Coronavirus prep
Options
Replies
-
cmriverside wrote: »Sure, Ann, I agree. It's just that we've had 200+ pages saying basically the same thing. "Wear your mask. Social distance."
I guess my time in this thread is over. ::wavingslowly::
That will be a loss to dialog, I think, but of course you should do what's best for you.
I'd observe that some of the "Wear your mask. Social distance." here is people venting frustrations that are harder to vent safely in some daily lives. In that sense, it's a release valve.
Wishing you well, always.
Agree 100% with Ann. Enjoy reading your commentary. @ Ann - I hope I'm wrong about the A/C and indoor ventilation being so dangerous.
Was curious (as I do a lot of advising/consulting with startups as part of my business) if there were companies that were utilizing UV light to disinfect air via air handlers in the mechanical systems of buildings. Found a really interesting article that one Seattle restaurant did just that. Seems that it's an older technology that was brought back. I'm not seeing a whole lot being done on this front and, quite frankly, it's surprising.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/13/890387205/coronavirus-sparks-new-interest-in-using-ultraviolet-light-to-disinfect-indoor-a2 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Sure, Ann, I agree. It's just that we've had 200+ pages saying basically the same thing. "Wear your mask. Social distance."
I guess my time in this thread is over. ::wavingslowly::
That will be a loss to dialog, I think, but of course you should do what's best for you.
I'd observe that some of the "Wear your mask. Social distance." here is people venting frustrations that are harder to vent safely in some daily lives. In that sense, it's a release valve.
Wishing you well, always.
Agree 100% with Ann. Enjoy reading your commentary. @ Ann - I hope I'm wrong about the A/C and indoor ventilation being so dangerous.
Was curious (as I do a lot of advising/consulting with startups as part of my business) if there were companies that were utilizing UV light to disinfect air via air handlers in the mechanical systems of buildings. Found a really interesting article that one Seattle restaurant did just that. Seems that it's an older technology that was brought back. I'm not seeing a whole lot being done on this front and, quite frankly, it's surprising.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/13/890387205/coronavirus-sparks-new-interest-in-using-ultraviolet-light-to-disinfect-indoor-a
I just saw a TV commercial of a local nursing home showing they have started using some kind of industrial UV light disinfection system. Is it possible it's newly been "proven" to work for covid? I haven't seen anything about it recently.2 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Sure, Ann, I agree. It's just that we've had 200+ pages saying basically the same thing. "Wear your mask. Social distance."
I guess my time in this thread is over. ::wavingslowly::
That will be a loss to dialog, I think, but of course you should do what's best for you.
I'd observe that some of the "Wear your mask. Social distance." here is people venting frustrations that are harder to vent safely in some daily lives. In that sense, it's a release valve.
Wishing you well, always.
Agree 100% with Ann. Enjoy reading your commentary. @ Ann - I hope I'm wrong about the A/C and indoor ventilation being so dangerous.
Was curious (as I do a lot of advising/consulting with startups as part of my business) if there were companies that were utilizing UV light to disinfect air via air handlers in the mechanical systems of buildings. Found a really interesting article that one Seattle restaurant did just that. Seems that it's an older technology that was brought back. I'm not seeing a whole lot being done on this front and, quite frankly, it's surprising.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/13/890387205/coronavirus-sparks-new-interest-in-using-ultraviolet-light-to-disinfect-indoor-a
I just saw a TV commercial of a local nursing home showing they have started using some kind of industrial UV light disinfection system. Is it possible it's newly been "proven" to work for covid? I haven't seen anything about it recently.
The tech has been around a while. From what I can tell, though, a lot of the companies went out of business for a long time due to low sales/interest. But since that 200 some scientists wrote to the WHO about the concern of aerosols spreading it in high concentrations in indoor settings (ASHRAE, the heating and air association of engineers has also been talking about it), it's being revisited. The problem is that most manufacturers stopped producing systems or are having to create custom systems. Plus, I think the building has to be suited for it. But here's an article about another company starting production for the same thing with an eye toward schools.
