Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

I hope I'm wrong about masks being permenet, but I don't see how we don't adopt them like most asian countries have since SARS. The majority have worn them regardless of being sick or not for a very long time now. You can't claim my view on this is conspiracy when we have proof humanity adopts this.

I would welcome sick people wearing them, but I'd rather them stay home.

---

It would be a real tragedy if we actually learned something and were better prepared for the next pandemic, like the Asians were after SARS.

---

I disagree that they were prepared, in fact the opposite:

According to this study, Coronavirus cases could have been reduced by 66% if measures by China were taken a week earlier or by 86% if measures began two weeks earlier. If action on their part was taken three weeks later, then the COVID situation could have worsened 18-fold.

Instead of acting swiftly, efforts to tackle the outbreak took place later in January, which was weeks after Wuhan ophthalmologist Dr Li Wenliang tried to warn the public about COVID on December 30. He was one out of eight people who were punished by police on Jan 1st last year for spreading "rumors" about the virus.

The fact is China downplayed this virus and by doing so unleashed it on the rest of the world. That's not being better prepared for any pandemic.

---

I was thinking of places like Singapore and Taiwan.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

I hope I'm wrong about masks being permenet, but I don't see how we don't adopt them like most asian countries have since SARS. The majority have worn them regardless of being sick or not for a very long time now. You can't claim my view on this is conspiracy when we have proof humanity adopts this.

I would welcome sick people wearing them, but I'd rather them stay home.

---

It would be a real tragedy if we actually learned something and were better prepared for the next pandemic, like the Asians were after SARS.

---

I disagree that they were prepared, in fact the opposite:

According to this study, Coronavirus cases could have been reduced by 66% if measures by China were taken a week earlier or by 86% if measures began two weeks earlier. If action on their part was taken three weeks later, then the COVID situation could have worsened 18-fold.

Instead of acting swiftly, efforts to tackle the outbreak took place later in January, which was weeks after Wuhan ophthalmologist Dr Li Wenliang tried to warn the public about COVID on December 30. He was one out of eight people who were punished by police on Jan 1st last year for spreading "rumors" about the virus.

The fact is China downplayed this virus and by doing so unleashed it on the rest of the world. That's not being better prepared for any pandemic.

---

I was thinking of places like Singapore and Taiwan.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

I hope I'm wrong about masks being permenet, but I don't see how we don't adopt them like most asian countries have since SARS. The majority have worn them regardless of being sick or not for a very long time now. You can't claim my view on this is conspiracy when we have proof humanity adopts this.

I would welcome sick people wearing them, but I'd rather them stay home.

---

It would be a real tragedy if we actually learned something and were better prepared for the next pandemic, like the Asians were after SARS.

---

I disagree that they were prepared, in fact the opposite:

According to this study, Coronavirus cases could have been reduced by 66% if measures by China were taken a week earlier or by 86% if measures began two weeks earlier. If action on their part was taken three weeks later, then the COVID situation could have worsened 18-fold.

Instead of acting swiftly, efforts to tackle the outbreak took place later in January, which was weeks after Wuhan ophthalmologist Dr Li Wenliang tried to warn the public about COVID on December 30. He was one out of eight people who were punished by police on Jan 1st last year for spreading "rumors" about the virus.

The fact is China downplayed this virus and by doing so unleashed it on the rest of the world. That's not being better prepared for any pandemic.

---

I was thinking of places like Singapore and Taiwan.

---

The reason they're doing so well isn't really public policy like masks, social distancing or lockdowns.

It's because they acted quickly and they already had a real-time electronic health record system that was slightly modified to handle COVID.

When the virus broke out, they immediately started screening passengers on inbound flights from Wuhan, and moved quickly to identify and isolate any travelers who exhibited symptoms of Covid-19.

The US didn't do that. We also have different factors: travel to the US is significantly higher than to Tawain. Heart disease effects most people because of our horrible diets and we have a high elderly population.

The idea that Americans aren't overwhelmingly complying measures is a fallacy.

---

Shippou said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Shippou said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Shippou said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Shippou said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Will masks become the 'new normal' even after the pandemic has passed? Some Americans say so

Quote:

---

"I think we do need a new culture of masks, at least any time not feeling well, and I think masks are in and handshakes out for the indefinite future," said Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the C.D.C. during the Obama Administration and the president of global health initiative Resolve to Save Lives.

---

---

Who cares? Is it that much of an inconvenience?

---

I do and yes.

