Originally Posted by
steelreserve
I take that as a good indicator that I'm on the right track. Thanks!
Look, here's my deal. At the very start of this, I was, like many, convinced this was overblown and hopefully much ado about nothing. Clearly it turned out to be something that should be taken more seriously than that, and there is no doubt about that, which I have freely admitted. I believe that is reflected in the type of stuff I have been arguing for or against over time (it has changed, believe it or not, from approximately "it's all bullshit" to "be reasonable, not crazy".)
It is probably very easy to interpret that as simply being consistently "against" whoever or whatever is calling the shots, because I was against what was being done then, and I am against what is being done now. Although I can see how it could come off that way, that is not exactly it either. I was skeptical of the (now comparatively moderate) measures about a month ago as out of proportion to what was going on at the time. I probably would not be too skeptical of that anymore. The reason why I do remain opposed to what is going on now is not because it is out of proportion to the current situation, but because it is out of proportion to any situation at all.
That is possibly just a matter of personal preference and tolerances. The medical worst case, to me, is probably not worse than the medically ordered lockdown. We long ago passed the point at which you cut your losses and say "you know what, this sucks, but there is only so much you can do before you are acting crazy, so we stop here and hopefully we can still avoid the absolute worst of it."
Here is the part that I think does not compute for some: Are you crazy? What if that means half a million dead? And the answer is: Then it means half a million dead. But you wouldn't even try to stop it? You have to! Well, not exactly. You try to stop it, but you admit your limitations. You're advocating for letting thousands of people just DIE? No, not advocating. Accepting it while doing the best within reason. It may be appalling to many, but yes, to me, something on the order of half a million or a million people dead can indeed still fall under the category "shit you just can't control," and crossing that line that you shouldn't can well be quixotic.
But that's the worst case, and the other big thing is - as you may have guessed - I tend to be extremely skeptical of the worst case. Way back toward the start of this argument, I believe I said something to the effect of, "Even if I am wrong about it blowing over, the real answer is probably not the worst case, it is somewhere in between." And despite everything, in a very general unscientific sense, that is STILL what appears to be playing out. It's never been the best case, but it's never been anywhere near the worst case either. So while it may be a dumb, completely
Adding to that skepticism of the worst case is the fact that the media has done about everything possible in the past several years to destroy any semblance of trust or credibility that it possessed, and it makes it difficult to know what is real or not. Figuring out what is bullshit and what is not has become a huge portion - probably more than half now - of reading the news, in many cases more important than what is actually printed. That is a huge problem, and really lends itself to the type of panic and confusion that abounds, not to mention the general acrimony and distrust. There are also many people who, for a variety of reasons, have clearly been chomping at the bit for something like this to happen, and are practically nutting in their pants at the chance to push it. Typing that makes me feel almost a bit tinfoil-hatty, but I don't think I have completely lost my mind yet.
The bottom line is that I do not think I know more about science than a scientist, or more about medicine than a doctor (although some people I went to school with, who later became doctors or lawyers, are the kind of people where you go "wait, THAT guy's a doctor?") ... but there really IS so much bullshit out there that once it all filters through, it is difficult to take a lot of it seriously. Usually, it is not that I am fighting with a medical expert, I am fighting with a journalist and whatever his or her own personal take on the facts is. Do I know enough to win that fight? You're goddamn right about that.
Anyway, I hope that at least explains where I am coming from, and that it is not just "all these experts with fancy degrees are idiots spouting bullshit, and I'm the only one who knows anything." That's kind of dumb. Knowing better than a journalist or a politician, though, or thinking that they might be spewing bullshit? Not a stretch at all.
Reply With Quote
) My brother & his wife are the only “outside” people who see his mother-in-law. She’s undergoing chemotherapy, but she needs supplies. She has to see someone; so, my brother & his wife are the only people she sees... thus reducing the number of exposures to the virus. 
