Stipulating that this is an Avid Media Composer list...
You seem to take a very sanguine attitude toward the scale of human suffering that this particular infection has losed upon 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.
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?
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?
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.
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?
But this is a list for Avid users, and so perhaps these comments are inappropriate here.
David
On Mar 14, 2020, at 5:55 AM, 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