Disc Golf Course Review

Disc Golf Course Review (https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Disc Golf Chat (https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Are we not taking Covid-19 seriously (https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136199)

VictorB 12-30-2020 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeverLostAdisc (Post 3674323)
Flu cases vanish. Hmm I wonder what happened to the flu. Couldn't possibly be reported as covid cases now because I trust what the government tells me. They have my best interests in mind.

or maybe flu cases are down because of all the people that are wearing masks and social distancing already. And the fact that more people were flu vaccinated this year than normal.

But, let's not turn facts into something they aren't, right?

coronavirus and influenza virus are two completely different things, but both can be stopped/significantly reduced using the same protective measures.

etdefender19 12-30-2020 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VictorB (Post 3674357)
or maybe flu cases are down because of all the people that are wearing masks and social distancing already. And the fact that more people were flu vaccinated this year than normal.

But, let's not turn facts into something they aren't, right?

coronavirus and influenza virus are two completely different things, but both can be stopped/significantly reduced using the same protective measures.

That, and people aren't going (or won't go) to work when they're sick this year.

I was a big offender in the past of this. People used to say "Ooh, stay away from me with that sniffle" as they were laughing. Now, one sneeze and you're getting sent home. Flu numbers will be way down this year but the right-wing idiots will spin that into saying that COVID numbers are being falsely inflated

ru4por 12-30-2020 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by etdefender19 (Post 3674362)
That, and people aren't going (or won't go) to work when they're sick this year.

I was a big offender in the past of this. People used to say "Ooh, stay away from me with that sniffle" as they were laughing. Now, one sneeze and you're getting sent home. Flu numbers will be way down this year but the right-wing idiots will spin that into saying that COVID numbers are being falsely inflated

Yep. I work for a hospital system and the "combined time off" program is asinine. It promotes coming in sick. I get a set amount of CTO to use for personal business, sick and vacation. If I use more than three incidents of sick or personal business in a rolling calendar year, I get corrective action. So, I come in sick to avoid the discipline. DUMB.

One post troll below. Likely one of our attention seeking trolls, using a alt account. He is welcome to educate himself, with the plethora of science found in this thread. It is all here for anyone that wishes to enlighten themselves.

Countchunkula 12-30-2020 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by etdefender19 (Post 3674362)
That, and people aren't going (or won't go) to work when they're sick this year.

I was a big offender in the past of this. People used to say "Ooh, stay away from me with that sniffle" as they were laughing. Now, one sneeze and you're getting sent home. Flu numbers will be way down this year but the right-wing idiots will spin that into saying that COVID numbers are being falsely inflated

Place I work now: My boss will send you home after the 3rd sneeze. Not covid related, this has been her policy since I started 5 years ago.

Place I worked for the 10 previous years: My boss didn't take a single sick day in his 10 years with the company and he would give us the business for calling in sick.

I'd like for us to land somewhere between those two approaches: Employees would stay home when they are sick and their employers/managers would support that.

I'm not expecting a sea change though. Too much of the population is happy in fantasy land.

ru4por 12-30-2020 05:01 PM

I just made an appointment to get the Pfizer vaccine on Monday. I was pretty surprised it was being offered to me. I am no longer working front line. I was not going to take it, if I thought it was a mistake. I had to spend a bit of time, on my vacation, poking around for criteria. It turns out that because I have to spend time at the hospital, as part of my job description, I am eligible. Most of our actual frontline worker, that want the vaccine, have had the offer made. I will keep you all posted on my experience.

DavidSauls 12-30-2020 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by etdefender19 (Post 3674362)
Flu numbers will be way down this year but the right-wing idiots will spin that into saying that COVID numbers are being falsely inflated

It's just their 13, 611th pretense that Covid is not real. It'll pass, to be replaced by some other lame pretense.

A friend on Facebook posed this year-end question: What did you do in 2020, that you never imagined you'd do? My answer was, "Tried to explain science to adults".

dysmike 12-30-2020 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidSauls (Post 3674493)
It's just their 13, 611th pretense that Covid is not real. It'll pass, to be replaced by some other lame pretense.

A friend on Facebook posed this year-end question: What did you do in 2020, that you never imagined you'd do? My answer was, "Tried to explain science to adults".

Welcome to your plans for 2021 as well.

Hampstead 12-30-2020 05:42 PM

People weren't traveling as much during the summer. Usually, the flu likes to winter in the southern hemisphere, returning in time to spend winter in the north. Fewer travelers means fewer people were spreading influenza around the globe. Pretty basic stuff.

