tdhoosier

Are you addressing me on this reply as well? I was just surprised you seemed to disagreeing with my concern at face value.

I don't know where we begin to start if you are going to insinuate skepticism on a flu comparison by just asking open ended 'what if' questions about similar traits the viruses may share because that doesn't get us anywhere. It's like me trying to compare the dangers of a pitbull and shih tzu by saying: well, they're both dogs, they both bark and they both have teeth, thus, they're equally as dangerous. Per the CDC website: Again, my argument is based on transmission rate given the information the CDC has observed and how this may effect a school operationally. I'm actually surprised i'm getting push back on this. My own concern (not the media's or your friend on Facebook...please don't lump me in with them) is that it is possible that high schools and possibly middle schools can be places where those superspreading events MAY happen. It's not going to happen in every school, but it is likely to happen. Therefore, individual districts are correct in practicing caution and concern by preparing for these possible events. It also re-iterates the very first and most important point of my original reply: this decision needs to be made locally based on the case count in their area. Just like you may believe that we all shouldn't be frightened away from opening schools if the case count in your area is relatively safe (which I actually agree with you and Reacher on), it's also that schools shouldn't be forced to open up if the case count is moderate to high.

@Reacher But this is not the flu. You are asking 'what if' and comparing apples and oranges. Plus, schools shut down because of flu outbreaks. A few schools in my area shut down because of a peak in the flu in January. Now take a virus that spreads much faster than the flu with an evelvating case count (in many areas in indiana) and you have a possible operational nightmare due to health related absences. One that needs to be prepared for and discussed. Please keep in mind that a good proportion of schools are staff and this virus is spreading amongst high school aged students just as quickly as it does in adults. I think you're missing the point of what i'm trying to convey. Please put health aside for a second. Please put media reports aside for a second. I'm talking about transmission and what that could mean for schools, purely from an operational standpoint. You think this concern is sensationalized?

I'm all for kids going back to school but I'm beginning to wonder how possible this actually is. I'll repeat what I said earlier, the decision to go back should be made on a local level based on the number of reported cases in the area. That said, I keep hearing about incidents like this one. A suburban Chicago school came to our county (Porter) to have a 'missed prom' and there was an outbreak, even after being pretty cautious (according to the article). We took our son for his check up and our Doctor said that Valpo High School also had a 'missed prom' and there was an outbreak there. These are smaller subgroups in an entire school system and infection still can't be avoided. Two incidents within 10 miles from me, right before school starts. It hits home a little. Again, I realize that severe symptoms in children 10 and under are believed to be rare and death is even more rare, but only concentrating on these stats misses the point. I'm wondering if schools can realistically function if too many teachers and students are out sick. How many subs are there? If a school has an outbreak, will you even get a sub to teach there? At what point will parents keep their healthy children home? I don't want to minimize death and hospitalization, but I think a valid concern is will schools be able to operate? I don't necessarily think that can be minimalized to fear mongering. It's a legit question.

I used to be really in to DMB in high school. I still say Carter Beauford is one of the most skilled drummers out there. That one one handed drum roll right before 3 minutes in the clip below, I mean come on... ......and then if you want to go above and beyond with skill, you need to learn about Terry Bozzio and The Black Page, which was written by Frank Zappa.

Got some beer can burgers going today. Stuffed with cheddar, cream cheese and jalapeño.

My favorite Beatles song has always been ‘Something.’

It’s official. I have a bro crush on Lost.

Wow, Hermain Cain just died of COVID: https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2020-07-30/herman-cain-former-gop-presidential-candidate-dies-after-coronavirus-battle

Holy cow. Did you see Kodak's stock?? Who was in on that one? ......We'll never find out.

Is it not true though? Fair and unbiased media is a pipe dream. For every fair source there are 3 opinionated sources with bias. It's much easier to control messaging than to control how the media reacts. And because you aren't going to change the media that is why leaders need to be careful and clear with their messaging. I'll leave it at that. I hate talking about this topic as much as the next guy.

If Trump doesn’t say anything about it > media doesn’t say anything about it > we aren’t talking about pharmaceuticals on a basketball board and it’s one less thing America is fighting about. it’s pretty much that simple.