---

Yeah, you're a lil ***** though, so does your opinion really matter in the grand scheme of things? I think not.

---

. You sure do enjoy your mirror time. Keep your chin up. You are bound to find a friend someday.

---

edit: I'm tired of this place, just stfu you not as clever as you think idiot.

---

'clever' or not.......GT obviously hit a nerve with his observations .

If one is determined to 'dish it out', a like kind response is not unreasonable.

---

No I'm literally tired of this particular section of this message board. I'm dealing with an aunt in ICU right now(not covid related) and ****ing snarky comments like that hit a nerve. Sorry, I'm only human. The response I had written before editing it was very not nice and in poor taste and I deleted it. Because I'm not gonna just lash out at people over the internet I don't know nor care for(no matter how ****ty they've been in the past) when I have real life things I have to deal with that take greater precedence over some idiot on an internet message board.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

I hope I'm wrong about masks being permenet, but I don't see how we don't adopt them like most asian countries have since SARS. The majority have worn them regardless of being sick or not for a very long time now. You can't claim my view on this is conspiracy when we have proof humanity adopts this.

I would welcome sick people wearing them, but I'd rather them stay home.

---

It would be a real tragedy if we actually learned something and were better prepared for the next pandemic, like the Asians were after SARS.

---

I disagree that they were prepared, in fact the opposite:

According to this study, Coronavirus cases could have been reduced by 66% if measures by China were taken a week earlier or by 86% if measures began two weeks earlier. If action on their part was taken three weeks later, then the COVID situation could have worsened 18-fold.

Instead of acting swiftly, efforts to tackle the outbreak took place later in January, which was weeks after Wuhan ophthalmologist Dr Li Wenliang tried to warn the public about COVID on December 30. He was one out of eight people who were punished by police on Jan 1st last year for spreading "rumors" about the virus.

The fact is China downplayed this virus and by doing so unleashed it on the rest of the world. That's not being better prepared for any pandemic.

---

I was thinking of places like Singapore and Taiwan.

---

The reason they're doing so well isn't really public policy like masks, social distancing or lockdowns.

It's because they acted quickly and they already had a real-time electronic health record system that was slightly modified to handle COVID.

When the virus broke out, they immediately started screening passengers on inbound flights from Wuhan, and moved quickly to identify and isolate any travelers who exhibited symptoms of Covid-19.

The US didn't do that. We also have different factors: travel to the US is significantly higher than to Tawain. Heart disease effects most people because of our horrible diets and we have a high elderly population.

The idea that Americans aren't overwhelmingly complying measures is a fallacy.

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Will masks become the 'new normal' even after the pandemic has passed? Some Americans say so

Quote:

---

"I think we do need a new culture of masks, at least any time not feeling well, and I think masks are in and handshakes out for the indefinite future," said Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the C.D.C. during the Obama Administration and the president of global health initiative Resolve to Save Lives.

---

---

Sorry Doc,

But you seem a little out of bounds on this one .

---

One thing is certain: CA, NY and many of the countries in Europe have proven that the shut-downs you and so many others have advocated didn't work.

---

According to what studies?

---

According to the statistics. We've already been over this.

---

Statistics interpreted by whom?

---

I showed you statistics just a couple of weeks ago showing that CA had a higher infection rate than Texas, despite much more draconian measures. I also sent you a link to an article comparing Europe and the U.S. that showed the infection rates in the countries that had taken draconian measures were equivalent to the U.S. That's not interpretation, that's fact.

This was like 2-3 weeks ago, just FYI. Have you already forgotten?

---

There were problems with those statistics, but more importantly I think you're using an uncommon standard when you say the policies "don't work." There are many, many studies showing that they work in the way they were intended. They haven't eradicated the virus, but they have saved lives by slowing the spread of the disease.

---

Sure, there are variables between states, but nevertheless, the statics I showed you saw a very negligible difference between the draconian states and countries, and those who were not.

The question is, have the draconian lock downs had enough of an effect to justify the cost. I think the statics show no. What we have seen in states like CA is it doesn't slow the spread as much as it delays it, while at the same time ruining lives and livelihoods.

We have had this discussion, but I certainly wasn't against reasonable lock downs and precautions being taken. But states like NY and CA have proven what you proposed is not only unworkable, but won't work.

---

Carlos Safety said:

---

JXL said:

---

How many lives could have been saved and infectious diseases prevented if the President had ordered a national mask mandate in 2010? Sure, Covid-19 wasn't around then, but many other infectious diseases were.

