Dr Fauci has been quoted

[EagleDawg97]

i'm just curious for those that compare to flue death rate that say the death rate is much lower because of all the unknown asymptomatic cases. are the flu asymptomatic cases counted in that death rate as well? if someone has the flu virus but doesn't show symptoms how do you know to count them in the rate. the rate we count with covid is of the known cases. wouldn't that be the same for the flu?

Yes, the CDC takes an educated guess each year to add to the confirmed flu cases. It states this on the CDC website. If you went just by confirmed cases the death rate for the flu would be much much much higher.

 

[Cooterpoot]

So educate me then? If not for lower prices, like everything else from steel to pacifiers, why?

Government policies ie. taxes. And why do you think labor costs are higher here? That's right...government policy.

 

[WilCoDawg]

Taxes? Also, it’s supposedly for ingredients that only China has access to from having a monopoly on resources.

 

[johnson86-1]

Looks like you made up 0.4%... Just like I thought.

The only one that is close you use the extreme lower end based on only Chinese data that many on here tout as completely false.

The last link has a CFR below 1 for those stalwarts of truth Russia, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Ghana, Djibouti, and Oman...

So do the math with the higher end numbers....

Sure, I made up the number that fits within the confidence interval of the number you used for the Carvnival cruise ship and is .3 percentage points higher than the lowest end estimate and .2 percentage points higher than the high range of the lowest estimate. ◔_◔

Let's revisit in a year and see if the number ends up being closer to .4% or 1%.

 

[L4Dawg]

Why would you bother doing this when the MSDH posts 4-6 better graphs updated daily? Plus covidtrackingproject on testing and worldometers on testing/positive rates.


View attachment 16156
Per Covid19, Mississippi has 5733 total beds available. 341 ICU beds available.

More testing, more positives, basically constant hospitalizations, severe cases(ICU), and ventilators.
View attachment 16157

We've basically got 10k positives here now in 100k tests. That number is going to be between 1/25 and 1/75 the actual number of people that have had it adding in asymptomatic and mild cases that weren't tested. Between 250,000 and 750,000 Mississippians have had it and beaten it IMO. That's between 8% and 25% of the entire state having been exposed if my assumptions end up being correct. If that's anywhere close to true -- you can see why I don't believe waiting on a vaccine is a feasible approach. If we're at 25% exposure, which I admit I don't believe we're quite that high, we're a couple of months at most from herd immunity.

These numbers of positives are going to go up quite a bit IMO because they are testing literally everyone in retirement and nursing homes now. The Guard was by Granny's assisted living facility today.

Care to cite you figures on how many have had it in Mississippi?

 

[WilCoDawg]

Interesting observation: we’re laying off and furloughing healthcare workers left and right because patients aren’t allowed to services and office visits that are non-virus related. But the House is championing (in its newest relief bill) a part to expedite foreign healthcare workers to help with the virus. I’m confused why we aren't re-assigning our own healthcare workers. And how are other countries able to spare their own healthcare workers to service us?

Also of note that is SO important to Americans during this time of emergency is a part that suspends punishing sanctuary cities. Everyone can breathe a sigh of relief.***

https://www.rollcall.com/2020/05/12/house-aid-package-contains-key-immigration-measures/

 

[L4Dawg]

No. I wear a mask when I go into the store. But not for me.

I think about all of those hourly workers that actually are exposed to everyone and everything... I think about how they could be at home collecting a big fat unemployment check, but instead choose to work. I think about how scared some of them are because they may be at real risk. I want them to feel a little better knowing that I am doing my part.

So I overcome my ego and I look in the mirror and put my ****** $3 cut up t-shirt mask (sorry Rocket and whoever else bought the ones I did) on and head on in.

Exactly. I do not understand why people can't look at this in this way. It's called source control, it is a known FACT that it does help, and that IS why we are asked to wear a mask. If you don't do it when you are in stores you are basically saying you don't give a crap about anybody but yourself.

 

[L4Dawg]

They are trending upward from a minuscule number while our hospitals are mostly empty. We have been locked down when the risk of overrunning our hospitals was low, and if we do bump up against that threshold, people who have already been hammered financially to shut down while hospitals were empty may not be inclined to do it again.

If we have to do it again, it most likely won't be a choice. Y'all need to think about that. I'd also say this, if it gets to that point, Trump will not be re-elected, no chance. Some of yall might want to think about that too when you are out showing how tough you are with no mask.

