Posted on Jul 17, 2020
What should an individual do when state and local health department systematically strip Americans of civil liberties?
3.83K
94
31
7
7
0
State and local health departments are coercing local and national business organizations to force consumers to take draconian precautions that are likely deemed unreasonable to reasonable consumers in society. Walmart, under duress from lobbying bullies, is constructing an artificial price floor to obstruct consumers from purchasing goods and services in stores. The Walmart price floor is likely to symbiotically morph into the price floor that has already been created from the hysteria generated by COVID in the market economy. The construction of these price floors through the coercive policies implemented into business organizations and the free market are likely to prevent potential consumers from purchasing goods and services and sustenance needed to live and thrive in American society. Walmart will lose at least one customer starting July 20, 2020.
The next question that needs asking is why are state and local health departments forcing the medical industry upon the American public? Government force onto American freedom is antithetical to American values. These misleadingly innocuous disruptions and coercive policies are eroding American freedom. Moreover, state and local health departments are using the coercive mechanisms of the government to collect observations on the medical health of the public while stripping way American freedom. Bureaucrats use the observations for hypothesis testing and the creation of legislation that permanently takes away a citizen's right to hold differing opinions and values. State and local health departments are slowly usurping an individual's autonomy of choice.
The next question that needs asking is why are state and local health departments forcing the medical industry upon the American public? Government force onto American freedom is antithetical to American values. These misleadingly innocuous disruptions and coercive policies are eroding American freedom. Moreover, state and local health departments are using the coercive mechanisms of the government to collect observations on the medical health of the public while stripping way American freedom. Bureaucrats use the observations for hypothesis testing and the creation of legislation that permanently takes away a citizen's right to hold differing opinions and values. State and local health departments are slowly usurping an individual's autonomy of choice.
Economics
Government
Business
Coronavirus COVID19
Freedom
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 11
9
9
0
Let's organize these as points -- you aren't clear on when it comes to specifics:
1) "State and local..draconian precautions.." are you talking here about face masks?
2) "Walmart... price floor" - what items?
3) "coercive policies.." what policies?
4) "forcing Medical industry" -- how?
5) "coercive mechanisms of govt" -- what mechanisms? what observations?
6) "freedom" what freedom?
7) "observations for hypothesis testing.." what?
8) "state and local health departments..." how are they usurping individuals choice?
I am guessing that you are talking about wearing mask and you do not believe the SARS-Covid-2 is a serious health issue. Let's address the issue of Covid first. What we do know is the R-naught (transmission rate) range is 2-4. This is to say 1 person infects 2 to 4 others that go on to infect 2 to 4 more each (2nd derivative of 4 to 16 additional people). The most widely expected R-0 is around 2.2-2.3. This is higher than flu which is below 2 and in order to get the virus under control we need to have it below 1.
The swine flu, which is a good comparison, infected 60m Americans and resulted in about 12,000 deaths. This CFR or case fatality rate was around 0.02 while the regular flu CFR is below 0.01 or below 1%. Deaths often occur with in the elderly population but no severe secondary effects on survivors. The CFR for Covid-19 is, when factoring in the expected number of asymptotic individuals, closer to .5 to 1%. Originally I believe this number was believed to be around 1.2%.
If we use .6% CFR and this were to go unchecked, we can easily assume 60m people in the US would become sick. This would result in an estimated 3.6m dead vs the swine flu's deaths of 12k. However, and here is the problem that many fail to grasp... that with a hospitalization rate of around 5%, we would exceed the available beds in the US. And given that we only have about 20 ventilators per 100,000 people in the US we would also quickly exceed that number as well. As a result, care would and survivability of Covid-19 would be significantly impacted and we'd be in a situation like Italy was; people unable to get help and dying at home. The death rate could easily double here and we'd see deaths near 7 to 10 million. We have not even discussed the secondary deaths -- have a heart attack? No room in the hospitals so you also die...Have a car accident, bleed out while waiting for a doctor to care for you.
We have not even discussed the secondary effects of those that don't die and instead of life-long respiratory problems. ARDS -- fluid building up in the lungs, holes in the lungs and other problems are serious life long effects that are not widely discussed nor the implications on society. Of the cases, 40% develop ARDS and about half of those are severe and will reduce a person's ability to perform work and require further care for the rest of their life.
And we haven't even talked about the dangers of a virus mutating. Obviously the more people that have it, the greater the chance it will mutate and while some mutations could be less dangerous, others could be more severe.