---

Or a governmental mandate that people not engage in homosex in the 1980s?

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Carlos Safety said:

---

JXL said:

---

How many lives could have been saved and infectious diseases prevented if the President had ordered a national mask mandate in 2010? Sure, Covid-19 wasn't around then, but many other infectious diseases were.

---

Or a governmental mandate that people not engage in homosex in the 1980s?

---

If we just mandated that people not engage in sex at all, we could take the death rate to zero over time (or damn near it), but for all those selfish, mean and nasty people who just don't comply with government mandates.

There appears to be some slippery correlation between living and dying.

---

PacificBear said:

---

Shippou said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Shippou said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Shippou said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Shippou said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Will masks become the 'new normal' even after the pandemic has passed? Some Americans say so

Quote:

---

"I think we do need a new culture of masks, at least any time not feeling well, and I think masks are in and handshakes out for the indefinite future," said Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the C.D.C. during the Obama Administration and the president of global health initiative Resolve to Save Lives.

---

---

Who cares? Is it that much of an inconvenience?

---

I do and yes.

---

Yeah, you're a lil ***** though, so does your opinion really matter in the grand scheme of things? I think not.

---

. You sure do enjoy your mirror time. Keep your chin up. You are bound to find a friend someday.

---

edit: I'm tired of this place, just stfu you not as clever as you think idiot.

---

'clever' or not.......GT obviously hit a nerve with his observations .

If one is determined to 'dish it out', a like kind response is not unreasonable.

---

No I'm literally tired of this particular section of this message board. I'm dealing with an aunt in ICU right now(not covid related) and ****ing snarky comments like that hit a nerve. Sorry, I'm only human. The response I had written before editing it was very not nice and in poor taste and I deleted it. Because I'm not gonna just lash out at people over the internet I don't know nor care for(no matter how ****ty they've been in the past) when I have real life things I have to deal with that take greater precedence over some idiot on an internet message board.

---

Please post of pic of yourself. I have a vision of Alan Harper from 2 1/2 men.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Will masks become the 'new normal' even after the pandemic has passed? Some Americans say so

Quote:

---

"I think we do need a new culture of masks, at least any time not feeling well, and I think masks are in and handshakes out for the indefinite future," said Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the C.D.C. during the Obama Administration and the president of global health initiative Resolve to Save Lives.

---

---

Sorry Doc,

But you seem a little out of bounds on this one .

---

One thing is certain: CA, NY and many of the countries in Europe have proven that the shut-downs you and so many others have advocated didn't work.

---

According to what studies?

---

According to the statistics. We've already been over this.

---

Statistics interpreted by whom?

---

I showed you statistics just a couple of weeks ago showing that CA had a higher infection rate than Texas, despite much more draconian measures. I also sent you a link to an article comparing Europe and the U.S. that showed the infection rates in the countries that had taken draconian measures were equivalent to the U.S. That's not interpretation, that's fact.

This was like 2-3 weeks ago, just FYI. Have you already forgotten?

---

There were problems with those statistics, but more importantly I think you're using an uncommon standard when you say the policies "don't work." There are many, many studies showing that they work in the way they were intended. They haven't eradicated the virus, but they have saved lives by slowing the spread of the disease.

---

Sure, there are variables between states, but nevertheless, the statics I showed you saw a very negligible difference between the draconian states and countries, and those who were not.

The question is, have the draconian lock downs had enough of an effect to justify the cost. I think the statics show no. What we have seen in states like CA is it doesn't slow the spread as much as it delays it, while at the same time ruining lives and livelihoods.

We have had this discussion, but I certainly wasn't against reasonable lock downs and precautions being taken. But states like NY and CA have proven what you proposed is not only unworkable, but won't work.

---

It depends on what you mean by "work." If they reduce deaths by slowing the spread (or delaying it, whichever term you prefer) they are having the intended effect.

As for ruining livelihoods, the virus is mostly doing that on its own:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/01/25/lockdowns-job-losses/?outputType=amp

---

JXL said:

---

How many lives could have been saved and infectious diseases prevented if the President had ordered a national mask mandate in 2010? Sure, Covid-19 wasn't around then, but many other infectious diseases were.

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Will masks become the 'new normal' even after the pandemic has passed? Some Americans say so

Quote:

---

"I think we do need a new culture of masks, at least any time not feeling well, and I think masks are in and handshakes out for the indefinite future," said Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the C.D.C. during the Obama Administration and the president of global health initiative Resolve to Save Lives.

---

---

Sorry Doc,

But you seem a little out of bounds on this one .

