ADVERTISEMENT

Great Barrington Project

ed odowd

All American
Gold Member
Apr 24, 2013
2,584
1,391
113
I would advise all to read this regarding covid 19 practice going forward.
 
Read it and signed it last week. The most common sense thing I've seen and entirely science based.
 
I would advise all to read this regarding covid 19 practice going forward.
ill do the work and actually link it


the only issue i have is that "if youre sick stay home"

its proven that sick people dont stay home. especially when it comes to working from an office. i know personally of a super spreader event for my brother in law's sister's wedding. 200 people inside in virginia. Groom had covid. he going to stay home? is someone going to miss the wedding if they were sick?

people simply dont stay home. you can go to the doctors unless they find out you have covid. most people need to go to the doctors so they lie.

goes on and on. id like to see barringtons response that considers sick people wont stay at home.
 
ill do the work and actually link it


the only issue i have is that "if youre sick stay home"

its proven that sick people dont stay home. especially when it comes to working from an office. i know personally of a super spreader event for my brother in law's sister's wedding. 200 people inside in virginia. Groom had covid. he going to stay home? is someone going to miss the wedding if they were sick?

people simply dont stay home. you can go to the doctors unless they find out you have covid. most people need to go to the doctors so they lie.

goes on and on. id like to see barringtons response that considers sick people wont stay at home.

"If you're sick, stay home" is common sense. Most people don't even want to work when they're sick so I wouldn't be concerned about that. It's the least of our worries.
 
"If you're sick, stay home" is common sense. Most people don't even want to work when they're sick so I wouldn't be concerned about that. It's the least of our worries.
you would think that but its not the case. people go to work when theyre sick. the more i hear about your experiences the more i realize you do not have the most realistic view of todays work environment. people dont want to use up that one sick day they get allotted. people dont want to have a day of work pile up for the next day. vacations dont mean you get a break from work, it means you have to backlog everything when you come back + do that weeks work. people dont want to fall behind the other coworkers by a day in fear theyll be a step back from that one promotion that is barely offered.

and thats just work. you didnt even address anything else. are people going to stay home from weddings, doctors apts, sporting events, concerts, things they have planned or spent money on? answer is no.

you have a very naive view on this. people are inconsiderate. bottom line. they will not stay home. you say its the least of our worries? its enemy #1 from preventing this whole thing from working. hell we currently have people who know they have covid go out bars or other events. its a huge flaw to overlook and deny it.

i support the message, mental health is going down the tubes. we must get back. but we must take into account people will do their normal routine knowing they are sick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doctorcb12
"If you're sick, stay home" is common sense. Most people don't even want to work when they're sick so I wouldn't be concerned about that. It's the least of our worries.
Per diem or attendance based compensation is gonna go and clock in. I think it is great that NJ has paid sick time/days now.
 
you would think that but its not the case. people go to work when theyre sick. the more i hear about your experiences the more i realize you do not have the most realistic view of todays work environment. people dont want to use up that one sick day they get allotted. people dont want to have a day of work pile up for the next day. vacations dont mean you get a break from work, it means you have to backlog everything when you come back + do that weeks work. people dont want to fall behind the other coworkers by a day in fear theyll be a step back from that one promotion that is barely offered.

and thats just work. you didnt even address anything else. are people going to stay home from weddings, doctors apts, sporting events, concerts, things they have planned or spent money on? answer is no.

you have a very naive view on this. people are inconsiderate. bottom line. they will not stay home. you say its the least of our worries? its enemy #1 from preventing this whole thing from working. hell we currently have people who know they have covid go out bars or other events. its a huge flaw to overlook and deny it.

i support the message, mental health is going down the tubes. we must get back. but we must take into account people will do their normal routine knowing they are sick.

Your view is incorrect because you (and certain politicians) think you can control the behavior of every individual. You're wasting time and air talking about that. It's impossible.
 
Your view is incorrect because you (and certain politicians) think you can control the behavior of every individual. You're wasting time and air talking about that. It's impossible.
i actually dont, im on your side we need to get things going. i just think we should do minimal things like wear masks (n95) for a bit. and take into account that people wont be courteous when making a plan.

my sister and her husband now have covid after attending a wedding that they really were scared of. tough when ur in the wedding party. hes very diabetic type1, turns out groom had covid and didnt say anything. that woulda changed things. now its a big deal. turning into super spreader event. this is the type of thing that should be avoided but wont.

if we open up and people blatantly lie and keep their diagnosis secret/dont quarantine when sick its a huge problem. probably could be a legal endangerment matter.

show me something that will keep that from happening and im fully in. having a plan that counts on humans being decent and doing the right thing is laughable. make it punishable for something like that
 
  • Like
Reactions: doctorcb12
"If you're sick, stay home" is common sense. Most people don't even want to work when they're sick so I wouldn't be concerned about that. It's the least of our worries.

But what is it supposed to accomplish? Studies have shown you are most infectious before the onset of symptoms. If that recommendation is to lessen the spread, then it is not effective, but why recommend it at all if the goal is herd immunity?

I also think we have already adjusted for the most part already. My life is fairly close to normal at this point. There is very little we can't do now. Only major thing in my life is that my kids are home for school but will be starting class in person in 2 weeks.

The "damaging physical and mental health" aspect of this related to any restrictions seems a bit overblown from my view. What can't we do? Attend a sporting event? Go to a crowded bar?

The damage from this is primarily economic, but unfortunately pretty much every county sees that with or without restrictions.

Now, I am not arguing for more lockdowns at all, but I don't think I would quite advocate for a herd immunity approach where we need to get to 50-60% of the country infected either.

Regarding schools, they addressed children which I agree with completely... but unfortunately children don't teach and live by themselves. They did not address children as vectors. They did not assess the risk to teachers, family members or environments where people live in apartments or similar living situations. It was a pretty simplistic "we can't lockdown forever" and yeah, we are all on board with that. The question is about managing the risk to the moment we are in.
 
Completely disagree. Viruses are everywhere, they do their thing. We really need to stop trying to blame people for passing it to others. It happens. You can't control it.
 
Completely disagree. Viruses are everywhere, they do their thing. We really need to stop trying to blame people for passing it to others. It happens. You can't control it.

"Viruses are everywhere, they do their thing"?

Well yeah, viruses are everywhere but please add the context.
Name the last virus to kill more than 200k Americans in one year and was stopped without a Vaccine.

This one is new. Err on the side of caution and mitigate the risk to give scientists the time to come up with the best treatment or a vaccine. Manage that risk in the full context of overall public health. and Again, I don't feel any restrictions right now. I just got my hair cut and picked up some items from a bakery.

I don't blame people for passing it to others, unless they are selfish a-holes and refuse to wear a mask in crowded places.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doctorcb12
The Barrington Project is exactly what we should be doing. In my conversations with healthcare executives and clinicians are two things that are mentioned most on what we should have done. First of all, we should have strengthened our borders with tight restrictions on allowing travel into the country combined with aggressive contact tracing. That would not have reduce the spread but it would have delayed it and slowed it down dramatically. Essentially, buying time. Secondly, they all agree that we should have focused 100% of our effortson protecting those most at risk. Elderly and those with comorbitities. And then enable the rest of the economy and society to function as normally as possible.

By far, the biggest mistake that was made was treating the early patients with ventilators. That one decision probably killed more people than anything else.
 
"Viruses are everywhere, they do their thing"?

Well yeah, viruses are everywhere but please add the context.
Name the last virus to kill more than 200k Americans in one year and was stopped without a Vaccine.

This one is new. Err on the side of caution and mitigate the risk to give scientists the time to come up with the best treatment or a vaccine. Manage that risk in the full context of overall public health. and Again, I don't feel any restrictions right now. I just got my hair cut and picked up some items from a bakery.

I don't blame people for passing it to others, unless they are selfish a-holes and refuse to wear a mask in crowded places.

My response was to shuathlete (or SHUSA now I guess lol).
 
