything further than "urgings" from officials. I might be out to lunch on this, but guess we will see in the numbers. The early numbers showed it was very bad for certain groups by a wide wide margin. Don't lose perspective, we can lose 50k each year in the US for seasonal flu and not blink, and that include hundreds of kids. Like I said before, if you have statistics and science, why not use them? There are diseases we have in the US that affects male vs female and young vs old. This might need to be tailored a bit in that direction. That is all I am saying.

Understood, but in all the scenarios I gave, I have taken the old and existing conditions folks out of the equation by quarantining them strictly. The occasional fit person on the vent would not be taking it from someone else most likely. Also, did not say quit social distancing. The biggest issue in my scenario is getting the US to go along with quarantining the elderly. Yes, they can shut down a rest home, but what about those not in rest homes. That would be like herding cats. My own folks, I have to watch them like a hawk or they will be talking about going here and there. I have them send me grocery lists against their will because they want to get out of the house. Also remember, with every elderly person that has tested positive and passed or are still in the hospital, their entire families have probably been infected. How many have gotten tested? I think again, more than the initial tests that everyone is wanting, we need the test that looks at antibodies to see who has already had it.

Yep, everyone saw it. One infant in Illinois, a 15 year old in China and a 17 yr old in CA. Is everyone technically "at risk"? Sure, but in waaaaaay less percentages than the seasonal flu, for which we do nothing but provide immunizations. The older folks are at major risk, and especially underlying conditions. What we are doing now is akin to standing out side thinking that as long as we watch the weatherman, we won't get wet when the thunderstorm hits our area. At least that is they way I see it. Why not get the ones who need to be in shelter inside? I just like opening up ideas and conversations. Do you guys never try to think of alternative views for solving problems? Governments and people are sometimes reactionary by nature. Not much conversation here except just the sensational headline links. There have been only a couple people who will discuss, but mostly fear based rebuts. Not that I can't handle rebuttals, but would be nice if it were thought out and discussions spawned. It is a moving target, changing every single day and I just enjoy NOT waiting on it all the time.