---

One thing is certain: CA, NY and many of the countries in Europe have proven that the shut-downs you and so many others have advocated didn't work.

---

According to what studies?

---

According to the statistics. We've already been over this.

---

Statistics interpreted by whom?

---

I showed you statistics just a couple of weeks ago showing that CA had a higher infection rate than Texas, despite much more draconian measures. I also sent you a link to an article comparing Europe and the U.S. that showed the infection rates in the countries that had taken draconian measures were equivalent to the U.S. That's not interpretation, that's fact.

This was like 2-3 weeks ago, just FYI. Have you already forgotten?

---

There were problems with those statistics, but more importantly I think you're using an uncommon standard when you say the policies "don't work." There are many, many studies showing that they work in the way they were intended. They haven't eradicated the virus, but they have saved lives by slowing the spread of the disease.

---

Sure, there are variables between states, but nevertheless, the statics I showed you saw a very negligible difference between the draconian states and countries, and those who were not.

The question is, have the draconian lock downs had enough of an effect to justify the cost. I think the statics show no. What we have seen in states like CA is it doesn't slow the spread as much as it delays it, while at the same time ruining lives and livelihoods.

We have had this discussion, but I certainly wasn't against reasonable lock downs and precautions being taken. But states like NY and CA have proven what you proposed is not only unworkable, but won't work.

---

It depends on what you mean by "work." If they reduce deaths by slowing the spread (or delaying it, whichever term you prefer) they are having the intended effect.

As for ruining livelihoods, the virus is mostly doing that on its own:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/01/25/lockdowns-job-losses/?outputType=amp

---

Delaying deaths and reducing deaths are too very different things. If it is the former, and the added side effect is killing livelihoods, then delaying serves no good purpose.

And of course, it is the former, and not the latter.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Will masks become the 'new normal' even after the pandemic has passed? Some Americans say so

Quote:

---

"I think we do need a new culture of masks, at least any time not feeling well, and I think masks are in and handshakes out for the indefinite future," said Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the C.D.C. during the Obama Administration and the president of global health initiative Resolve to Save Lives.

---

---

Sorry Doc,

But you seem a little out of bounds on this one .

---

One thing is certain: CA, NY and many of the countries in Europe have proven that the shut-downs you and so many others have advocated didn't work.

---

According to what studies?

---

According to the statistics. We've already been over this.

---

Statistics interpreted by whom?

---

I showed you statistics just a couple of weeks ago showing that CA had a higher infection rate than Texas, despite much more draconian measures. I also sent you a link to an article comparing Europe and the U.S. that showed the infection rates in the countries that had taken draconian measures were equivalent to the U.S. That's not interpretation, that's fact.

This was like 2-3 weeks ago, just FYI. Have you already forgotten?

---

There were problems with those statistics, but more importantly I think you're using an uncommon standard when you say the policies "don't work." There are many, many studies showing that they work in the way they were intended. They haven't eradicated the virus, but they have saved lives by slowing the spread of the disease.

---

Sure, there are variables between states, but nevertheless, the statics I showed you saw a very negligible difference between the draconian states and countries, and those who were not.

The question is, have the draconian lock downs had enough of an effect to justify the cost. I think the statics show no. What we have seen in states like CA is it doesn't slow the spread as much as it delays it, while at the same time ruining lives and livelihoods.

We have had this discussion, but I certainly wasn't against reasonable lock downs and precautions being taken. But states like NY and CA have proven what you proposed is not only unworkable, but won't work.

---

It depends on what you mean by "work." If they reduce deaths by slowing the spread (or delaying it, whichever term you prefer) they are having the intended effect.

As for ruining livelihoods, the virus is mostly doing that on its own:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/01/25/lockdowns-job-losses/?outputType=amp

---

Delaying deaths and reducing deaths are too very different things. If it is the former, and the added side effect is killing livelihoods, then delaying serves no good purpose.

And of course, it is the former, and not the latter.

---

Of course it isn't.

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Will masks become the 'new normal' even after the pandemic has passed? Some Americans say so

Quote:

---

"I think we do need a new culture of masks, at least any time not feeling well, and I think masks are in and handshakes out for the indefinite future," said Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the C.D.C. during the Obama Administration and the president of global health initiative Resolve to Save Lives.

---

---

Sorry Doc,

But you seem a little out of bounds on this one .

---

One thing is certain: CA, NY and many of the countries in Europe have proven that the shut-downs you and so many others have advocated didn't work.

