I think it's more about incompetence than malice.
They are not the right personalty to deal with a crisis.
They are climbers made for courtly intrigue.
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Federal, State and Local Covid Restrictions: Where do you draw the line?
- Thread starter GromsDad
- Start date
They are not the right personalty to deal with a crisis.
They are climbers made for courtly intrigue.
Cardiff is a noice little locale!! I once bought some patagonia wears, followed by a tasty açaí bowl, saw Rob walk in all barefoot and then shreded the reef. what a place!
does it have the rona?
These memes pretend red states haven't had similar economic challenges. That's not really true.
But like the "these people were dying anyway" theory we see from covid non-believers, are you sure these failing businesses weren't failing anyway? 7-10% of all small businesses go out of business every year. 60% of restaurants don't make it past one year, and 80% go out of business within 5 years.
And did you know that new business applications are up almost 20% YOY?
So...
Have no plan for when
The comparison to people who were going to die anyways is apt. If you are going to do something that is going to stop them from dying, then by all means. If you're going to do something that will protect them from their fate for a few weeks or months, at the permanent expense of everyone and everything else....let them go.
As far as restaurants go, most of the ones that close for good were just given a little push out the door. There were too many, too low quality. Too much to sustain. Humans can only go out and eat so many places.
The comparison to people who were going to die anyways is apt. If you are going to do something that is going to stop them from dying, then by all means. If you're going to do something that will protect them from their fate for a few weeks or months, at the permanent expense of everyone and everything else....let them go.
I do recall from your thread on this adventure and the video of it that you travelled through villages and made some stops along the way. Don't try to act like there was no human contact. Where else have you travelled and spread your murderous viral germs?
You're right. He might have spread covid, although unlikely if he didn't have covid. If he had covid, and was in enclosed spaces with people, particularly maskless, he could have, and probably would have spread covid.
Exactly. Not only that, people in his group came from and flew on to other places like Hawaii. Talk about a super-spreader event. Fecal is a typical California elitist hypocrite. He thinks he's better and smarter than everyone else and that the rules don't apply to him. He's no better than California's governor lying about his dinner party.
THE MASK DELUSION So much of what masquerades as “science”.... isn’t. It’s just the modern version of an old wives’ tale. (Like the idea that injecting yourself with aborted fetal tissue and rotten animal DNA/RNA and chemicals and attenuated viruses prevents disease or in any way makes you healthy.) But so many have accepted that we must wear masks, because surgeons wear masks — so they must prevent disease — right? Here’s where Arthur Firstenberg said about facial masks after looking into the actual scientific literature. As a person who went to medical school, I was shocked when I read Neil Orr’s study, published in 1981 in the Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Dr. Orr was a surgeon in the Severalls Surgical Unit in Colchester. And for six months, from March through August 1980, the surgeons and staff in that unit decided to see what would happen if they did not wear masks during surgeries. They wore no masks for six months, and compared the rate of surgical wound infections from March through August 1980 with the rate of wound infections from March through August of the previous four years. And they discovered, to their amazement, that when nobody wore masks during surgeries, the rate of wound infections was less than half what it was when everyone wore masks. Their conclusion: “It would appear that minimum contamination can best be achieved by not wearing a mask at all” and that wearing a mask during surgery “is a standard procedure that could be abandoned.” I was so amazed that I scoured the medical literature, sure that this was a fluke and that newer studies must show the utility of masks in preventing the spread of disease. But to my surprise the medical literature for the past forty-five years has been consistent: masks are useless in preventing the spread of disease and, if anything, are unsanitary objects that themselves spread bacteria and viruses. • Ritter et al., in 1975, found that “the wearing of a surgical face mask had no effect upon the overall operating room environmental contamination.” • Ha’eri and Wiley, in 1980, applied human albumin microspheres to the interior of surgical masks in 20 operations. At the end of each operation, wound washings were examined under the microscope. “Particle contamination of the wound was demonstrated in all experiments.” • Laslett and Sabin, in 1989, found that caps and masks were not necessary during cardiac catheterization. “No infections were found in any patient, regardless of whether a cap or mask was used,” they wrote. Sjøl and Kelbaek came to the same conclusion in 2002. • In Tunevall’s 1991 study, a general surgical team wore no masks in half of their surgeries for two years. After 1,537 operations performed with masks, the wound infection rate was 4.7%, while after 1,551 operations performed without masks, the wound infection rate was only 3.5%. • A review by Skinner and Sutton in 2001 concluded that “The evidence for discontinuing the use of surgical face masks would appear to be stronger than the evidence available to support their continued use.” • Lahme et al., in 2001, wrote that “surgical face masks worn by patients during regional anaesthesia, did not reduce the concentration of airborne bacteria over the operation field in our study. Thus they are dispensable.” • Figueiredo et al., in 2001, reported that in five years of doing peritoneal dialysis without masks, rates of peritonitis in their unit were no different than rates in hospitals where masks were worn. • Bahli did a systematic literature review in 2009 and found that “no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative wound infection was observed between masks groups and groups operated with no masks.” • Surgeons at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, recognizing the lack of evidence supporting the use of masks, ceased requiring them in 2010 for anesthesiologists and other non-scrubbed personnel in the operating room. “Our decision to no longer require routine surgical masks for personnel not scrubbed for surgery is a departure from common practice. But the evidence to support this practice does not exist,” wrote Dr. Eva Sellden. • Webster et al., in 2010, reported on obstetric, gynecological, general, orthopaedic, breast and urological surgeries performed on 827 patients. All non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries, and none of the non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries. Surgical site infections occurred in 11.5% of the Mask group, and in only 9.0% of the No Mask group. • Lipp and Edwards reviewed the surgical literature in 2014 and found “no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials.” Vincent and Edwards updated this review in 2016 and the conclusion was the same. • Carøe, in a 2014 review based on four studies and 6,006 patients, wrote that “none of the four studies found a difference in the number of post-operative infections whether you used a surgical mask or not.” • Salassa and Swiontkowski, in 2014, investigated the necessity of scrubs, masks and head coverings in the operating room and concluded that “there is no evidence that these measures reduce the prevalence of surgical site infection.” • Da Zhou et al., reviewing the literature in 2015, concluded that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.” Schools in China are now prohibiting students from wearing masks while exercising. Why? Because it was killing them. It was depriving them of oxygen and it was killing them. At least three children died during Physical Education classes -- two of them while running on their school’s track while wearing a mask. And a 26-year-old man suffered a collapsed lung after running two and a half miles while wearing a mask. Mandating masks has not kept death rates down anywhere. The 20 U.S. states that have never ordered people to wear face masks indoors and out have dramatically lower COVID-19 death rates than the 30 states that have mandated masks. Most of the no-mask states have COVID-19 death rates below 20 per 100,000 population, and none have a death rate higher than 55. All 13 states that have death rates higher than 55 are states that have required the wearing of masks in all public places. It has not protected them. “We are living in an atmosphere of permanent illness, of meaningless separation,” writes Benjamin Cherry in the Summer 2020 issue of New View magazine. A separation that is destroying lives, souls, and nature. Arthur Firstenberg August 11, 2020
"If he had covid, and was in enclosed spaces with people, particularly maskless, he could have, and probably would have spread covid."