I actually think that practicing doctors should be removed from the equation altogether. Practicing doctors aren't the ones that perform studies for precisely this reason: bias. That's why most studies are controlled, double blind and use placebos. Like you said, one doctor could've given HCQ to a patient who developed heart arrhythmia and formed a negative opinion of the drug. Another doctor could have given it to a patient who's symptoms improved in 3 days, so he/she formed a positive opinion about it. Both of these instances are individual cases that aren't representative. So pinning one doctor against another won't get us anywhere, whether it's 50/50, 60/40 or 70/30.

I don't make it a habit of following pharmaceutical research, but do other drugs get studied this much? Man, I feel like every other day an HCQ study comes out. The data pool of research seems to be vast for this one. I think the lesson learned is politicians should stay out of drug research claims (whether right or wrong) because it leads to a crap show. Too many people on both sides of the issue were drawing a line in the sand before any research was completed. Instead of finding whether or not this actually works, it's been minimized to a game of proving the other side wrong. This leads to a situation where, in the end, nobody is going to accept the results......which is sad.

Taking down that video is Facebook regulating itself though. I guess the point being is that one persons regulation is another's censorship.

Here's a Stella Immanuel sermon that wasn't 'censored' where she claims that DNA from space aliens is being used in medicine and that women develop cysts from demonic sperm after demonic sex dreams. I report. You decide. 😎 (5fouls, just having fun. Do agree with your overall assessment. It seems like we're too overwhelmed with distractions these days)

Again, you can watch it; let's not act like it doesn't exist anywhere on the internet. Their message is still getting out. If anything, because everybody is crying censorship, more people are watching it. What's the opposite side of this argument? Who decides Facebook posting policy if it's not Facebook? @Reacher are you saying that the government should regulate Facebook content? Because I'm sure that's a slippery slope we don't want to go down. Look, I'm no fan of Facebook or where social media is going. If we want to go after Facebook, censorship violation is the wrong path. What's more concerning to me is that they take our personal information, at no charge to them, and sell it for advertising purposes.

This is not censorship. You can go to Brietbart and watch the video. Just type in the url....it’s that simple. If the government made Brietbart take down that video then it would be censorship. Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are private companies that under no obligation to show anything they don’t want to. Don’t like it? Then stop using their platforms. It’s your right. this is essentially the same as saying Costco is taking away your freedom because they require masks in their store. It’s their store. It’s their decision.

@Lostin76, since you work in a hospital I thought you may find today's podcast for The Daily' interesting. They were talking about how patients were dying at a higher rate at the NYC public hospitals vs. private hospitals because they were understaffed. For example, when they learned that proning was good for patients, they couldn't get enough nurses to flip them over because with all the wires and IVs it takes 4 or 5 people to do that. The nurse to patient ratios at that time were 7 to 1 compared to 3 to 1 in private hospitals. A doctor said that he thought 2 or 3 patients out of every 10 who died could've been saved if they had enough staff. Just sad all the way around.

https://thehill.com/policy/international/508688-coronavirus-measures-lead-to-lower-influenza-numbers-across-the-southern It only makes sense that same precautions we take for COVID would also protect us against influenza. Good news since many health officials think the combo of COVID and influenza this winter could push our hospitals to the brink. Also want to get ahead of all the conspiracies that are likely going to allege we’re counting influenza cases as COVID cases when comparing numbers to previous years’ totals. 😎

I want to like sours but very rarely find one that I can drink a full glass of. And they give me heart burn. Imagine that. Haha.

I actually have. Good stuff. Whether you like her or not, she definitely can write a song.

My wife Got me some Old 55 Bourbon from Newton, IN for my birthday last weekend and I gotta say it’s up there with Blanton's for me. So many flavors and so smooth.

I gotta say that the new Taylor Swift album is excellent. Less pop, more folk/indie. Really surprised how much I liked it.

Assuming we can get back to normal I think the cities who have more to offer than just a business district will make a comeback just fine. Afterall, the stuff they provide is what many are missing and craving right now: culture, arts, history, restaurants, sports, vacation spots, etc. People aren't going to forget about the activities a big city can provide once we are in the clear. On the other hand, I can also see a situation where companies may realize they don't need office spaces. If they can achieve the same productivity with employees working from home, why would they want that extra leasing expense? I do think this would be a better thing for society in the long-run, but that's just me.