I envision (if we don't have a vaccine soon) some version of this along with Hepa filtration being attempted.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vystar-produce-rxair400-uv-c-130807625.html
Also saw a very interesting startup today that utilizes both AI (artificial intelligence) and UV technology to disinfect things like touch screens or things that are public domain. Finds the finger prints and then shoots UV at them in between uses. You can't look directly into UV without damaging your eyes, so that would be a tough one to implement. They were even talking for like casino machines. You won't catch me in a casino anytime soon!5 -
cmriverside wrote: »
So let's look at the UK. They have socialized medicine. They decided to do the herd immunity thing. It was ugly. But they can't afford to shut down the economy and still care for the people. Same with Sweden. Socialization is not the answer. Self-determination and self-accountability can be the answer - but not if people are locked out of working.
Canada has universal health care and did NOT decide to go the herd immunity route. I think we've done fairly well in terms of mortality rate. The economy did not completely shut down. Yes, lots of people were temporarily out of work but there was a government income benefit to offset that somewhat. After a lengthy period of decreased cases, provinces have done phased reopening. My region of the province entered Stage 3 today, which means this is the first time since mid-March that we have been permitted to dine inside a restaurant. My city will see mandatory masks in enclosed public spaces plus buses and taxis next week... we have had no positive cases in two weeks and at the moment there is only one identified active case, yet we will be wearing masks. About 40% of us already do, whether voluntarily or by necessity, so I don't think this will create too much angst.
Sometimes an abundance of caution is the answer.14 -
I would also add that it is misguided to assume that opening back up means saving the economy.
If we get another 200,000 deaths through the fall, it will hurt the economy. If hundreds of thousands of people end up in the ER or ICU and are saddled with medical debt, it will hurt the economy. If small business owners are too sick to work for a month or two, they most likely will lose their business, which will hurt the economy. If a generation of 20 something's get asymptomatic cases but end up with a lifetime of diminished lung or kidney function, or an increased risk of stroke, which by the way could be considered a pre existing condition, so are constantly dealing with medical costs as they age, that will hurt the economy. If the 20% of the US population that is in an increased risk category continue to feel unsafe and don't participate in the economy, it will hurt the economy.
There are obviously logical differences of opinion possible, but opening everything back up to normal before cases are declining and hospitalizations are dwindling, and without clear plans for how to deal with outbreaks that pop up, could tank the economy just as badly as another lockdown could. We needed to have a plan in March. We still don't have a plan in July. That is going to cost us royally, regardless of what else we do. Most people aren't adverse to getting back to close to normal, they're adverse to doing so without a plan. Most people aren't adverse to sending kids back to school, they're adverse to doing so without a plan. Everything here is just making up policy, throwing it at the wall, and seeing if it sticks.
I think I said this long ago (not going back to find it)... there are basically 3 options:
1. Shut everything down absolutely (like what Spain ended up doing) and contain the virus, but have huge economic losses.
2. Keep everything open, have a lot of death, but not economic losses (aside form the indirect economic problems caused by all the death).
3. Do a hybrid approach (half shutdown) that results in both lots of economic losses and lots of deaths.
Most places did a half shutdown (option 3) and then went back to option 2 pretty quickly afterwards.1 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Sure, Ann, I agree. It's just that we've had 200+ pages saying basically the same thing. "Wear your mask. Social distance."
I guess my time in this thread is over. ::wavingslowly::
That will be a loss to dialog, I think, but of course you should do what's best for you.
I'd observe that some of the "Wear your mask. Social distance." here is people venting frustrations that are harder to vent safely in some daily lives. In that sense, it's a release valve.
Wishing you well, always.
Agree 100% with Ann. Enjoy reading your commentary. @ Ann - I hope I'm wrong about the A/C and indoor ventilation being so dangerous.
Was curious (as I do a lot of advising/consulting with startups as part of my business) if there were companies that were utilizing UV light to disinfect air via air handlers in the mechanical systems of buildings. Found a really interesting article that one Seattle restaurant did just that. Seems that it's an older technology that was brought back. I'm not seeing a whole lot being done on this front and, quite frankly, it's surprising.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/13/890387205/coronavirus-sparks-new-interest-in-using-ultraviolet-light-to-disinfect-indoor-a
I just saw a TV commercial of a local nursing home showing they have started using some kind of industrial UV light disinfection system. Is it possible it's newly been "proven" to work for covid? I haven't seen anything about it recently.
