Lockdown proponents: do you realize that we'd have to continue this for another 5-6 years?

Dingler wrote:

Portland Hobby Jogger wrote:

Few here seem to ever consider a middle ground. It's either "let 'em all die!" or "let's tank the whole capitalist system!". The threat remains but, the system will have to adapt to the new reality. There will be winners and losers like there are in any big change.

We will have to wear masks when out and about and gatherings will need to be smaller. Consumerism will need to be curtailed - no more mindless ambling in large crowded shopping malls and fewer stores will exist. More things will be purchased online for home delivery. We will cook more and eat out far less. Restaurant dining will become an expensive "event" reserved for special occasions not something you do out of laziness or a lack of food in your pantry. Take out and delivery will continue for the masses but, the cost will go up.

More office work will be done remotely. This will gut commercial real estate, mass transit, auto sales, and gasoline consumption. On the plus side, the air will get cleaner and many office parks and towers will be converted into housing adding more affordable supply in overpriced markets. People will also become healthier with the reduction in commuting stress and the time lost to sitting in traffic breathing noxious fumes.

Economies will be come more locally based. With many department stores and national chains failing, the opportunity for local entrepreneurs will be enhanced. People will still want to shop at stores for something unique that can't be ordered from Walmart, Costco, or Amazon. This is an opportunity for boutique retailers, mom and pops, and young innovators to enter the market with original products and services.

International travel will again become the province of the monied classes. Flights will get expensive and countries will start requiring visas to enter. Overall, this will help to minimize the spread of pathogens internationally while keeping cultural and environmental treasures from being overrun by mindless tourists more interested in Instagram likes than learning and cultural exchange.

Since this is a running board, I speculate that races will have to change . There will likely be more knowledge gained over the next year or two to assess the risks to larger gatherings of people. Will there be less road racing events? Yes. RDs will go under and corporate sponsors will be much harder to find. Will the remaining events change? Yes. I think that large marathons will require qualifiers to get in much like Boston always has. This will distill the fields down to fitter athletes with less risk of exposure/deadly consequences. Smaller races will shift dates to warmer weather months with less illness (avoiding the usual flu season) and may utilize wave starts or age-group starts with appropriate time in between to spread fields for greater safety. Things like bubble and color runs will cease to exist. I also think that a return to locally produced, minimalist racing will occur featuring "boring" courses in parks, mall parking lots, and office parks - no gimmicks, shirts, medals the size of dinner plates, bands every mile, etc. Pay $10 and race for personal glory on a certified 5K loop for a time, a ribbon, and bragging rights.

We will not have to live under house arrest for 5-6 years. We will all have to adapt to the new world that we live in.

This is the most intelligent post I read here in a month. Well done. The lockdown will not last this way for months, but the world is also never going back to the way it was.

JohnMD1022 wrote:

Lysol wrote:

Go drink a bottle of your Trump Lysol.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/bUvdrNxQ60c/hqdefault.jpg

Try reading the transcript:

From Daily Wire:

"Bryan (DHS) said, “Our most striking observation to date is the powerful effect that solar light appears to have on killing the virus, both surfaces and in the air. We’ve seen a similar effect with both temperature and humidity as well, where increasing the temperature and humidity or both is generally less favorable to the virus,”

Daily Wire continues:

"Now, it is in this context that President then made the following statement:

"So, I’m (Trump) going to ask Bill a question that probably some of you are thinking of if you’re totally into that world, which I find to be very interesting. So, supposing when we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you’re going to test that too. Sounds interesting.

"And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful.

"Moments later, ABC News’ Jonathan Karl asked Bryan, “The president mentioned the idea of a cleaner, bleach and isopropyl alcohol emerging. There’s no scenario where that could be injected into a person, is there?”

"He responded: “No, I’m here to talk about the finds that we had in the study. We don’t do that within that lab at our labs.”

The president then added “It wouldn’t be through injections, you’re talking about almost a cleaning and sterilization of an area. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work, but it certainly has a big effect if it’s on a stationary object.”

"Trump then discussed the possibility of whether UV rays might be able to kill the virus if it was on a person’s skin or on their hands.

“If they’re outside, right, and their hands are exposed to the sun, will that kill it as though it were a piece of metal or something else?” He asked.

“I don’t want to say it will at the same rate because it’s a non-porous surface, but what we do know is that we looked at the worst case scenario and the virus lives longer on non-porous surfaces,” Bryan responded. “So porous surfaces, it doesn’t live quite as long, so in theory what you said is correct.”

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

[quote]blatter wrote:

1) we don't yet know that people who have been infected have immunity Media fear mongering, there is no evidence that some immunity isn't created. There would have been cases of people getting the disease multiple times if this was the case. How long immunity lasts is unknown but it is absurd to think there is none.

2) we have not identified any effective treatments or treatment protocol Unlikely to be a breakthrough of significance until a vaccine is made. What we have is probably it for the near future.

3) while the old/sick/compromised make up the majority of deaths, it's not every one. Kids, young people, middle aged people have all died from this virus. The numbers don't support this is a severe threat to the young and middle aged. The damage from the shutdown to this group far exceeds the health risk.

4) those old/sick/compromised don't deserve to die early because you "did the math!". We can't protect everyone from everything. There is a point where the damage done by the measures do more good then bad to society.

5) we are not in lockdown. Lockdown means you don't go out of your house. If we did that, we'd be done by summer.

The whole point of social distancing is the slow down the spread. This allows science and medicine to catch up. At some point we'll have better data. We will understand the virus better. We'll know if heard immunity is possible. We might have better treatments even if we don't have a cure - which will allow more people to survive.

Stop being so self centered. This is a once in several lifetimes effect. Wait you mean we should not be self-centered to protect the most selfish generation from this threat. The generation that has built up the national debt, created a divided political system that left us with a dunce in chief, allowed social security to become unsustainable to protect their retirement checks, and most significantly destroyed the environment for generations to come. Now you want us to not be selfish and sacrifice for that generation. My generation and generations after will be left to solve the problems the greatest generation and baby boomers left the world with.

And this is not a once in a lifetime event. It's this today, a few years from now it will be something else. Maybe that generation should accept their mortality and finally sacrifice something for the good of future generations.[/quote]

two incels above wrote:

No races until 2022? wrote:

So let's say that there are a thousand people who want to run that 5K. If one person starts every minute, people are going to be running from 7 AM until midnight. How is that going to work? If the interval between runners decreases much further, you're just going to end up with crowds like before (albeit smaller).

Maybe you and all the other lockdown proponents should do something. If you want me to stay home and not work, you should be paying my food, housing, health insurance, utilities, and all other non-entertainment costs until the lockdown is lifted. Are you up for that? If not, let me get back to work.

I’ll let you in on something I’m not in charge of that decision.

I’m just pointing out that you’re all talk and no action, full of sh!t really,

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

[quote]blatter wrote:

1) we don't yet know that people who have been infected have immunity Media fear mongering, there is no evidence that some immunity isn't created. There would have been cases of people getting the disease multiple times if this was the case. How long immunity lasts is unknown but it is absurd to think there is none."

I did not say there was no immunity. Only that we don't know yet. We know the virus mutates quickly. It appears to not mutate at the critical juncture as quickly. There may well be decent immunity. There may well be little to poor immunity. We don't know.

2) we have not identified any effective treatments or treatment protocol Unlikely to be a breakthrough of significance until a vaccine is made. What we have is probably it for the near future.

3) while the old/sick/compromised make up the majority of deaths, it's not every one. Kids, young people, middle aged people have all died from this virus. The numbers don't support this is a severe threat to the young and middle aged. The damage from the shutdown to this group far exceeds the health risk.

4) those old/sick/compromised don't deserve to die early because you "did the math!". We can't protect everyone from everything. There is a point where the damage done by the measures do more good then bad to society.

5) we are not in lockdown. Lockdown means you don't go out of your house. If we did that, we'd be done by summer.

The whole point of social distancing is the slow down the spread. This allows science and medicine to catch up. At some point we'll have better data. We will understand the virus better. We'll know if heard immunity is possible. We might have better treatments even if we don't have a cure - which will allow more people to survive.

Stop being so self centered. This is a once in several lifetimes effect. Wait you mean we should not be self-centered to protect the most selfish generation from this threat. The generation that has built up the national debt, created a divided political system that left us with a dunce in chief, allowed social security to become unsustainable to protect their retirement checks, and most significantly destroyed the environment for generations to come. Now you want us to not be selfish and sacrifice for that generation. My generation and generations after will be left to solve the problems the greatest generation and baby boomers left the world with.

And this is not a once in a lifetime event. It's this today, a few years from now it will be something else. Maybe that generation should accept their mortality and finally sacrifice something for the good of future generations.[/quote]

roscoe. wrote:

1ub2run wrote:

Humans do not decide here. Sweden and Georgia will learn that lesson.

The virus decides.

Which means it’s up to science. China has 2 vaccines in stage 2/3. USA has 10 in pipeline. We will start manufacturing during summer not knowing if they work. Meaning..

We will have ‘compassionate use’ vaccines in fall. That will take the fear off and we will start back. Spring 2021 for most of USA population to be vaccinated and able to run races.

Disagree, when all countries come out of lockdown they will be doing what Sweden has done the whole time. The difference is that Sweden has a massive head start on immunity and only have to take care of the vulnerable, whereas the US, UK etc, well I hate to think really. People are rationalising based on this virus still being in the containment stage, it isn’t and we need to sadly accept it.