was somewhere between 10-12% of the population. So instead of testing for who has the anti bodies for the coronavirus wouldn’t it be better to test which group was likely to suffer. Much like the annual flu.
So if we know that a certain portion of our community is likely to get a disease either coronavirus or the flu or some other virus wouldn’t it be more productive to have them isolate themselves from us carriers?
We need to evaluate this conundrum since it’s likely to happen often.
And go to the gym 4 days a week when it is open of course. I think physical fitness plays more of an issue than age but of course the older people don't exercise as much.
Let's open this pandora's box of letting the government control any aspect of our lives that our esteemed coastal elites deem "essential." By the way... last time I checked over half the COVID deaths occurred in Cuomo's favorite metro area. How come he doesn't get any MSM media criticism?
all the time.
(no message)
Where it fails though is that fatty eating a Big Mac doesn't affect those around them (other than the flatulence).
understanding is correct. This is also related to our yesterday's topic - what strategy/approach we should consider. I would like Sweden way, i.e. highly targeted "surgical strikes" approach from very beginning, targeting the elder and vulnerable for protection and locking down them, not locking down 80% healthy people like we currently do. In NY state, it is even more strange, they open nursing homes, but lockdown schools.
(no message)
isn’t political. Can you only respond on that level? There is something wrong with you. You don’t realize this but trust me, everyone that knows you understands that you have issues.
(no message)