I read a study that found uv takes a really long time to kill covid. I’m wondering if this will work.0 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »I would also add that it is misguided to assume that opening back up means saving the economy.
If we get another 200,000 deaths through the fall, it will hurt the economy. If hundreds of thousands of people end up in the ER or ICU and are saddled with medical debt, it will hurt the economy. If small business owners are too sick to work for a month or two, they most likely will lose their business, which will hurt the economy. If a generation of 20 something's get asymptomatic cases but end up with a lifetime of diminished lung or kidney function, or an increased risk of stroke, which by the way could be considered a pre existing condition, so are constantly dealing with medical costs as they age, that will hurt the economy. If the 20% of the US population that is in an increased risk category continue to feel unsafe and don't participate in the economy, it will hurt the economy.
There are obviously logical differences of opinion possible, but opening everything back up to normal before cases are declining and hospitalizations are dwindling, and without clear plans for how to deal with outbreaks that pop up, could tank the economy just as badly as another lockdown could. We needed to have a plan in March. We still don't have a plan in July. That is going to cost us royally, regardless of what else we do. Most people aren't adverse to getting back to close to normal, they're adverse to doing so without a plan. Most people aren't adverse to sending kids back to school, they're adverse to doing so without a plan. Everything here is just making up policy, throwing it at the wall, and seeing if it sticks.
I think I said this long ago (not going back to find it)... there are basically 3 options:
1. Shut everything down absolutely (like what Spain ended up doing) and contain the virus, but have huge economic losses.
2. Keep everything open, have a lot of death, but not economic losses (aside form the indirect economic problems caused by all the death).
3. Do a hybrid approach (half shutdown) that results in both lots of economic losses and lots of deaths.
Most places did a half shutdown (option 3) and then went back to option 2 pretty quickly afterwards.
But experience has shown this is not the case.
(1) A lot of countries did this, they had to subsidize a lot and sustain economic losses in the short term, but cutting this short likely prevented a long term economic problem. This ranges from Spain/Italy (who got hurt before we understood what was coming) and Australia/NZ (who warded it off).
(2) Sweden -- there is no indication that Sweden's decision not to lock down prevented economic losses.
(3) Us, the UK -- not great. Likely we should have shut down by region or state and prevented travel, however.3 -
cmriverside wrote: »I could disagree point by point but not with an attorney because I don't have that kind of time.
Let's just say I disagree on most points you just made lemur, because all of them assume we are getting all the numbers - which we aren't - especially from countries that have socialist or communist governments.
What's the basis for thinking we aren't getting the numbers from Germany or most other EU countries or Australia? Because that's what I have been focusing on.There isn't one country (such as Germany) who miraculously just isn't seeing any deaths (or such low deaths like China and Germany) unless there is a lot of deception going on or there is some genetic trait only prevalent in that population - which could turn out to be true, but right now is a wild speculation. Or they have governmental control over their citizens, which I find hard to believe in any country short of communist or dictatorships.
On what basis do you think Germany is lying? Or Australia?8 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »I would also add that it is misguided to assume that opening back up means saving the economy.
If we get another 200,000 deaths through the fall, it will hurt the economy. If hundreds of thousands of people end up in the ER or ICU and are saddled with medical debt, it will hurt the economy. If small business owners are too sick to work for a month or two, they most likely will lose their business, which will hurt the economy. If a generation of 20 something's get asymptomatic cases but end up with a lifetime of diminished lung or kidney function, or an increased risk of stroke, which by the way could be considered a pre existing condition, so are constantly dealing with medical costs as they age, that will hurt the economy. If the 20% of the US population that is in an increased risk category continue to feel unsafe and don't participate in the economy, it will hurt the economy.
There are obviously logical differences of opinion possible, but opening everything back up to normal before cases are declining and hospitalizations are dwindling, and without clear plans for how to deal with outbreaks that pop up, could tank the economy just as badly as another lockdown could. We needed to have a plan in March. We still don't have a plan in July. That is going to cost us royally, regardless of what else we do. Most people aren't adverse to getting back to close to normal, they're adverse to doing so without a plan. Most people aren't adverse to sending kids back to school, they're adverse to doing so without a plan. Everything here is just making up policy, throwing it at the wall, and seeing if it sticks.