Increase the number of people with such illnesses and you increase the need to raise taxes to help support these people over the course of their lives. Our health care system turns into a third world triage system that is unable to keep up with other needs (cancer, accidents, etc).
Here is what we do know about face masks. That wearing one (a proper one and wearing it properly) cuts transmission by about 2/3rds and around 95-99% if both individuals wear a mask. Agreed that there are different levels of protection and wearing a bandana is a joke and won't do anything but face masks that are N95 or KN95 are very effective IF properly warn.
To prevent unneeded and unnecessary deaths, wearing a face mask is an easy task. Properly warn, and a correct mask, can reduce the transmission to below 1. If EVERYONE were to do so for a period of 2-3 months we'd be close to a more normal life. If we had proper contract tracing -- requiring people to load an app to track individuals movements (no PII) except phone number/name -- to identify potential vectors when a person tests hot then we could get the virus out of the US.
For questions: 2-8 there are no specifics and I can only guess as to what you are discussing.
1) "State and local..draconian precautions.." are you talking here about face masks?
2) "Walmart... price floor" - what items?
3) "coercive policies.." what policies?
4) "forcing Medical industry" -- how?
5) "coercive mechanisms of govt" -- what mechanisms? what observations?
6) "freedom" what freedom?
7) "observations for hypothesis testing.." what?
8) "state and local health departments..." how are they usurping individuals choice?
I am guessing that you are talking about wearing mask and you do not believe the SARS-Covid-2 is a serious health issue. Let's address the issue of Covid first. What we do know is the R-naught (transmission rate) range is 2-4. This is to say 1 person infects 2 to 4 others that go on to infect 2 to 4 more each (2nd derivative of 4 to 16 additional people). The most widely expected R-0 is around 2.2-2.3. This is higher than flu which is below 2 and in order to get the virus under control we need to have it below 1.
The swine flu, which is a good comparison, infected 60m Americans and resulted in about 12,000 deaths. This CFR or case fatality rate was around 0.02 while the regular flu CFR is below 0.01 or below 1%. Deaths often occur with in the elderly population but no severe secondary effects on survivors. The CFR for Covid-19 is, when factoring in the expected number of asymptotic individuals, closer to .5 to 1%. Originally I believe this number was believed to be around 1.2%.
If we use .6% CFR and this were to go unchecked, we can easily assume 60m people in the US would become sick. This would result in an estimated 3.6m dead vs the swine flu's deaths of 12k. However, and here is the problem that many fail to grasp... that with a hospitalization rate of around 5%, we would exceed the available beds in the US. And given that we only have about 20 ventilators per 100,000 people in the US we would also quickly exceed that number as well. As a result, care would and survivability of Covid-19 would be significantly impacted and we'd be in a situation like Italy was; people unable to get help and dying at home. The death rate could easily double here and we'd see deaths near 7 to 10 million. We have not even discussed the secondary deaths -- have a heart attack? No room in the hospitals so you also die...Have a car accident, bleed out while waiting for a doctor to care for you.
We have not even discussed the secondary effects of those that don't die and instead of life-long respiratory problems. ARDS -- fluid building up in the lungs, holes in the lungs and other problems are serious life long effects that are not widely discussed nor the implications on society. Of the cases, 40% develop ARDS and about half of those are severe and will reduce a person's ability to perform work and require further care for the rest of their life.
And we haven't even talked about the dangers of a virus mutating. Obviously the more people that have it, the greater the chance it will mutate and while some mutations could be less dangerous, others could be more severe.
Increase the number of people with such illnesses and you increase the need to raise taxes to help support these people over the course of their lives. Our health care system turns into a third world triage system that is unable to keep up with other needs (cancer, accidents, etc).
Here is what we do know about face masks. That wearing one (a proper one and wearing it properly) cuts transmission by about 2/3rds and around 95-99% if both individuals wear a mask. Agreed that there are different levels of protection and wearing a bandana is a joke and won't do anything but face masks that are N95 or KN95 are very effective IF properly warn.
To prevent unneeded and unnecessary deaths, wearing a face mask is an easy task. Properly warn, and a correct mask, can reduce the transmission to below 1. If EVERYONE were to do so for a period of 2-3 months we'd be close to a more normal life. If we had proper contract tracing -- requiring people to load an app to track individuals movements (no PII) except phone number/name -- to identify potential vectors when a person tests hot then we could get the virus out of the US.