Let’s all remember that the reason the restrictions were put in place initially were to destress the healthcare system. That’s still is the number one objective. It’s a bad virus. People are going to die. We need to use good common sense and focus on those most at risk. The mental health ramifications of a complete lockdown are going to be more devastating than the actual virus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shu09 and SHUSA
The Barrington Project is exactly what we should be doing. In my conversations with healthcare executives and clinicians are two things that are mentioned most on what we should have done. First of all, we should have strengthened our borders with tight restrictions on allowing travel into the country combined with aggressive contact tracing. That would not have reduce the spread but it would have delayed it and slowed it down dramatically. Essentially, buying time. Secondly, they all agree that we should have focused 100% of our effortson protecting those most at risk. Elderly and those with comorbitities. And then enable the rest of the economy and society to function as normally as possible.

By far, the biggest mistake that was made was treating the early patients with ventilators. That one decision probably killed more people than anything else.
why were the ventilators bad?
 
My response was to shuathlete (or SHUSA now I guess lol).
i agree with merge in that we cant pretend it doesnt exist or have a normal impact. number of overall deaths are up. dont treat this as the flu. BUT dont treat it as a the apacolypse. where i disagree with merge is that bars and sports are leisure activities... that create thousands of jobs. the economy has many gears and we gotta get it going.

i like the barrington declaration, but i just am caught up on that one part. people who are sick dont stay home. flu? ok whatever, new virus that has increasd deaths? ok lets account for it.

trust me, as someone who was unfortunately affected on the jobfront its time to get back to normal as much as we can.
 
i agree with merge in that we cant pretend it doesnt exist or have a normal impact. number of overall deaths are up. dont treat this as the flu. BUT dont treat it as a the apacolypse. where i disagree with merge is that bars and sports are leisure activities... that create thousands of jobs. the economy has many gears and we gotta get it going.

i like the barrington declaration, but i just am caught up on that one part. people who are sick dont stay home. flu? ok whatever, new virus that has increasd deaths? ok lets account for it.

trust me, as someone who was unfortunately affected on the jobfront its time to get back to normal as much as we can.

It should be treated as the flu for people under 50 or 60, because in those age groups it is no more deadly. For those in the vulnerable categories, they should look at it as something worse than the flu and take appropriate precautions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HALL85
It should be treated as the flu for people under 50 or 60, because in those age groups it is no more deadly. For those in the vulnerable categories, they should look at it as something worse than the flu and take appropriate precautions.
young people with the flu arent cautious about spreading it , young people with covid need to be cognisant of who they are in contact with that is vulnerable. yes 50+ or comorbidity must do as much as they can, but covid + has tesponsibility too.
 
where i disagree with merge is that bars and sports are leisure activities... that create thousands of jobs. the economy has many gears and we gotta get it going.

I see that as a slightly different thing than what The declaration was getting at though. When they talk about the health impacts, generally that doesn’t have much to do with bars and restaurants being open or not outside of economic circumstances.

Don’t get me wrong, the economic issues are very important. I posted back in March that we needed a fairly massive stimulus to help deal with the economic issues and we haven’t done nearly enough there.

Im fine with bars and restaurants being open, but even if they were open for full capacity, they will not be nearly as crowded as normal and business will still be hurting. Cases and deaths will spike in areas where they get crowded and then those spots end up closing anyway.
 
young people with the flu arent cautious about spreading it , young people with covid need to be cognisant of who they are in contact with that is vulnerable. yes 50+ or comorbidity must do as much as they can, but covid + has tesponsibility too.

I believe it is up to those in the vulnerable category to choose how much risk they expose themselves to. The vulnerable need to be cognizant of who they're in contact with, not the other way around. If they're comfortable with seeing other people, that's fine and entirely up to them. If they aren't, that's fine too. Leave it up to the individual. For instance, my 90 year old grandmother has no problem with seeing me, my cousins or her own children (some of them in the "vulnerable" category). Other senior citizens might not be comfortable with that and that's fine too.
 
It should be treated as the flu for people under 50 or 60, because in those age groups it is no more deadly.

That is not correct.
Covid deaths under 65 is around 5-6 times the number of flu deaths in 2019 in the same age group.

It should not be treated as the flu because in every age group above 14, it has proven to be more contagious than the flu, more deadly than the flu and we have vaccines and effective treatments for the flu.
 