I think I said this long ago (not going back to find it)... there are basically 3 options:
1. Shut everything down absolutely (like what Spain ended up doing) and contain the virus, but have huge economic losses.
2. Keep everything open, have a lot of death, but not economic losses (aside form the indirect economic problems caused by all the death).
3. Do a hybrid approach (half shutdown) that results in both lots of economic losses and lots of deaths.
Most places did a half shutdown (option 3) and then went back to option 2 pretty quickly afterwards.
But experience has shown this is not the case.
(1) A lot of countries did this, they had to subsidize a lot and sustain economic losses in the short term, but cutting this short likely prevented a long term economic problem. This ranges from Spain/Italy (who got hurt before we understood what was coming) and Australia/NZ (who warded it off).
(2) Sweden -- there is no indication that Sweden's decision not to lock down prevented economic losses.
(3) Us, the UK -- not great. Likely we should have shut down by region or state and prevented travel, however.
All fair points because these options all must assume that there is no travel nor trade among various states / countries that make different choices. Or to say that another way, this assumes everybody makes the same choice.0 -
rheddmobile wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Sure, Ann, I agree. It's just that we've had 200+ pages saying basically the same thing. "Wear your mask. Social distance."
I guess my time in this thread is over. ::wavingslowly::
That will be a loss to dialog, I think, but of course you should do what's best for you.
I'd observe that some of the "Wear your mask. Social distance." here is people venting frustrations that are harder to vent safely in some daily lives. In that sense, it's a release valve.
Wishing you well, always.
Agree 100% with Ann. Enjoy reading your commentary. @ Ann - I hope I'm wrong about the A/C and indoor ventilation being so dangerous.
Was curious (as I do a lot of advising/consulting with startups as part of my business) if there were companies that were utilizing UV light to disinfect air via air handlers in the mechanical systems of buildings. Found a really interesting article that one Seattle restaurant did just that. Seems that it's an older technology that was brought back. I'm not seeing a whole lot being done on this front and, quite frankly, it's surprising.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/13/890387205/coronavirus-sparks-new-interest-in-using-ultraviolet-light-to-disinfect-indoor-a
I just saw a TV commercial of a local nursing home showing they have started using some kind of industrial UV light disinfection system. Is it possible it's newly been "proven" to work for covid? I haven't seen anything about it recently.
I read a study that found uv takes a really long time to kill covid. I’m wondering if this will work.
@rheddmobile
The UV used used for disinfection is UV "C" not UV A or B (different wave length). It is the same kind of equipment used in the hospitals ORs between surgeries.
Does UV light kill the new coronavirus?
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/medical/does-uv-light-kill-the-new-coronavirus/ar-BB16DH583 -
cmriverside wrote: »
So let's look at the UK. They have socialized medicine. They decided to do the herd immunity thing. It was ugly. But they can't afford to shut down the economy and still care for the people. Same with Sweden. Socialization is not the answer. Self-determination and self-accountability can be the answer - but not if people are locked out of working.
Canada has universal health care and did NOT decide to go the herd immunity route. I think we've done fairly well in terms of mortality rate. The economy did not completely shut down. Yes, lots of people were temporarily out of work but there was a government income benefit to offset that somewhat. After a lengthy period of decreased cases, provinces have done phased reopening. My region of the province entered Stage 3 today, which means this is the first time since mid-March that we have been permitted to dine inside a restaurant. My city will see mandatory masks in enclosed public spaces plus buses and taxis next week... we have had no positive cases in two weeks and at the moment there is only one identified active case, yet we will be wearing masks. About 40% of us already do, whether voluntarily or by necessity, so I don't think this will create too much angst.
Sometimes an abundance of caution is the answer.
You in Canada did a much better job than we in the US did.
I've seen charts on the news comparing the two countries but am having trouble finding them online.5 -
Oklahoma City just passed a mask mandate with many exceptions. Penalty for non-compliance = $9 fine.2
-
cmriverside wrote: »The harsh reality is that those with the fewest resources to keep safe have the most pressure to get back to pre-covid practices.
Honestly this restriction has gone on long enough that this group is probably approaching critical mass right now.
Those of you in this thread who are the loudest proponents of social distancing and masks and quarantines...how would you feel about all this were you not privileged? It's easy for those with stay-home capability to pontificate from their keyboards but the reality is that tens of millions of people are living basically hand-to-mouth even in the best of economic times.
