Covid-19 in OKC (coronavirus)

[Bill Robertson]

But the report only shows like 5 new hospitalizations. So how did it jump? Were people already in the hospital?

I don’t know. The front page of the OKDH site often has one number, the EOR has another and if you start digging through the other data on the site you come up with another. For instance on 5-18 to 5-19 the main page showed 5 new hospitalizations but the EOR went from 167 the day before to 209. I just stick to the numbers on the EOR because my understanding is they are “corrected”.

[Canoe]

Unfortunately, there are quite a few folks that think freedom means you can do whatever you want.

noun: freedom
the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.

Given the definition above I can see how people may get the impression that freedom means you can do whatever you want. As Adults and Citizens we limit OURSELVES for the good of the community. The GOVERMENT does not limit us. Even if they could limit our freedom by force it would take to.much time and effort to enforce. The individual puts limits on themselves. This is the balance between FREEDOM and living in a Society.

[Pete]

^

Along those lines, I read today that air travel is less than 10% what it was before virus.

And there are virtually no restrictions on domestic air travel, it's all been voluntary.

[Brad72]

Well, like I've expressed, and continue to be reminded, this is not a friendly place for people to share and discuss their opinion if it differs from the bully majority on this thread. Well, at least not unless they want to lower themselves to trying to belittle others to make their point seem more valid. I'll just have to take solace in the reality that when I do go out in public, the majority of people, including our own governmental leaders whom we elected, seem to share in my logic, my interpretation of the numbers and my level of concern for the realistic threat of the virus to myself and those around me. To me it's a difference of opinion that I can find scientific validation for just as easily as the other side can to validate their own opinion. But I don't have to call you, directly or indirectly, ignorant or make it seem as if you're callous to the welfare of others simply to express my view.

[Pete]

the majority of people, including our own governmental leaders whom we elected, seem to share in my logic

SOME government leaders that YOU chose to follow.

There are very many who wear masks and have different opinions but you don't agree with their politics so you disregard that.

And of course apolitical scientists who know more about this than anyone are almost unanimous on this issue.

It's fair to challenge those who disregard the advice and clear direction from scientists and merely follow the lead of politicians they agreed with long before this transpired, because that has nothing to do with logic.

[d-usa]

Surveillance testing we have conducted has consistently shown that the vast majority of positive cases have zero symptoms.

[Canoe]

Well, like I've expressed, and continue to be reminded, this is not a friendly place for people to share and discuss their opinion if it differs from the bully majority on this thread. Well, at least not unless they want to lower themselves to trying to belittle others to make their point seem more valid. I'll just have to take solace in the reality that when I do go out in public, the majority of people, including our own governmental leaders whom we elected, seem to share in my logic, my interpretation of the numbers and my level of concern for the realistic threat of the virus to myself and those around me. To me it's a difference of opinion that I can find scientific validation for just as easily as the other side can to validate their own opinion. But I don't have to call you, directly or indirectly, ignorant or make it seem as if you're callous to the welfare of others simply to express my view.

If this was directed at me it wasn't my intention to bully in the least.

In my opinion your approach of measuring the risks with your own natural (God given) intelligence and taking the measures that you think are best for yourself and the community is exactly how you should act in a western style democracy. Thank you for doing the right thing.

[Bill Robertson]

The following type of thing really irks me. I was on Facebook looking at pictures of my mud covered year old grandson. Next up was an ad for, supposedly, a NY Times article saying that the CDC has decided that COVID isn’t transmitted by touching contaminated surfaces, only by airborne virus. So I went to the CDC website and just as I thought. No such statement. And no, I don’t ever trust FB for news but I’m sure many do.

[Brad72]

SOME government leaders that YOU chose to follow.

There are very many who wear masks and have different opinions but you don't agree with their politics so you disregard that.

And of course apolitical scientists who know more about this than anyone are almost unanimous on this issue.

It's fair to challenge those who disregard the advice and clear direction from scientists and merely follow the lead of politicians they agreed with long before this transpired, because that has nothing to do with logic.

Well, can't I turn that around and say almost exactly the same to you? You are choosing who to follow and you are choosing who to disregard. And yet, you qualify your statement by proclaiming mine as illogical. I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Hopefully you'll agree you are simply as bias to your own opinion as I am to mine. But I don't feel a need to bully you into seeing my perspective.

