answers inline
If you know me a little you know I'm a science man. And no, I never had a flu shot ever. And I'm still alive.
You totally missed the point. The poor / vulnerable people seem left behind
On 14 Mar 2020, at 14:16, David Dodson <davaldod@gmail.com> wrote:Stipulating that this is an Avid Media Composer list…
Who cares, we're friends here.
Bouke, you keep referring to the "the flu," but COVID-19 is not the flu. The mortality rate is far higher. This particular virus is killing not just the old, the vulnerable. Many people of all ages and health conditions are dying. 'Healthy' and 'normal' people ARE dying from COVID-19, just as they do with the flu.rant
Please elaborate, cause that is NOT what I'm seeing here. Granted, I do not have access to 'official' records, let alone the truth.
(Hence my rant.)
You seem to take a very sanguine attitude toward the scale of human suffering that this particular infection has losed upon the world.
On the opposite, I think (yes, not PC), I think this will do good to 'the world'
And you seem to have very little concern for the millions of health care workers who are in a war against not only the virus, but against their under-funded, under-equipped facilities with which to treat the sick. I don't understand this attitude.
What attitude? Where did I state that care should not be provided? (Please, see the bigger picture.)
Your point about a cure for the flu is simply wrong. Cure, no? A vaccine for specific strains, yes. Do yo not consider the flu vaccine worthwhile? Maybe you don't get your flu shot every year? Maybe you don't believe in the science of it all?
Besides the discussion of new 'shots' (and who earns money on it / what is the benefit / risk), I very much doubt that a 'shot' will cure this thing.
The world is sorta kinda big, I very much doubt that if a 'shot' is produced, the entire world gets to benefit. (I take it the happy few will get it if they pay, and the rest can die.)
Do prove me wrong, what HIV medicine are available foor the poor in Africa?
If we slow the spread, yes, we get more time to develop vaccines and therapies. Isn't that a good thing? If we save lives, ins't that a good thing?
That's a matter of opinion. I for one think old / sick people must be allowed to die.
My brother is immuno-compromised due to medications he takes for a chronic condition. If he becomes infected by the COVID-19, his outlook is very grim. I'm sorry, Bouke, but you seem far, far, too willing to sacrifice him and the millions around the world like him, to something that we, as a race, have the power to stop.
I'm sorry for your brother, and my remarks aren't for individuals. But in general (and again, that includes myself), it now seems that Earth wants to fight back, and it has every right to do so.
Again, sorry for your brother (and Bob Z. and me), but thinking that we humans have the power to control everything is way more over my arrogance.
With all due respect, I find your attitude towards this to be off-putting. Instead, why aren't you saying that you will eagerly do your part to help slow the spread and give millions of vulnerable people a chance? Why the lack of empathy?
The world has gone crazy over nothing, the poor are left behind.
I'm not God, I just make observations, and I work in media.
From what I see, Media is making things worse, not better.
To send files, go here:
On 14 Mar 2020, at 13:55, Bouke <bouke@editb.nl> wrote:Lemme break this down:On 14 Mar 2020, at 13:23, Pat Horridge <pat@horridge.org.uk> wrote:Isn't this about trying to delay the spread so health service can cope?Perhaps, and then?Let me make it more easy, give the specialists more time to find a cure.Was there ever a cure for the flu? (Any form.)Its inevitable that it will spread and going ahead with large gatherings and world travel ensures that will happen way faster.No arguments here, you're right.The danger then is health services get over whelmed (they may do anyway) and far more people will die.Yes, people WiLL die, but, as I've learned: Life is a sexual transmitted disease with a guaranteed deadly outcome.So sensible precautions by scrapping non essential gatherings and travel makes sense.No, it does not. People WILL get exposed eventually.Its also questionable if these sorts of shows are worth the carbon footprint they generate. Isn't most of it just the same people meeting up to shake hanks and have a drink and a chat.
Product info and news can be released easier online.
Time the world shaped up and moved away from encouraging people to fly all over the place.I totally agree here!This looks to be the kick start for remote working.I totally DISAGREE here.We are humans, and we need to interact / see / feel / smell each other.(Raise your hand if you did not ever have had sex in the broom closet with a co-worker / client.)On 14 Mar 2020, at 13:23, Pat Horridge <pat@horridge.org.uk> wrote:Isn't this about trying to delay the spread so health service can cope?
Its inevitable that it will spread and going ahead with large gatherings and world travel ensures that will happen way faster.
The danger then is health services get over whelmed (they may do anyway) and far more people will die.
So sensible precautions by scrapping non essential gatherings and travel makes sense.
Its also questionable if these sorts of shows are worth the carbon footprint they generate. Isn't most of it just the same people meeting up to shake hanks and have a drink and a chat.
Product info and news can be released easier online.
Time the world shaped up and moved away from encouraging people to fly all over the place.
This looks to be the kick start for remote working.
No comments:
Post a Comment