Unless you know a way to fabricate money out of thin air, I think allowing everyone to make their own choice is going to be the only way forward. Yes, people are going to die. More people won't. The choice should not be up to rich people living in comfortable isolation with plenty of money.
The "choice" to go out and work because your job can't be done at home shouldn't carry with it unnecessary risk because society views you as expendable and public policy reflects that view, or because your employer isn't willing to take any measures to protect you, or because customers/clients/patients or other members of the public you have to deal with in your job think their freedom not to wear a mask is more important your life and your family's lives.
15 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »One of the the larger school districts in our area announced their plan. Parents will make a binding choice for the fall semester
- Child will go to school in person with distancing measures, masks required, etc. Classes will be taught by the district's teachers. If there is an outbreak these kids will be taught remotely by their regular teachers
- Child will remote school. Instruction will be through a 3rd party provider.
This is interesting because I was just asking elsewhere about the plan. If a teacher or student is infected, then everyone who rode the bus or had a class with that person quarantines for 2 weeks? And if one of them ends up sick, does everyone who rode the bus or had a class with that teacher or student quarantine for 2 weeks?
Not to mention that multiple families have more than one child in school. Compound this by what the plan is if someone in class A gets sick and someone in that classroom has a sibling in Class B. Is all of Class B now expected to quarantine? The logistics of this seem almost overwhelming.
Exactly! Just have everyone do virtual. Students without a computer/internet can maybe be sent packets of materials to read and complete.
Or they could be given computers and Internet service. There are already Internet service providers offering deep discounts on both to low-income families with school-age kids. Making up the different probably wouldn't cost anymore than developing a whole secondary logistical framework involving human labor and human contact to create packets of material, deliver, retrieve, and review/grade/provide feedback by hand. Plus the added bonus of not treating kids as "less than" because their parents can't afford a computer and Internet access.7 -
cmriverside wrote: »@kshama2001 - I agree that legislating relief during this is a necessary thing, but it's not going to solve the longer term issue of a highly contagious respiratory virus that they're not even sure a vaccine will work against.
If a vaccine becomes viable like the Moderna one (or any of them, really) then all this relief and discussion goes away in less than a year. Until then, we're in trouble.
On the rest of the arguments which are all red herrings, no one is safe, correct. That's always been a given. The young who are not as seriously affected as a whole should be allowed to go back to work. The massive layoffs and furloughs mostly affect the young. I'm not talking about grocery store or essential workers, but everyone in every industry that has been basically shut down indefinitely. Restaurants, sports, hotels, lots of retailers, etc etc etc..
What good will it do to "let" people go back to work in industries that won't have sustainable demand because too many people aren't eager to expose themselves to the risk of covid, especially if there are no mask mandates and too many other people won't voluntarily mask up? No one has shut down the airline industry, but being "allowed" to work isn't going to do flight crews, ticket agents, ground service crews, etc. (not to mention upstream vendors) any good as airlines begin laying people when their PPP loans that required them to maintain employment levels run out in the early fall.
ETA the words in bold.6 -
cmriverside wrote: »If you look at that Johns Hopkins link I posted above, you'll see that our rate of death per case is 3.9% (edit - in the U.S.) and Germany's is 4.5%, so again - not sure what the point was there. Sweden is at 7.3%, UK at 15.4%.
Death per cases is not a reliable stat, because many or most with coronavirus aren't being tested. That's why the best comparison is death per millions.
In addition, deaths per cases is not a reliable stat because our incidence of new cases is rising so fast. The majority of our cases are not yet resolved. You cannot treat all those unresolved cases as cases that did not result in death. Many of them will still result in deaths (based on current figures on the Johns Hopkins site, as many as 11% of those unresolved cases in the U.S. will end in death -- and if you consider that rising cases means greater strain on the health care system and potentially poorer care and triaging, that rate could rise).
