[DannyTN]

So then, why the hell are we on lockdown again?

Because whatever the numbers end up being, it would be much worse without the lockdown.

[cuban leaf]

Because whatever the numbers end up being, it would be much worse without the lockdown.

---

True. So how come we don’t lock down every year because of the flu?

[lodi90]

Because whatever the numbers end up being, it would be much worse without the lockdown.

---

Heads I win, tails you lose. Wu Flu addicts have the best confidence game going right now.

[sam_whiskey]

I bet we could still keep it at an acceptable level (which I would define as below 1 million), if we just quarantine the seniors and the immuno-compromised. We wouldn’t be wreaking nearly the destruction that we are now.

[nevermorelenore]

Or Not ....

[billyboy15]

“Because whatever the numbers end up being, it would be much worse without the lockdown.”

What are you saying? Is it worth ANY price, any amount of DESTRUCTION to the HUGE majority of peoples lives by way of economic catastrophe to MAYBE save the lives of some people who have health issues anyway? Ruining the lives of maybe 100,000,000 people (financially) for what?

People dying from the regular flu and no one reports on this....why?

Italy....ITALY now reporting just 12%...TWELVE PERCENT of reported China Virus deaths can be attributed to this Virus....12% which means a FULL 88% can as easily be attributed to the underlying health issues ALL the dead had (not to mention the average age of these people was OVER 80 yrs)

Purely a media driven panic for purely ideological reasons.

[fireman15]

Because whatever the numbers end up being, it would be much worse without the lockdown.

These things tend to run their course regardless of what is done. The “lockdown” might slow things up and drag it out longer, but the evidence that what is being done is saving lives is anecdotal. In Washington State where it was first discovered in the US, things already appear to be slowing.

[Antoninus]

Because whatever the numbers end up being, it would be much worse without the lockdown.

Or not. The fact is that millions are going to get this virus no matter what we do. The only thing lockdown is doing right now is helping the ICUs stay afloat until more help can get to the most afflicted areas--which is important, of course.

But the fact is that locking down "for the foreseeable future" has many other ramifications that will also result in people suffering and dying--particularly if civil unrest results. If that happens, the ICUs are going to be overwhelmed, and not only with COVID patients. Nobody wants that, and MDs are not experts in dealing with those types of situations.