For questions: 2-8 there are no specifics and I can only guess as to what you are discussing.
(9)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
SPC Steve Bright, data does not spin. The reason that data does not spin is because data is a collection of objective observations over a period of time. Sources of data should be used for testing hypotheses in a laboratory. Laboratories provide controls for study of the outcomes. Outcomes generate discussions for policy, recommendations, future study and conclusions.
Controls? Think back to basic training and the mitigating factors to reduce risk that a Drill Sargent or a Drill Instructor presented to the company before setting out on a training exercise. Think of a safety brief provided by the CO for a long weekend. Those factors mitigate risk of harm to soldiers needed to remain safe at that specific point in time and before the training exercise or the long weekend begins.
Testing conducted outside of a laboratory produces ad hoc results because the testers provide zero control measures to the test taker during the test. Ad hoc results are scientifically unreliable. Ad hoc results mean nothing for science. Ad hoc results mean everything for politics and politicians. Translation: fanning the flames of hysteria potentially generates votes from fearful individuals that believe that the end is imminent and that subscribe to media spin for driving home a politically false narrative.
Controls? Think back to basic training and the mitigating factors to reduce risk that a Drill Sargent or a Drill Instructor presented to the company before setting out on a training exercise. Think of a safety brief provided by the CO for a long weekend. Those factors mitigate risk of harm to soldiers needed to remain safe at that specific point in time and before the training exercise or the long weekend begins.
Testing conducted outside of a laboratory produces ad hoc results because the testers provide zero control measures to the test taker during the test. Ad hoc results are scientifically unreliable. Ad hoc results mean nothing for science. Ad hoc results mean everything for politics and politicians. Translation: fanning the flames of hysteria potentially generates votes from fearful individuals that believe that the end is imminent and that subscribe to media spin for driving home a politically false narrative.
(1)
(0)
SGT Gregory Cole
CPT (Join to see) on point 4 sir, you forgot to mention the bleaching of the brown eye. Gotta be ready for the big green weenie 24/7.
(1)
(0)
SPC Steve Bright
CPT (Join to see) You Are applying statistics here and data theories incorrectly.
Think about this for a minute... Either statistics are wrong and people w several advanced degrees and PhDs — even ones from MIT — are wrong or you are wrong.
I would suggest looking into a top 20 data science program. Not an online degree mill — that’s basically like high school — but look into taking classes at place like Georgetown, NYU, Columbia, IU, UT, Stanford. You’ll find these challenging and learn a lot.
Think about this for a minute... Either statistics are wrong and people w several advanced degrees and PhDs — even ones from MIT — are wrong or you are wrong.
I would suggest looking into a top 20 data science program. Not an online degree mill — that’s basically like high school — but look into taking classes at place like Georgetown, NYU, Columbia, IU, UT, Stanford. You’ll find these challenging and learn a lot.
(2)
(0)
PO2 Stephen Cline
SPC Steve Bright - I'm sorry but you have been lied to by the government and the media. Studies going back to at least 2002 found no evidence that masks will protect from a virus. masked are rated to filter at 10 microns an N94 3 microns a virus is 0.01 microns. A recently released study (Aug.26th) found that masks, social distancing and the lock downs had no effect on the spread of this virus and that it's spread pattern is the same as any other virus. It's all on the internet all anyone has to do is do your own research.
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
With all due respect, Captain - wear the mask and keep your distance. This virus is too new and too virulent to mess with, and it kills people not because of what they do, but because of what others do. Yes, I know the politicians have FUBARed the message and the science, but the truth is, wearing masks and keeping distance help. Your civil rights will be fine.
(5)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I totally disagree with your comment, PO2 Kirkwood. Your comment lacks any type of thought process toward a reasonable conclusion. If you are simply unable or unwilling to contribute to this conversation in a positive way, I would really appreciate if you would not say anything on comments I post.
(0)
(0)
PO2 Skip Kirkwood
CPT (Join to see) - As suggested by a couple of others, I will comment as I see fit. Your analysis of my "thought process" is further without merit. As both an experienced attorney, a career health care provider, and a veteran, my opinion is at least as valid as any other. And as you have seen, over the last three weeks, mask wearing has become far more common. Even POTUS is now wearing when out and about.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
What the heck is a price war? What is an example of forcing medical industry upon the American public?
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google