[Brad72]

If this was directed at me it wasn't my intention to bully in the least.

In my opinion your approach of measuring the risks with your own natural (God given) intelligence and taking the measures that you think are best for yourself and the community is exactly how you should act in a western style democracy. Thank you for doing the right thing.

Thank you very much. Now, to me, that was a very sensible and mature way to address a comment you may or may not agree with. Someone could apply that same principle and come out with a completely opposite conclusion. Say, to wear a mask at all times. I would respect that decision as much as I'd expect them to respect my decision. Thank you again. It's not always a debate. Sometimes it's simply an acknowledgement that we are all entitled to our own opinion.

[Pete]

Well, can't I turn that around and say almost exactly the same to you? You are choosing who to follow and you are choosing who to disregard. And yet, you qualify your statement by proclaiming mine as illogical. I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Hopefully you'll agree you are simply as bias to your own opinion as I am to mine. But I don't feel a need to bully you into seeing my perspective.

No, because I follow science not politics when it comes to scientific matters. And there is almost no debate on these matters in respected scientific quarters.

That's a huge difference.

[AP]

noun: freedom
the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.

Given the definition above I can see how people may get the impression that freedom means you can do whatever you want. As Adults and Citizens we limit OURSELVES for the good of the community. The GOVERMENT does not limit us. Even if they could limit our freedom by force it would take to.much time and effort to enforce. The individual puts limits on themselves. This is the balance between FREEDOM and living in a Society.

So no laws apply to you because you are free? There are many things citizens would do if the government didn’t limit it. People associate what freedoms we do have with the definition you provided above meaning we have freedom to do whatever we want whenever we want. The constitution does not grant absolute freedom to citizens. There are defined freedoms. The whole point of defining freedoms is so that they can limit other things. The government has the absolute ability to force you to wear a mask if they want. The same way they force you to wear clothes in public.

[AP]

^

Along those lines, I read today that air travel is less than 10% what it was before virus.

And there are virtually no restrictions on domestic air travel, it's all been voluntary.

His argument is that the government has no ability to limit your freedom, only citizens can limit themselves, which is absolutely, unequivocally false. How many people would carry a gun on the plane if the government did not take that freedom away from them?

[Pete]

Every U.S. citizen is subject to literally thousands of laws, at the federal state and city level.

And they are constantly changing and being added and everyone has to abide or there are also specific consequences.

[Pete]

His argument is that the government has no ability to limit your freedom, only citizens can limit themselves, which is absolutely, unequivocally false. How many people would carry a gun on the plane if the government did not take that freedom away from them?

Wasn't directly addressing that point, just that a huge amount of people are limiting themselves voluntarily.

[Bill Robertson]

noun: freedom
the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.

Given the definition above I can see how people may get the impression that freedom means you can do whatever you want. As Adults and Citizens we limit OURSELVES for the good of the community. The GOVERMENT does not limit us. Even if they could limit our freedom by force it would take to.much time and effort to enforce. The individual puts limits on themselves. This is the balance between FREEDOM and living in a Society.

This pretty much. If Freedom truly, literally, meant you can do whatever you want whenever you want then there would be no lines drawn. Murder, assault, etc., etc., etc., would be ok because Freedom with no limits would allow you to do what you want when you want. I will never believe that’s what the creators of our Free country and Constitution had in mind. I believe in being Free as long as my expressions of Freedom don’t do others, or could do others harm. Thinking of others is becoming a lost character trait of our society and that is extremely sad.

[Canoe]

So no laws apply to you because you are free? There are many things citizens would do if the government didn’t limit it. People associate what freedoms we do have with the definition you provided above meaning we have freedom to do whatever we want whenever we want. The constitution does not grant absolute freedom to citizens. There are defined freedoms. The whole point of defining freedoms is so that they can limit other things. The government has the absolute ability to force you to wear a mask if they want. The same way they force you to wear clothes in public.

Natural Rights vs Legal Rights

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natu...d_legal_rights

Do you believe in natural Rights and if so how do you define them?

[Pete]

I believe in being Free as long as my expressions of Freedom don’t do others, or could do others harm. Thinking of others is becoming a lost character trait of our society and that is extremely sad.

Except you can't leave it up to individuals to decide for themselves on many matters which is precisely why we have thousands of laws and corresponding consequences for not following them.