 

[L4Dawg]

Interesting observation: we’re laying off and furloughing healthcare workers left and right because patients aren’t allowed to services and office visits that are non-virus related. But the House is championing (in its newest relief bill) a part to expedite foreign healthcare workers to help with the virus. I’m confused why we aren't re-assigning our own healthcare workers. And how are other countries able to spare their own healthcare workers to service us?

Also of note that is SO important to Americans during this time of emergency is a part that suspends punishing sanctuary cities. Everyone can breathe a sigh of relief.***

https://www.rollcall.com/2020/05/12/house-aid-package-contains-key-immigration-measures/

All healthcare workers are not trained to do the same thing. For example, you wouldn't want an opthamologist treating you for COVID.

 

[Bulldawg77]

Exactly. I do not understand why people can't look at this in this way. It's called source control, it is a known FACT that it does help, and that IS why we are asked to wear a mask. If you don't do it when you are in stores you are basically saying you don't give a crap about anybody but yourself.

Actually it really doesn't help that much. And cloth mask are worse. And gloves are worse than your hands.... but maybe you know a Dr you can ask

 

[SheltonChoked]

Government policies ie. taxes. And why do you think labor costs are higher here? That's right...government policy.

Because things cost more here....

And it's not because of "Taxes"

If you think that, I'll pay you the median wage a Nike factory shoemaker makes in Vietnam, tax free. And you try and live in the USA...

[FONT=&quot]Nike workers in Vietnam earned between $0.61 and $0.89 per hour in 2016, based on a working week of 48 hours. [/FONT]

 

[WilCoDawg]

I understand that. I’m not an idiot. But there are plenty out there that can provide help.

Also, look at NYC. They just released the USS Comfort and told Samaritan’s Purse that it was time to leave. If they don’t need extra help, who does? Where are the places that are still so overwhelmed?

 

[L4Dawg]

Actually it really doesn't help that much. And cloth mask are worse. And gloves are worse than your hands.... but maybe you know a Dr you can ask

You are flat out wrong on the masks. Standard masks really do help to keep you from spreading something you may have. PROVEN FACT. The cloth ones do too. They don't do much to protect you. As I said, it's not about you, it's about others. Gloves are great at what they do, but most people don't know what they can and more importantly can't do.

 

[L4Dawg]

I understand that. I’m not an idiot. But there are plenty out there that can provide help.

Also, look at NYC. They just released the USS Comfort and told Samaritan’s Purse that it was time to leave. If they don’t need extra help, who does? Where are the places that are still so overwhelmed?

Yeah, they also had HCW from all over the country there too. Now that we are going back to non-emergency procedures those won't be available as much.

 

[johnson86-1]

If we have to do it again, it most likely won't be a choice. Y'all need to think about that. I'd also say this, if it gets to that point, Trump will not be re-elected, no chance. Some of yall might want to think about that too when you are out showing how tough you are with no mask.

Do you read this out loud before you hit post?

We might have to shutdown in the future, so we might as well shut down now?

That is bass ackwards. It'd be one thing if shutting down now prevented shutting down in the future. But it doesn't. Eventually we are going to open up and this is either going to spread, maybe to the point that we should shut down, in which case we just delayed the inevitable and made sure we would have too little cooperation for a shutdown like approach to be as effective as it shoud, or it's not going to spread, in which case we are inflicting a lot of harm for nothing.

If it's going to spread, we need it to spread as quickly as we can without overwhelming our healthcare system. Shutting down as this burns through over the next 18 months to 2 years or until we get a vaccine would be a cure worse than the disease. But of course, that's not what's going to happen.

People are going to get sick of it and they're going to carry on as normal and if it spreads quickly enough to overrun our hospitals, they're not going to shut down again until it's really bad. And because of the lag between infection and serious symptoms, we really need them to heed warnings before it is visibly bad. But they aren't going to do that, and understandably so, because our public health officials have proven to have no realistic plan and no ability to weigh trade-offs and have essentially cried wolf for something like 75% of the country's land mass. If we had shut down for two weeks or three weeks and come out and said something to the effect of, "this is still serious and the shutdown was a good idea because of the uncertainty, but it looks like a lot of localities don't yet have the levels of infection to justify a shut down, so we are opening up all but the worst spots. This is not over though and everybody needs to be vigilant as they go about their lives, and people at high risk or that are in regular close contact with people that are high risk need to voluntarily social distance. And although people don't need to panic, they need to pay attention to updates as sthere may be instances where localities do need to shut down again to prevent their healthcare system from being overrun and it will be important that everybody cooperates if and when those instances arise."

Something like that could have kept trust in the people making decisions and maybe resulted in people being compliant if a second shutdown was called for. Continuing the shutdown with no plan just ruined their credibility while chasing a policy that any one that has any understanding of the public would know was not workable for more than a month or two. It was a giant 17 up.

 

[BiscuitEater]

Please understand, you have said that the main expert, with every feasible medical credibility, is “kicked to the curb”. And this is the same expert trying to allow for a reasonable approach to playing football, and the replies are simply for either 1) upvotes on a board or, 2) to disprove the libs.

I think the point is/was that you can find a Fauci quote to 'fit' either side of any argument. When isolation mandate went into effect, the stated GOAL was to 'flatten the curve.' And, it was only AFTER the curve flattened, Fauci 'changed' the goals.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Actually it really doesn't help that much. And cloth mask are worse. And gloves are worse than your hands.... but maybe you know a Dr you can ask

Yeah that's why medical people have never worn them. They don't work*****

 

[BiscuitEater]

While I don't disagree with the give-and-take comment from a general perspective, I don't get why people keep repeating this "the bad economy is going to kill more people than the virus will" nonsense. The virus has killed approximately 81,000 people in the US alone over the last two or three months (and that's WITH social distancing and other guidelines). And another 286,000 people have died from it worldwide. A poor economy isn't going to kill anywhere near that number.

You're right that we can't stay at home forever. But we should be sensible about how and when we re-open. However, when some people are so fragile that it causes them to freak out and protest over small precautions like wearing masks in public, I start to see the wisdom in erring on the side of caution since those people apparently can't be trusted to make sensible decisions themselves.

Ahhhh .. where to start. EVERY year, ~2.8 Million people die in the US, 647 K from heart disease, 599 K from cancer. Each AND every month ~234,000 people in the US DIE. CDC website Link

The Feds are reimbursing hospitals $$ for EVERY Covid death but NOT for flu or pneumonia. Think about that for a minute. Take a look at the NY graph below. Think


View attachment 16160

 

[SheltonChoked]

Taxes? Also, it’s supposedly for ingredients that only China has access to from having a monopoly on resources.

Are taxes the reason why the average wage here is higher than Vietnam? or China?

Just Taxes? Wage in Vietnam is $0.89 an hour. In Mississippi it's $11 an hour. So the tax rate in Mississippi is $10+ an hour?

 

[Bulldawg77]

Yeah that's why medical people have never worn them. They don't work*****

Yes the do in a controlled environment. In the outside world not as much as you think.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Sure, I made up the number that fits within the confidence interval of the number you used for the Carvnival cruise ship and is .3 percentage points higher than the lowest end estimate and .2 percentage points higher than the high range of the lowest estimate. ◔_◔

Let's revisit in a year and see if the number ends up being closer to .4% or 1%.

Glad you see things my way.

Please stop making up numbers.

Put a number down. How many do you say die from covid?

 

[ColoradoDawg]

Here is a case of someone in S Korea spreading it to over 40 people in a single night.

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/ominous-warning-for-world-governments-as-south-korea-hit-by-super-spreader-after-lockdowns-lifted/news-story/9f22fda0855c14721e5a46943cf751fc

Someone going to a football game and then spreading it to 40+ people in a single night and then having those people drive all over to different parts of the state sound like a really good way to make sure things get out of control incredibly quickly. I am for reopening and for having sports again, but it all has to be done in a controlled and well-thought out way. I like football, but not enough to unnecessarily risk people's lives.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Yes the do in a controlled environment. In the outside world not as much as you think.

Explain to me how the virus knows if you are in a controlled environment or not?

 

[SheltonChoked]

Here is a case of someone in S Korea spreading it to over 40 people in a single night.

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/ominous-warning-for-world-governments-as-south-korea-hit-by-super-spreader-after-lockdowns-lifted/news-story/9f22fda0855c14721e5a46943cf751fc

Someone going to a football game and then spreading it to 40+ people in a single night and then having those people drive all over to different parts of the state sound like a really good way to make sure things get out of control incredibly quickly. I am for reopening and for having sports again, but it all has to be done in a controlled and well-thought out way. I like football, but not enough to unnecessarily risk people's lives.

In the initial outbreak in South Korea, Patient 31 went to a Church service with 9,300 people. She infected 1,160 people who then infected 4,363. https://graphics.reuters.com/CHINA-HEALTH-SOUTHKOREA-CLUSTERS/0100B5G33SB/index.html

That's what will happen in a Sports arena.

 

[engie]

Care to cite you figures on how many have had it in Mississippi?

Already did in the thing you quoted if you would kindly read and interpret.

 

[WilCoDawg]

Then why not request the Comfort and Samaritan’s Purse back if it’s that bad again instead of hiring out foreigners? And that doesn’t answer the question on why other countries and afford to spare hc workers but we have a deficit.

 

[engie]

Here is a case of someone in S Korea spreading it to over 40 people in a single night.

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/ominous-warning-for-world-governments-as-south-korea-hit-by-super-spreader-after-lockdowns-lifted/news-story/9f22fda0855c14721e5a46943cf751fc

Someone going to a football game and then spreading it to 40+ people in a single night and then having those people drive all over to different parts of the state sound like a really good way to make sure things get out of control incredibly quickly. I am for reopening and for having sports again, but it all has to be done in a controlled and well-thought out way. I like football, but not enough to unnecessarily risk people's lives.

It will be over here by then if we just let it happen.

 

[WilCoDawg]

I have no idea how you concluded this. I think you can figure out why they’re paid much less over there, but it’s not my problem. I’d rather support workers here than there.

 

[Cooterpoot]

In the initial outbreak in South Korea, Patient 31 went to a Church service with 9,300 people. She infected 1,160 people who then infected 4,363. https://graphics.reuters.com/CHINA-HEALTH-SOUTHKOREA-CLUSTERS/0100B5G33SB/index.html

That's what will happen in a Sports arena.

All those examples are indoors in closed settings. Odds of spreading are greatly reduced by being outdoors, especially day games, which will become the norm. Masks are going to be required as well.
But panic on..

 

[Cooterpoot]

Ahhhh .. where to start. EVERY year, ~2.8 Million people die in the US, 647 K from heart disease, 599 K from cancer. Each AND every month ~234,000 people in the US DIE. CDC website Link

The Feds are reimbursing hospitals $$ for EVERY Covid death but NOT for flu or pneumonia. Think about that for a minute. Take a look at the NY graph below. Think


View attachment 16160

Not true. It's only Medicare patients and Medicare pays something for just about everything. They pay more for COVID. It's not EVERY COVID patient.

 

[L4Dawg]

Yes, the CDC takes an educated guess each year to add to the confirmed flu cases. It states this on the CDC website. If you went just by confirmed cases the death rate for the flu would be much much much higher.

Actually it's probably the other way around.

 

[PBRME]

All those examples are indoors in closed settings. Odds of spreading are greatly reduced by being outdoors, especially day games, which will become the norm. Masks are going to be required as well.
But panic on..

https://www.tampabay.com/news/healt...rope-linked-to-champions-league-soccer-match/

 

[L4Dawg]

All those examples are indoors in closed settings. Odds of spreading are greatly reduced by being outdoors, especially day games, which will become the norm. Masks are going to be required as well.
But panic on..

So, people at a football game never go indoors for anything then? They also never yell or do anything that would lead to droplets being expelled directly onto the people around them. There is a study out there that shows that activity that increases forceful respiration, like singing and yelling, dramatically increases the risk of transmission, both transmitting it and getting it. You are correct it is much worse indoors. If we have football at all it almost certain to be with no fans.

 

[L4Dawg]

https://www.tampabay.com/news/healt...rope-linked-to-champions-league-soccer-match/

A. Madrid at Liverpool has been linked to a serious spike in Liverpool as well.

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

Do you read this out loud before you hit post?

We might have to shutdown in the future, so we might as well shut down now?

That is bass ackwards. It'd be one thing if shutting down now prevented shutting down in the future. But it doesn't. Eventually we are going to open up and this is either going to spread, maybe to the point that we should shut down, in which case we just delayed the inevitable and made sure we would have too little cooperation for a shutdown like approach to be as effective as it shoud, or it's not going to spread, in which case we are inflicting a lot of harm for nothing.

If it's going to spread, we need it to spread as quickly as we can without overwhelming our healthcare system. Shutting down as this burns through over the next 18 months to 2 years or until we get a vaccine would be a cure worse than the disease. But of course, that's not what's going to happen.

People are going to get sick of it and they're going to carry on as normal and if it spreads quickly enough to overrun our hospitals, they're not going to shut down again until it's really bad. And because of the lag between infection and serious symptoms, we really need them to heed warnings before it is visibly bad. But they aren't going to do that, and understandably so, because our public health officials have proven to have no realistic plan and no ability to weigh trade-offs and have essentially cried wolf for something like 75% of the country's land mass. If we had shut down for two weeks or three weeks and come out and said something to the effect of, "this is still serious and the shutdown was a good idea because of the uncertainty, but it looks like a lot of localities don't yet have the levels of infection to justify a shut down, so we are opening up all but the worst spots. This is not over though and everybody needs to be vigilant as they go about their lives, and people at high risk or that are in regular close contact with people that are high risk need to voluntarily social distance. And although people don't need to panic, they need to pay attention to updates as sthere may be instances where localities do need to shut down again to prevent their healthcare system from being overrun and it will be important that everybody cooperates if and when those instances arise."

Something like that could have kept trust in the people making decisions and maybe resulted in people being compliant if a second shutdown was called for. Continuing the shutdown with no plan just ruined their credibility while chasing a policy that any one that has any understanding of the public would know was not workable for more than a month or two. It was a giant 17 up.

We had a plan, from the Trump team. We're not following it.

Tell me where your logic process branches out from mine:

1. We were running an R0 of 1 with SIP.
2. People have/are going to slack, increasing R0 even without relaxing rules.
3. Relaxing rules will further increase R0.
4. Relaxing rules sends a signal that causes people to further slack in social distancing, further increasing R0.
5. R0 will be over 1, meaning the virus will spread and grow.
6. Spread will lead to hospitals being overwhelmed, causing a reimposition of SIP.
7. 2 to 3 more months of SIP, total of ~8 months when it could have been 3-4.

 

[johnson86-1]

We had a plan, from the Trump team. We're not following it.

Tell me where your logic process branches out from mine:

1. We were running an R0 of 1 with SIP.
2. People have/are going to slack, increasing R0 even without relaxing rules.
3. Relaxing rules will further increase R0 (will put upward pressure on R0; whether that increases it depends on where we are in the curve, but yes, this early on, it will likely be an actualy increase)
4. Relaxing rules sends a signal that causes people to further slack in social distancing, further increasing R0.
5. R0 will be over 1, meaning the virus will spread and grow.
6. Spread may lead to hospitals being overwhelmed, causing a reimposition of SIP.
7. Waiting until hospitals are being overwhelmed will minimize the time we spend under SIP or other restrictions and we will not "waste" people's limited reserve of sacrifice when infection rates are low and hospital resources are underutilized.

I've bolded my differences.

Also, Trump's plan allowed for differences based on local conditions. I don't think it's reasonable to wait for a reduction when hospitals are already underutilized and the total confirmed cases (not just active cases) is around .3% of the population, although that is based on me assuming that the number of active cases is still somewhere under 1%; but hospital capacity is the bigger deal.

But yes, we're pretty close on what we thnk is going to happen. I think the difference is that I don't think anything is going to change in the near enough future that would justify locking down. In other words:
- We're not going to get the cases low enough to contact trace and that would have limited effectiveness anyway b/c of the potential spread before symptoms appear; just too many opportunities for a super spreader incident to overwhelm our tracing capabilities.
- the virus isn't going to just go away
- we're not going to have a treatment breakthrough that is going to change the game in the next few weeks
- we're not going to have a vaccine at any time soon enough that we could wait it out until it gets here


If any of those four assumptions are wrong, then the logic for opening up are wrong. The most questionable one is I think number 3; we could determine a treatment that significantly reduces mortality. I just don't think that's likely enough to justify the risk. And the mortality rate is already low enough that it makes it hard to determine an effective treatment.

 

[SheltonChoked]

I have no idea how you concluded this. I think you can figure out why they’re paid much less over there, but it’s not my problem. I’d rather support workers here than there.

You told me it was due to Taxes...

So do you want to tell me it is something else now?

Or are you sticking with "taxes"...

 

[L4Dawg]

Do you read this out loud before you hit post?

We might have to shutdown in the future, so we might as well shut down now?

That is bass ackwards. It'd be one thing if shutting down now prevented shutting down in the future. But it doesn't. Eventually we are going to open up and this is either going to spread, maybe to the point that we should shut down, in which case we just delayed the inevitable and made sure we would have too little cooperation for a shutdown like approach to be as effective as it shoud, or it's not going to spread, in which case we are inflicting a lot of harm for nothing.

If it's going to spread, we need it to spread as quickly as we can without overwhelming our healthcare system. Shutting down as this burns through over the next 18 months to 2 years or until we get a vaccine would be a cure worse than the disease. But of course, that's not what's going to happen.

People are going to get sick of it and they're going to carry on as normal and if it spreads quickly enough to overrun our hospitals, they're not going to shut down again until it's really bad. And because of the lag between infection and serious symptoms, we really need them to heed warnings before it is visibly bad. But they aren't going to do that, and understandably so, because our public health officials have proven to have no realistic plan and no ability to weigh trade-offs and have essentially cried wolf for something like 75% of the country's land mass. If we had shut down for two weeks or three weeks and come out and said something to the effect of, "this is still serious and the shutdown was a good idea because of the uncertainty, but it looks like a lot of localities don't yet have the levels of infection to justify a shut down, so we are opening up all but the worst spots. This is not over though and everybody needs to be vigilant as they go about their lives, and people at high risk or that are in regular close contact with people that are high risk need to voluntarily social distance. And although people don't need to panic, they need to pay attention to updates as sthere may be instances where localities do need to shut down again to prevent their healthcare system from being overrun and it will be important that everybody cooperates if and when those instances arise."

Something like that could have kept trust in the people making decisions and maybe resulted in people being compliant if a second shutdown was called for. Continuing the shutdown with no plan just ruined their credibility while chasing a policy that any one that has any understanding of the public would know was not workable for more than a month or two. It was a giant 17 up.

You might want to read it before YOU post. I specifically said that was in reference to wearing masks in the post.

 

[SheltonChoked]

All those examples are indoors in closed settings. Odds of spreading are greatly reduced by being outdoors, especially day games, which will become the norm. Masks are going to be required as well.
But panic on..

Are they? Cite?

Odds of spreading increase with time and with breath rate. Talking, yelling, etc increases the the odds as well.

How close do you sit to other people and for how long at a game? Is there any talking? Yelling?

Again. ONE PERSON. Infected 1,160. In 2 hours.

It's not a panic, it's being educated on the risk.

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

I've bolded my differences.

Also, Trump's plan allowed for differences based on local conditions. I don't think it's reasonable to wait for a reduction when hospitals are already underutilized and the total confirmed cases (not just active cases) is around .3% of the population, although that is based on me assuming that the number of active cases is still somewhere under 1%; but hospital capacity is the bigger deal.

But yes, we're pretty close on what we thnk is going to happen. I think the difference is that I don't think anything is going to change in the near enough future that would justify locking down. In other words:
- We're not going to get the cases low enough to contact trace and that would have limited effectiveness anyway b/c of the potential spread before symptoms appear; just too many opportunities for a super spreader incident to overwhelm our tracing capabilities.
- the virus isn't going to just go away
- we're not going to have a treatment breakthrough that is going to change the game in the next few weeks
- we're not going to have a vaccine at any time soon enough that we could wait it out until it gets here


If any of those four assumptions are wrong, then the logic for opening up are wrong. The most questionable one is I think number 3; we could determine a treatment that significantly reduces mortality. I just don't think that's likely enough to justify the risk. And the mortality rate is already low enough that it makes it hard to determine an effective treatment.

Agreed that local conditions has not been paid enough attention. Look at GA. Almost all the cases are in Atlanta. Yet we all have been looking at state data and statewide orders.

Spread WILL lead to hospitals being overwhelmed. It's just math.

I'm not following the rest. Nothing will happen that will justify having locked down, or that will justify locking down again?

The thing that gets me is when numbers start going back up, how do we know when to call it and reimpose SIP? Goes to your #7. I don't think you are giving proper weight to the lag times involved and the lack of quality data. I predict the guvs will all stare at each other until one goes first. And by then it will be too late, hospitals will be overwhelmed, and we will be far worse off than if we waited. Businesses need customers too, and no one is going to want to go anywhere throughout the nation if there's a NYC-level crisis in the news somewhere. We get one shot to credibly tell consumers it's safe. We're blowing it.

ETA: I guess I'm saying We have the wiggle room to open up some, and we should, but the idiots out there are blowing us past our wiggle room, and officials should respond to that. Send a strong signal that selfish, uneconomic social behavior will be followed by tougher rules. Open the beaches and idiots pack them? Close them. Idiot refused to wear a mask somewhere that required one? Close the business for a day for cleaning. Send that message, and we have the wiggle room to open up.