I agree that deaths per millions is probably the best comparison between countries, but if you want to get some sense of the percentage of covid cases in a particular country are ending in death, you would do better to look at [deaths] divided by [deaths + recoveries]. Admittedly, that may be a little high, as it appears on average, from the (largely anecdotal) information I've seen, that average time to recovery is probably somewhat longer than average time to death. But it's going to be far closer to the truth than using a denominator in which two-thirds* of the cases have not yet resolved in either death or recovery
*Two-thirds is the figure for unresolved cases to date for the U.S. YMMV in other countries.3 -
I don't know whether I'm a "loudest proponent" or not. I do think that everyone who can social distance should do that, everyone who can work from home should do that, everyone should minimize trips out into public places or into group gatherings as much as feasible (<= note "feasible"), everyone who can should wear their mask (correctly) while near others, and that those who are able should do what they feasibly can in their circumstances to support others who are economically affected, and keep economic activity happening as much as it can do safely.
Mask rebellion is not helping anyone. I don't see how it's "privileged" to ask people to wear masks when near others. At some stores, they're being handed out for free. People I know have been making cloth ones, and giving them away or donating them, for free. The essential workers, mostly (here), are correctly masked. I can be correctly masked (even as an elderly person with COPD) to protect them, and limit my trips (where I spend about the same amount of money into the economy in many categories, though not all).
^^This.
I agreed with pretty much every word you wrote in the longer post, but I think these two paragraphs are so fundamental and so right and get so to the core of the issues that I wanted to pull them out to in the hope that people who tend toward the TL;DR view might see them.8 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Sure, Ann, I agree. It's just that we've had 200+ pages saying basically the same thing. "Wear your mask. Social distance."
I guess my time in this thread is over. ::wavingslowly::
That will be a loss to dialog, I think, but of course you should do what's best for you.
I'd observe that some of the "Wear your mask. Social distance." here is people venting frustrations that are harder to vent safely in some daily lives. In that sense, it's a release valve.
Wishing you well, always.
Agree 100% with Ann. Enjoy reading your commentary. @ Ann - I hope I'm wrong about the A/C and indoor ventilation being so dangerous.
Was curious (as I do a lot of advising/consulting with startups as part of my business) if there were companies that were utilizing UV light to disinfect air via air handlers in the mechanical systems of buildings. Found a really interesting article that one Seattle restaurant did just that. Seems that it's an older technology that was brought back. I'm not seeing a whole lot being done on this front and, quite frankly, it's surprising.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/13/890387205/coronavirus-sparks-new-interest-in-using-ultraviolet-light-to-disinfect-indoor-a
The folks that installed my residential HVAC systems and do my seasonal inspections are always trying to convince me to add a UV light disinfecting unit. I have resisted as I have no allergies and live alone, but if I were in a multi-person household, I think I'd be tempted now in the covid end-times
4 -
So, to go back to a more literal sense of "prepping," does anyone shop at Trader Joe's? It's not my regular grocery store, but I like to go a few times a year to stock up on some of their frozen and non-perishable foods that I especially like. The TJs near me are all pretty small (my sense is that that's true of the entire chain, but I don't know), and in the BC (before covid) they were always pretty crowded when I went in. We have capacity limits now for retailers where I live, and I have had to wait briefly to get into a Whole Foods once and into Home Depot once, but I'm more concerned about the conditions once I get inside than I am about the prospect of having to wait in line.
For those of you who have capacity limits in place locally and shop at a TJs, have you felt like social distancing is a realistic possibility once you get inside?0 -
cmriverside wrote: »I could disagree point by point but not with an attorney because I don't have that kind of time.
Let's just say I disagree on most points you just made lemur, because all of them assume we are getting all the numbers - which we aren't - especially from countries that have socialist or communist governments.
What's the basis for thinking we aren't getting the numbers from Germany or most other EU countries or Australia? Because that's what I have been focusing on.There isn't one country (such as Germany) who miraculously just isn't seeing any deaths (or such low deaths like China and Germany) unless there is a lot of deception going on or there is some genetic trait only prevalent in that population - which could turn out to be true, but right now is a wild speculation. Or they have governmental control over their citizens, which I find hard to believe in any country short of communist or dictatorships.
On what basis do you think Germany is lying? Or Australia?
Australia and NZ have relatively low Covid numbers - yes I get that their populations are lower but I mean low proportionate numbers.
They are not communist countries.
One could argue they are more socialist countries than US since they have things like universal medical care - but are you really suggesting that means their Covid numbers are falsified???
4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions