Depends on the lockdown order.Booray said:What is your definition of a lock down?Doc Holliday said:Do you advocate against lockdowns?Booray said:I'm not advocating for lock downs. I want people to wear masks, socially distance, avoid high-risk activities and test regularly.Jacques Strap said:The idea we can wall off everyone not vulnerable is a bigger fantasy.Booray said:Not every 70 year-old has the financial ability to live by themselves; they do not all need to be in assisted living facilities. This idea that we can just wall of the most vulnerable is a fantasy.Jacques Strap said:AZ_Bear said:Jacques Strap said:
Ever since the CDC posted the numbers below and the the experts from Harvard, Oxford and Stanford posted their advice below I've been pretty much back to normal. Airplanes, vacations, restaurants, Thanksgiving, yada yada yada.
0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054
Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19.
In other words, you want to kill old people.
They have no worries if they follow the advice above and protect themselves via quarantine. win/win
I am for capacity limits based on disease metrics; in a severe situation that can include closing bars and restaurants as well as limiting church services. I mention those because they are hot button issues.
I am against blanket shut down orders.
California is looking at stay at home orders in 90%+ of their counties.