---

According to what studies?

---

According to the statistics. We've already been over this.

---

Statistics interpreted by whom?

---

I showed you statistics just a couple of weeks ago showing that CA had a higher infection rate than Texas, despite much more draconian measures. I also sent you a link to an article comparing Europe and the U.S. that showed the infection rates in the countries that had taken draconian measures were equivalent to the U.S. That's not interpretation, that's fact.

This was like 2-3 weeks ago, just FYI. Have you already forgotten?

---

There were problems with those statistics, but more importantly I think you're using an uncommon standard when you say the policies "don't work." There are many, many studies showing that they work in the way they were intended. They haven't eradicated the virus, but they have saved lives by slowing the spread of the disease.

---

Sure, there are variables between states, but nevertheless, the statics I showed you saw a very negligible difference between the draconian states and countries, and those who were not.

The question is, have the draconian lock downs had enough of an effect to justify the cost. I think the statics show no. What we have seen in states like CA is it doesn't slow the spread as much as it delays it, while at the same time ruining lives and livelihoods.

We have had this discussion, but I certainly wasn't against reasonable lock downs and precautions being taken. But states like NY and CA have proven what you proposed is not only unworkable, but won't work.

---

It depends on what you mean by "work." If they reduce deaths by slowing the spread (or delaying it, whichever term you prefer) they are having the intended effect.

As for ruining livelihoods, the virus is mostly doing that on its own:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/01/25/lockdowns-job-losses/?outputType=amp

---

Delaying deaths and reducing deaths are too very different things. If it is the former, and the added side effect is killing livelihoods, then delaying serves no good purpose.

And of course, it is the former, and not the latter.

---

Of course it isn't.

---

CA and NY say otherwise.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Delaying deaths and reducing deaths are too very different things. If it is the former, and the added side effect is killing livelihoods, then delaying serves no good purpose.

And of course, it is the former, and not the latter.

---

Of course it isn't.

---

CA and NY say otherwise.

---

No, because when you delay the spread you can reduce the deaths. That's the whole point of flattening the curve.

---

Delay the spread does not prove fewer deaths. It simply means less deaths at a particular time and place, but more later or somewhere else.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Delaying deaths and reducing deaths are too very different things. If it is the former, and the added side effect is killing livelihoods, then delaying serves no good purpose.

And of course, it is the former, and not the latter.

---

Of course it isn't.

---

CA and NY say otherwise.

---

No, because when you delay the spread you can reduce the deaths. That's the whole point of flattening the curve.

---

Delay the spread does not prove fewer deaths. It simply means less deaths at a particular time and place, but more later or somewhere else.

---

Wrong.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cases /= deaths

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cases /= deaths

---

Sam: "When you delay the spread you can reduce the deaths. That's the whole point of flattening the curve."

That's only true insofar that hospitals can avoid overflow, the process by itself does not reduce the lethality of the virus.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cases /= deaths

---

Sam: "When you delay the spread you can reduce the deaths. That's the whole point of flattening the curve."

That's only true insofar that hospitals can avoid overflow, the process by itself does not reduce the lethality of the virus.

---

Actually it could. The slower the spread, the less opportunity for mutations. But the main purpose is to avoid straining the hospitals.

---

Canada2017 said:

---

We are a strange, eminently self-destructive nation.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

We are a strange, eminently self-destructive nation.

---

FIFY

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

We are a strange, eminently self-destructive nation.

---

FIFY

---

You think this is only an American problem?

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

We are a strange, eminently self-destructive nation.

---

FIFY

---

You think this is only an American problem?

---

It's a human problem, but it's especially pronounced in our culture.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

We are a strange, eminently self-destructive nation.

---

FIFY

---

You think this is only an American problem?

---

It's a human problem, but it's especially pronounced in our culture.

---

I see it differently. China, for example, has handled things in ways that from one perspective "worked" but would be chilling if used here.

Other nations, like Singapore, took actions which protected their citizens but caused harm to foreigners stuck in their city-state.

There are many different examples of situations where the individual decision was unique, and in some cases, draconian.

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Now approaching half a million deaths and still....the same guys making the same ridiculous arguments .

In all of US history only two events have cost more American lives than the Covid pandemic .

1918 Spanish Influenza
US Civil War

Yet some remain firm that C19 is ' just another virus' or merely a 'common cold '.

Or say just 'stay inside ' , knowing all along most people simply can't afford to do so . Even then outsiders bring the virus in to them .



We are a strange, eminently self destructive species .

---