You f u cking idiot. I was obviously referring to covid + trump being chauffeured around in a goddamn limousine by his poor driver and the defenseless secret service people.
trump had covid, knew he had covid, and exposed people.
Fecal face doesn't/didn't have covid
Gavin Newsome doesn't/didn't have covid
all your f u c king trumpy heroes have covid. Because they're f u c king idiots.
You truly are an ultimate moron.
Last edited:
64 cases reported in 92007 (Cardiff by the Sea). We’re part of Encinitas with 448 reported cases. Didn’t see any mortality statistics.
"Schools in China are now prohibiting students from wearing masks while exercising. Why? Because it was killing them. It was depriving them of oxygen and it was killing them. At least three children died during Physical Education classes -- two of them while running on their school’s track while wearing a mask. And a 26-year-old man suffered a collapsed lung after running two and a half miles while wearing a mask."
THIS IS ALL TRUE. NOT MADE UP AT ALL. RUNNING WITH A MASK WILL KILL YOU. "At least three children died..." COULD HAVE BEEN MORE. COULD HAVE BEEN FOUR, OR FOURTY, OR FOUR THOUSAND. IF THREE MASKED KIDS DIED WHY NOT THREE HUNDRED? IF ONE MAN SUFFERED A COLLAPSED LUNG FROM RUNNING WITH A MASK, WHY NOT A HUNDRED MEN, A THOUSAND, TEN THOUSAND?
THIS IS ALL TRUE. NOT MADE UP AT ALL. RUNNING WITH A MASK WILL KILL YOU. "At least three children died..." COULD HAVE BEEN MORE. COULD HAVE BEEN FOUR, OR FOURTY, OR FOUR THOUSAND. IF THREE MASKED KIDS DIED WHY NOT THREE HUNDRED? IF ONE MAN SUFFERED A COLLAPSED LUNG FROM RUNNING WITH A MASK, WHY NOT A HUNDRED MEN, A THOUSAND, TEN THOUSAND?
Reasonable questions....but did China NOT prohibit students from wearing masks while exercising?
What do you think about the recent Danish mask study?
You're a deluded and remarkably unscientific crazy man. You will believe what you want to believe.
You are unable to have a reasonable conversation regarding the science of this pandemic and must resort to name calling in an attempt to counter.....because you have nothing...nada....zip...of value to add.
While you're at it....stop spreading the virus eh....turn off your television and or quit watching main stream news on your computer or phone...you're brainwashed and don't even know it. That...or you're just like the other nasty locals that run this erBB....sitting in your cube....or maybe WFH now....playing social media games with the unsuspecting. If the latter is true....I hope someday you'll see the light.....and find another job that actually adds value....
Im going to reflexively be skeptical of an article that says that kids in China died from wearing a mask, or that some man's lung collapsed because he was wearing a mask and exercising. Mask wearing has been politicized, so I will be skeptical that such a claim is political, rather than factual. But you will ignore the politicization. Why? What is undergirding our differences in approach, in outlook? What am I invested in that you're dismissive of?
"Find the disagreement under the disagreement. In the Talmudic tradition when two people disagree about something, it’s because there is some deeper philosophical or moral disagreement undergirding it. Conversation then becomes a shared process of trying to dig down to the underlying disagreement and then the underlying disagreement below that. There is no end. Conflict creates cooperative effort. As neuroscientist Lisa Feldman Barrett writes, “Being curious about your friend’s experience is more important than being right.”"
"Find the disagreement under the disagreement. In the Talmudic tradition when two people disagree about something, it’s because there is some deeper philosophical or moral disagreement undergirding it. Conversation then becomes a shared process of trying to dig down to the underlying disagreement and then the underlying disagreement below that. There is no end. Conflict creates cooperative effort. As neuroscientist Lisa Feldman Barrett writes, “Being curious about your friend’s experience is more important than being right.”"
Conspiracies are just way for incredibly disturbed/stupid people to think they are smarter then everyone else.