[Canoe]

Except you can't leave it up to individuals to decide for themselves on many matters which is precisely why we have thousands of laws and corresponding consequences for not following them.

When it comes down to it a government could pass a law limiting anything, but it is up to the individual to follow the law. If a law is passed that is unjust or violates your Natural Rights then a moral man should not follow the unjust law.

For example a government could pass a law decreeing that any man named Teo should be shot onsite. Would I be right to shoot any Teos next time I see him? Of course not, because shorting someone because of their name is a violation of their natural Rights.

I need to go to work now, but I am extremely interested to see where my colleagues draw the line between natural Rights and legal rights in the context of society and COVID-19.

[soonerguru]

Well, can't I turn that around and say almost exactly the same to you? You are choosing who to follow and you are choosing who to disregard. And yet, you qualify your statement by proclaiming mine as illogical. I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Hopefully you'll agree you are simply as bias to your own opinion as I am to mine. But I don't feel a need to bully you into seeing my perspective.

You are absolutely entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. Regardless of what politicians are saying, scientists and medical professionals have made it clear that if you are not wearing a mask in public, you are endangering people around you, as it is possible you could be an asymptomatic or presymptomatic carrier of the virus. Understand that when people see you in public they may draw conclusions about you that you don't care about their general welfare.

[catcherinthewry]

You are absolutely entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. Regardless of what politicians are saying, scientists and medical professionals have made it clear that if you are not wearing a mask in public, you are endangering people around you, as it is possible you could be an asymptomatic or presymptomatic carrier of the virus. Understand that when people see you in public they may draw conclusions about you that you don't care about their general welfare.

I totally agree with this and don't see how anyone could say it is a bully opinion unless their definition of a bully opinion is one they don't agree with. The facts are clear on wearing masks and the public benefit.

[TheTravellers]

The following type of thing really irks me. I was on Facebook looking at pictures of my mud covered year old grandson. Next up was an ad for, supposedly, a NY Times article saying that the CDC has decided that COVID isn’t transmitted by touching contaminated surfaces, only by airborne virus. So I went to the CDC website and just as I thought. No such statement. And no, I don’t ever trust FB for news but I’m sure many do.

Well, the CDC *did* come out with new info regarding surface transmission, but it's not "it isn't transmitted that way", you're right, it's more along the lines of "doesn't transmit as easily from surfaces as we thought".

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...es/5235317002/

[Bill Robertson]

Well, the CDC *did* come out with new info regarding surface transmission, but it's not "it isn't transmitted that way", you're right, it's more along the lines of "doesn't transmit as easily from surfaces as we thought".

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...es/5235317002/

Ok. So it was only kinda fake FB news. I’ve always considered myself a solid guy in the common sense department but this virus crap has me tied up in knots.

[OKC Guy]

Well, like I've expressed, and continue to be reminded, this is not a friendly place for people to share and discuss their opinion if it differs from the bully majority on this thread. Well, at least not unless they want to lower themselves to trying to belittle others to make their point seem more valid. I'll just have to take solace in the reality that when I do go out in public, the majority of people, including our own governmental leaders whom we elected, seem to share in my logic, my interpretation of the numbers and my level of concern for the realistic threat of the virus to myself and those around me. To me it's a difference of opinion that I can find scientific validation for just as easily as the other side can to validate their own opinion. But I don't have to call you, directly or indirectly, ignorant or make it seem as if you're callous to the welfare of others simply to express my view.

Agree, and I’m another minority poster here who has to watch words closer than others.

I’d like to comment on the mask wearing. Take the politics out of it and still a majority of people do not wear masks in public. And unless we ask each non wearer their party we have no idea which way they lean. For some reason its assumed only one side wears them and the other doesn’t and I think thats a false assumption. The bigger picture is a majority don’t and that is an important distinction.

[Bill Robertson]

Agree, and I’m another minority poster here who has to watch words closer than others.

I’d like to comment on the mask wearing. Take the politics out of it and still a majority of people do not wear masks in public. And unless we ask each non wearer their party we have no idea which way they lean. For some reason its assumed only one side wears them and the other doesn’t and I think thats a false assumption. The bigger picture is a majority don’t and that is an important distinction.

And again, that majority, regardless of the reasoning, simply doesn’t care about others and that’s the saddest thing about what our society has become.