I believe it is up to those in the vulnerable category to choose how much risk they expose themselves to. The vulnerable need to be cognizant of who they're in contact with, not the other way around. If they're comfortable with seeing other people, that's fine and entirely up to them. If they aren't, that's fine too. Leave it up to the individual. For instance, my 90 year old grandmother has no problem with seeing me, my cousins or her own children (some of them in the "vulnerable" category). Other senior citizens might not be comfortable with that and that's fine too.
i dont think you truly understood me. i wasnt saying the vulnerable shouldnt look out for themselves. of course they should. im saying its both that need to be cognizant in this scenario of covid. the vulnerable might think its ok to see a non-sick individual. or that that its ok to shop at a store because covid positive arent allowed in. that non-sick individual is actually out and about despite a positive covid test, well that needs to be punishable to actually get the sick to stay in.
 
i dont think you truly understood me. i wasnt saying the vulnerable shouldnt look out for themselves. of course they should. im saying its both that need to be cognizant in this scenario of covid. the vulnerable might think its ok to see a non-sick individual. or that that its ok to shop at a store because covid positive arent allowed in. that non-sick individual is actually out and about despite a positive covid test, well that needs to be punishable to actually get the sick to stay in.

No. Just no.
 
No. Just no.
you think sick people should hide the fact theyre sick and just go out to knowingly spread it? is that what youre saying? you cant budge from the deep end of your spectrum to admit there can be some precautions?

ok.
 
you think sick people should hide the fact theyre sick and just go out to knowingly spread it? is that what youre saying? you cant budge from the deep end of your spectrum to admit there can be some precautions?

ok.

Sick people should stay home. I said that before. Sick people do stay home.
 
That is not correct.
Covid deaths under 65 is around 5-6 times the number of flu deaths in 2019 in the same age group.

It should not be treated as the flu because in every age group above 14, it has proven to be more contagious than the flu, more deadly than the flu and we have vaccines and effective treatments for the flu.

Wrong. It is quite comparable to flu in the younger, less vulnerable age groups. Is it more contagious? Yes. But it is only marginally more deadly.

 
Wrong. It is quite comparable to flu in the younger, less vulnerable age groups. Is it more contagious? Yes. But it is only marginally more deadly.


First, I don’t know who that guy is, but it is hard to take anyone seriously that is still saying a mask is for personal safety. It’s not forpersonal safety.

Second, he’s basing that on an estimate of the number of infections and using the absolute highest number anyone is using right now. It’s likely not correct. I can show that fairly easily actually.

Take that IFR rate .14% and use it in New York... you end up with more people infected in New York than live in New York... obviously not correct.
Same thing in NJ.

About 45k under 65 have died from Covid.
same age group for flu deaths in 2019 was around 8.5k

^ That doesn’t happen if these are similar viruses.
They aren’t. It’s at least 5x worse. That could change with a vaccine and if we know how to treat it like we do the flu.
 
Last edited:
Sick people should stay home. I said that before. Sick people do stay home.
*should* is not a plan. they dont stay home and they wont stay home. if they did than the rate of transmission would be below 1. but lets not even start there, lets have it so we dont have videos of people bragging about being out and about while infected with covid.

lmao about sick people do stay home. funny. not that ive already given an example of that being false. this is where i can tell youre too far on the one side of the spectrum. its like looking at the sky and calling it green.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doctorcb12
Completely disagree. Viruses are everywhere, they do their thing. We really need to stop trying to blame people for passing it to others. It happens. You can't control it.
Who is the person who decides who is vulnerable and who is not? The person themselves? Problem is people are not responsible to do the right thing. If they were, perhaps that this would work to an extent. But the virus would spread very rapidly throughout the population then threatening those who stayed home. I don't think we should discount this all together with the upcoming second wave. However, this is not going to work without a serious amount of people dying. The rationale for the shutdown is prevent as many people from dying until we have the vaccine. The second wave is coming already. Hospitals have had a steady increase in CoVid patients and already converting units into Covid units.

There are tons of people who don't believe the this disease exists or do not care that about contracting the disease or passing it even though they are part of the vulnerable population. I think the economy may not take as a severe a hit as March because now businesses have developed away to do things remotely. The problem is businesses like restaurants and bars where it is really difficult to stay open during this. I think a pointed and specific stimulus should go to Bars, restaurants, hotels, airlines and other businesses that are particularly affected by the shutdown in order to get them through this fall and winter.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT