• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Covid that serious of a danger?

Was the disease deadly enough to warrant the reactions?


  • Total voters
    63
  • This poll will close: .

Moot

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
37,769
Reaction score
13,484
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's more like a hemorrhagic fever? That sounds like more hype.
My symptoms were more like an upper respiratory flu which turned into secondary bacterial pneumonia.
Did you go to the hospital?

You're lucky it didn't turn into a Bradykinin storm....

"....As bradykinin builds up in the body, it dramatically increases vascular permeability. In short, it makes your blood vessels leaky. This aligns with recent clinical data, which increasingly views Covid-19 primarily as a vascular disease, rather than a respiratory one. But Covid-19 still has a massive effect on the lungs. As blood vessels start to leak due to a bradykinin storm, the researchers say, the lungs can fill with fluid. Immune cells also leak out into the lungs, Jacobson’s team found, causing inflammation..."​
 

Felis Leo

Moral clarity is needed
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
6,423
Reaction score
5,908
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm afraid, Benjamin Franklin's often overused quote may be meaningful in this case: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

I feel the country should've practiced "some" protective measures against spreading this disease, not this hodge-podge mess. But have we really purchased a significant amount of security to offset the misery and cost of the long term damage done by the shutdown, social distancing, and other measures?

"You know, putting a national lockdown, stay at home orders, is like house arrest. Other than slavery, which was a different kind of restraint, this is the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history," Bill Barr said.

Though this is uncomparable to slavery, in any fashion, it is becoming an incredible intrusion on our liberties. The big question is, was this disease deadly enough to warrant the reactions? Many think not and many do.
I voted "No" but this is only with the benefit of hindsight. While many of the states overreacted, I think Donald Trump failed to at least try to marshal Federal resources once this disease appeared on his radar. I said many, many months ago that the moment he found out that an easily-spread and deadly coronavirus was on the horizon and could feasibly be spread to the United States, he should have at least tried to replenish our country's depleted Strategic National Stockpile of medical equipment and PPE. More importantly, once the virus hit the United States, he should have gotten on the phone with every single governor of every single state in the Union to coordinate a national response rather than just letting each governor play it by ear.

It may not have helped too much more in the long run, and we may have faced a large number of deaths no matter what. But I think Donald Trump's being seen to be trying to get everyone to work in tandem would have contributed to a greater sense of national unity and solidarity rather than the extraordinary division that the patchwork response to the virus has exacerbated.
 
Last edited:

CharloTexan

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
148
Reaction score
50
Location
Houston, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yeah, one. What about the covid vaccine(s) coming out soon. Kind of poopoo's your whole 2028 scenario?
Someone quoted a 10-year comparison. I corrected his wrong math and extrapolated. I'm not predicting anything. I made two numbers practically comparable.
 

grip

☚ Not Sure ☛
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
23,729
Reaction score
8,993
Location
Fl
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I voted "No" but this is only with the benefit of hindsight. While many of the states overreacted, I think Donald Trump failed to at least try to marshal Federal resources once this disease appeared on his radar. I said many, many months ago that the moment he found out that an easily-spread and deadly coronavirus was on the horizon and could feasibly be spread to the United States, he should have at least tried to replenish our country's depleted Strategic National Stockpile of medical equipment and PPE. More importantly, once the virus hit the United States, he should have gotten on the phone with every single governor of every single state in the Union to coordinate a national response rather than just letting each governor play it by ear.

It may not have helped too much more in the long run, and we may have faced a large number of deaths no matter what. But I think Donald Trump's being seen to be trying to get everyone to work in tandem would have contributed to a greater sense of national unity and solidarity rather than the extraordinary division that the patchwork response to the virus has exacerbated.

Trump dropped the ball for sure. But he also had to weigh a potential epidemic against a more severe panicking than what already happened. A run on the banks and worse one on food and other goods could've left the country far worse off than even earlier preparedness on covid did.
 
Top Bottom