DavidSauls 12-30-2020 05:43 PM

Ha, ha. I'm developing an ability to let people wallow in their ignorance. Not so much explaining these days. If they don't get it by now, either they can't understand, or refuse to understand.

Riverdog 12-30-2020 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidSauls (Post 3674499)
Ha, ha. I'm developing an ability to let people wallow in their ignorance. Not so much explaining these days. If they don't get it by now, either they can't understand, or refuse to understand.


I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

txmxer 12-30-2020 07:08 PM

On Nextdoor, there are people still arguing that the "science" on masks is unsettled.

txmxer 12-30-2020 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ru4por (Post 3673910)
We have talked about this a bit, in this thread. Things are bad, but could be very much worse. COVID could have been a lot more contagious, a lot more deadly and a lot more difficult to treat and vaccinate. Pandemics are not going away, being a matter of when, not if. Scary stuff. Here is an article that touches on that idea, but also has some nice numbers to ponder.

https://www.marke****ch.com/story/wh...?siteid=yhoof2

and along comes the European variant...

txmxer 12-30-2020 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JedV (Post 3671945)
Every time I see someone with their nose hanging out of their mask, I think of this meme...

*Cartoon NSFW content*

Probably should have made that in to a T-shirt when masks became the recommendation. Maybe something less NSFW...but still. Another missed million dollar idea!

https://ctl.s6img.com/society6/img/H...it=0&attempt=0

dysmike 12-30-2020 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txmxer (Post 3674540)
On Nextdoor, there are people still arguing that the "science" on masks is unsettled.

You can't even trust the idiots on nextdoor to have reliable rumors about your neighbors sexual affairs.

BogeyNoMore 12-30-2020 07:35 PM

Down in FL visiting 89 yr old Mamma Bogey, who got her 1st dose of the vaccine Monday, with her 2nd dose scheduled for two weeks after that. Other than soreness in her upper arm (no different than what I experience with the flu vaccine), she's had no side effects.

They arrange the visits outside, by appointment, and with everyone spread out and wearing masks.

Other than her severely limited mobility and stability (result of a lumbar fracture about 18 mos ago), she doing pretty well. Glad her mind is still working well.

ru4por 12-30-2020 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BogeyNoMore (Post 3674553)
Down in FL visiting 89 yr old Mamma Bogey, who got her 1st dose of the vaccine Monday, with her 2nd dose scheduled for two weeks after that. Other than soreness in her upper arm (no different than what I experience with the flu vaccine), she's had no side effects.

They arrange the visits outside, by appointment, and with everyone spread out and wearing masks.

Other than her severely limited mobility and stability (result of a lumbar fracture about 18 mos ago), she doing pretty well. Glad her mind is still working well.

Good to hear. Scary having a elderly loved one in a secondary care facility.

You gonna be back by Sat?

DG_player 12-30-2020 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RowingBoats (Post 3674311)
Looks like I may have misinterpreted you, and shouldn't jump in like that anyways even if I didn't.

I apologize.

Thank you.

I was just trying to point out that this has been a sucky year for everyone, even if you weren't directly impacted by the virus.

In hindsight I can see how my short comment could be misinterpreted as minimizing the people who have died.

BogeyNoMore 12-30-2020 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ru4por (Post 3674572)
You gonna be back by Sat?

That's the plan.

Heading back up tomorrow morning. Plan to hit T2 at Bill Frederick park tomorrow, and Athens Regional Park in TN on Friday.

Barring a snowstorm, I should get home late Fri, and available Sat.

I'll have bagged more new courses this trip than I have for the rest 2020 combined. :\

R-Ogre 12-30-2020 08:49 PM

I’m scheduled for the Pfizer on the 13th. Sounds like I fall in the same group as @ru4por, healthcare industry but not hands-on with the patients.

DG_player 12-30-2020 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ru4por (Post 3674483)
I just made an appointment to get the Pfizer vaccine on Monday. I was pretty surprised it was being offered to me. I am no longer working front line. I was not going to take it, if I thought it was a mistake. I had to spend a bit of time, on my vacation, poking around for criteria. It turns out that because I have to spend time at the hospital, as part of my job description, I am eligible. Most of our actual frontline worker, that want the vaccine, have had the offer made. I will keep you all posted on my experience.

I thought I recalled you mentioning you had the virus already.

This isn't directed at you, as a health care worker I realize you likely have vaccine requirements, but is there any policy to check people for past infection before vaccinating? I haven't seen any reporting on this in any of the media. However with a limited number of vaccines available, it seems like foolish policy to vaccinate anyone that has already recovered before people who haven't had it.

DG_player 12-30-2020 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R-Ogre (Post 3674580)
I’m scheduled for the Pfizer on the 13th. Sounds like I fall in the same group as @ru4por, healthcare industry but not hands-on with the patients.

This seems like really bad policy to me. I completely understand vaccinating frontline healthcare workers and first responders before everyone else. Outside of that though I don't understand why you would vaccinate people with low exposure risk before people working in areas where this is a high risk of contracting or spreading the virus, or those that are high risk of having a bad outcome from the disease.

My state recently announced their vaccination planning. Essential workers are ahead of a lot of high risk people. This makes sense to a degree, but I have a hard time understanding why a healthy young postal delivery worker who doesn't even come in contact with people, should be vaccinated over by dad who is in the russian roulette if you get it health category. I also have a severe ethical issue with deciding people who are deemed to be employed in "essential" roles lives are more important than everyone else's. Especially when these "non-essential" people pose a greater risk for contracting or transmitting the disease. I'm sure the guy waiting tables would love to have a post office job and not have to risk coming into work everyday to pay the bills. If you goal is to minimize deaths shouldn't the pecking order be based purely on risk factors and targeting the people that are most likely to contribute to transmission? Where are we as a nation when we start deciding who's lives are worth saving based on what their job is?

txmxer 12-30-2020 09:12 PM

I can’t wait for all you people to gay vaccinated so I’m safe! I’m at the end of the line for the vaccine.

Is there any word on the effectiveness of the vaccines versus the new EU strain?

dehaas 12-30-2020 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG_player (Post 3674581)
I thought I recalled you mentioning you had the virus already.

This isn't directed at you, as a health care worker I realize you likely have vaccine requirements, but is there any policy to check people for past infection before vaccinating? I haven't seen any reporting on this in any of the media. However with a limited number of vaccines available, it seems like foolish policy to vaccinate anyone that has already recovered before people who haven't had it.

Recovery does not mean you are totally immune to it going forward, simple as that.

Same as receiving a vaccination does not promise immunity.

ru4por 12-30-2020 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG_player (Post 3674581)
I thought I recalled you mentioning you had the virus already.

This isn't directed at you, as a health care worker I realize you likely have vaccine requirements, but is there any policy to check people for past infection before vaccinating? I haven't seen any reporting on this in any of the media. However with a limited number of vaccines available, it seems like foolish policy to vaccinate anyone that has already recovered before people who haven't had it.

Great question. I did have to pass a screening. One of the questions was if I had tested positive in the last 90 days. I indeed has tested positive in May and again in June. I had already planned to try to do a little research on this and will be certain to ask when I go in for the vaccine.

I am not sure there is any short supply of the vaccine at this point. It seems that distribution and delivery are far bigger issues.

Jerbob 12-30-2020 09:18 PM

Well, when the current government decided to deny the existence of Covid and not come up with any national plan, that is where we are as a country. Boy, everyone thought the ACA would lead to death panels. Be prepared to accept triage measures.

Received my vaccine on Tuesday, due for my second mid January. Sore shoulder, just like other shots. No other other side effects, but former co-worker felt crappy for a day.

DG_player 12-30-2020 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dehaas (Post 3674591)
Recovery does not mean you are totally immune to it going forward, simple as that.

Same as receiving a vaccination does not promise immunity.

The science seems to suggest that you're immune for at least a period of time, and probably have at least partial immunity for a lot longer. To date there's been how many millions of people infected worldwide and only a handful of cases of re-infection.

Even if it's only partial immunity, it seems like from a greater good standpoint you would vaccinate the prior infected people only after you've worked your way through the still completely immunologically naive.

R-Ogre 12-30-2020 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG_player (Post 3674587)
This seems like really bad policy to me. I completely understand vaccinating frontline healthcare workers and first responders before everyone else. Outside of that though I don't understand why you would vaccinate people with low exposure risk before people working in areas where this is a high risk of contracting or spreading the virus, or those that are high risk of having a bad outcome from the disease.

My state recently announced their vaccination planning. Essential workers are ahead of a lot of high risk people. This makes sense to a degree, but I have a hard time understanding why a healthy young postal delivery worker who doesn't even come in contact with people, should be vaccinated over by dad who is in the russian roulette if you get it health category. I also have a severe ethical issue with deciding people who are deemed to be employed in "essential" roles lives are more important than everyone else's. Especially when these "non-essential" people pose a greater risk for contracting or transmitting the disease. I'm sure the guy waiting tables would love to have a post office job and not have to risk coming into work everyday to pay the bills. If you goal is to minimize deaths shouldn't the pecking order be based purely on risk factors and targeting the people that are most likely to contribute to transmission? Where are we as a nation when we start deciding who's lives are worth saving based on what their job is?

If there aren’t any pilots to fly the planes, the sick people (COVID and not) in our city and in the villages in our area won’t get to the care they need. Not a good situation.

After propping up the healthcare system, there are a lot of differing opinions on prioritization and many of those opinions have valid points. I believe that in most cases the people designing the vaccination schedules have made their best effort to balance the many viewpoints and come up with something that may work.

ru4por 12-30-2020 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG_player (Post 3674594)
The science seems to suggest that you're immune for at least a period of time, and probably have at least partial immunity for a lot longer. To date there's been how many millions of people infected worldwide and only a handful of cases of re-infection.

Even if it's only partial immunity, it seems like from a greater good standpoint you would vaccinate the prior infected people only after you've worked your way through the still completely immunologically naive.

I am going to venture a guess that the lack of a national results database creates logistical issues with whom the previously infected are.

My 90+ y/o father in law, in not really high risk. He is elderly with a couple health problems, but he goes NOWHERE. His exposure is also limited to two people who go nearly nowhere. To keep him at home and out of harms way is not difficult. Do we place a priority on getting the economy kickstarted before getting to these folks? I don't want to pretend I have answers. I just want a plan.

peabody 12-30-2020 09:44 PM

We were supposed to have 20 million inoculated by tomorrow. We are just a hair over 2 million.
At this rate it will take more than a year to get to everyone that wants one.
What if we discover the vaccine is only effective for four months to a year. There will be folks that are waiting for their turn when the vaccine schedule for essential workers and the elderly starts all over.
If we can't drastically increase the amount then our hope for 2021 becomes our hope for 2022?
.




.

dehaas 12-30-2020 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG_player (Post 3674594)
The science seems to suggest that you're immune for at least a period of time, and probably have at least partial immunity for a lot longer. To date there's been how many millions of people infected worldwide and only a handful of cases of re-infection.

Even if it's only partial immunity, it seems like from a greater good standpoint you would vaccinate the prior infected people only after you've worked your way through the still completely immunologically naive.

I don’t disagree with the idea of partial immunity for a while at least, but the problem is there’s not a hard number of days where a switch gets flipped and you’re at risk again. So how long do you make those people wait before they’re eligible? What happens if they get sick again with complications while sitting in vaccination time out?

The important part people are forgetting about vaccinating health care workers is that if they’re all sick and not able to work who is there to take care of everybody else? We’re protecting health care workers first so we can continue to care for those in need. Sure there is some overlap of people who have had it and those same people getting vaccinated, but I wouldn’t call that a foolish policy personally. They’re getting vaccinated so they have the best opportunity to provide care for others.

ru4por 12-30-2020 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peabody (Post 3674603)
We were supposed to have 20 million inoculated by tomorrow. We are just a hair over 2 million.
At this rate it will take more than a year to get to everyone that wants one.
What if we discover the vaccine is only effective for four months to a year. There will be folks that are waiting for their turn when the vaccine schedule for essential workers and the elderly starts all over.
If we can't drastically increase the amount then our hope for 2021 becomes our hope for 2022?
.




.

Yeah, I have been warning of this. The timeline reported was not realistic to begin with. The execution has been even worse. The planning was left in the hands of the Federal government, who that was gonna work?

paul2432 12-30-2020 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peabody (Post 3674603)
We were supposed to have 20 million inoculated by tomorrow. We are just a hair over 2 million.
At this rate it will take more than a year to get to everyone that wants one.
What if we discover the vaccine is only effective for four months to a year. There will be folks that are waiting for their turn when the vaccine schedule for essential workers and the elderly starts all over.
If we can't drastically increase the amount then our hope for 2021 becomes our hope for 2022?

.

At least this is a start. The Moderna (sp?) vaccine is much easier to deliver as it doesn't need the crazy cold temps to keep it from spoiling as the Pfizer vaccine. I would think (and hope) Pfizer which has all the $$ in the world refines its vaccine so it can be easier to ship and dispense. We're at the beginning of a very long process to get all people vaccinated and it's a process that hopefully and likely gets better as time goes on.

DG_player 12-30-2020 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R-Ogre (Post 3674599)
If there aren’t any pilots to fly the planes, the sick people (COVID and not) in our city and in the villages in our area won’t get to the care they need. Not a good situation.

After propping up the healthcare system, there are a lot of differing opinions on prioritization and many of those opinions have valid points. I believe that in most cases the people designing the vaccination schedules have made their best effort to balance the many viewpoints and come up with something that may work.

I don't know. I'd have to think it would be a real kick in the balls to be a waiter or some other low end high risk job, get forced back to work because your government is unwilling to do what it takes to help you pay your bills and keep food on the table, only to find out that you're behind someone teaching virtual classes from their living room on the vaccine list.

DavidSauls 12-30-2020 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peabody (Post 3674603)
We were supposed to have 20 million inoculated by tomorrow. We are just a hair over 2 million.
At this rate it will take more than a year to get to everyone that wants one.
What if we discover the vaccine is only effective for four months to a year. There will be folks that are waiting for their turn when the vaccine schedule for essential workers and the elderly starts all over.
If we can't drastically increase the amount then our hope for 2021 becomes our hope for 2022?
.

It's probably a mistake to interpolate the future based on the first few weeks of the rollout. More vaccines, different people in charge, lessons learned....it could get rolling in a few months. Or not.

DG_player 12-30-2020 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ru4por (Post 3674600)
I am going to venture a guess that the lack of a national results database creates logistical issues with whom the previously infected are.

My 90+ y/o father in law, in not really high risk. He is elderly with a couple health problems, but he goes NOWHERE. His exposure is also limited to two people who go nearly nowhere. To keep him at home and out of harms way is not difficult. Do we place a priority on getting the economy kickstarted before getting to these folks? I don't want to pretend I have answers. I just want a plan.

Outside of healthcare workers and first responders, I don't see a real reason to use anything other than risk of poor outcome, and risk of spreading the disease as reasons to prioritize vaccination.

I haven't seen the final version, but in my state the draft version went like this:

1A Health care / first responders
1B nursing home staff and occupants
2A 75+ with conditions / Essential workers

Essential workers included occupations like teachers (all of whom outside a few private schools are all teaching virtually where I live), mail carriers, a bunch of random government employees, grocery store workers, and a few others.

Obviously 1A and 1B make sense. I understand grocery store workers, they're exposed and could potentially expose other people. But the rest of them, why in the world are they next on the list? It just makes no sense at all to me. The whole point of the vaccine at this stage is to protect the vulnerable and interrupt the chain of transmission, why in the world are we vaccinating someone teaching virtual classes from their living room before a waiter or store clerk???

dehaas 12-30-2020 10:55 PM

Essential employees are not the same as people in high contact jobs.

Teachers have the ability to work remotely but if they are all sick the education system falls apart. Last time I checked education is a big deal...

dysmike 12-30-2020 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dehaas (Post 3674641)
Essential employees are not the same as people in high contact jobs.

Teachers have the ability to work remotely but if they are all sick the education system falls apart. Last time I checked education is a big deal...

The teachers I know are also concerned about being forced back into the classroom. Because they function as baby sitters, so people can go to work.

Ess-dog 12-30-2020 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ru4por (Post 3674607)
Yeah, I have been warning of this. The timeline reported was not realistic to begin with. The execution has been even worse. The planning was left in the hands of the Federal government, who that was gonna work?

It was the Trump Admin(Feds) that allowed the states to go every which way in response to the virus and had a policy of letting people get infected in the hopes of economically doing better than countries that were locked down and hopeful herd immunity. I suppose in some ways if only a few million get vaccinated and cases blow up even more they'd be happy that we didn't waste resources. So exactly as planned.

DG_player 12-31-2020 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dehaas (Post 3674641)
Essential employees are not the same as people in high contact jobs.

Teachers have the ability to work remotely but if they are all sick the education system falls apart. Last time I checked education is a big deal...

Maybe education is important where you live, but where I live everyone is homeschooling their kids, except the people that can afford to send their kids to a classroom with other kids and have a tutor chaperone their virtual lessons, or have their kids in private school. (All of which to my knowledge have resulted in zero cases)

I'd agree with you if I actually thought there was any intention to open schools this year.

DavidSauls 12-31-2020 06:40 AM

It seems odd to say, "Teachers are working virtually, why vaccinate them?" I think the idea is that if they're vaccinated, they don't have to work virtually anymore. In-person schooling is better for the kids, better for the parents, and better for the economy.

I don't have a problem with the concept of "essential workers". Keeping the economy and vital services running is a valid concern, and we can have more than one emphasis. The problem comes when defining "essential workers" -- as every trade group is lobbying to be included.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.