Posted by GWRising  6/25/2020 10:04 am | #21 |
Gwmayhem wrote:
We've managed to veer off track, certainly from the poll and even from Bill Maher's commentary which is what prompted this discussion. I recognize that Maher was giving his opinion and by no means was he trying to play the role of someone in power. Nevertheless, his opinions are undoubtedly going to be meaningful to some of his viewers, so his words should be thoughtful. IMO, his words were insensitive. He was telling a percentage of the population that they were at less risk than others so they should therefore be willing to take the risks. To his credit, he exempted those with underlying conditions and the like. Nevertheless, I am extremely critical of his opinion. In this free country of ours, all adults should maintain the right to make individual decisions like this for themselves. Young adults should not be made to feel coerced or pressured into living their lives in a manner that makes them feel scared or uncomfortable. I know several people who have been infected but have not died and based on what I have heard, I would not wish this disease on my worst enemy. And, even if the mortality rate among young adults remains at .1% (which is dubious considering the uptick in new cases among this age group), how are we supposed to reconcile any deaths based on a sense of obligation to stimulate the economy? How many parents, grandparents, and others may become infected as a result of contact/exposure to the infected millennial? Maher's speech appeared to be an attempt to shame a less vulnerable portion of the population to get off their asses and accept some serious risks. Sorry but I can't see how anyone can be cool with this.
Nobody said they were "cool" with any of this. But let me ask you this. Are you cool with the increased suicides and drug dependency the stay at home orders have caused? Are you cool with people lining up at food pantries because they can no longer afford basic groceries? Are you cool with children not receiving childhood vaccines or folks missing needed medical evaluations or treatments because doctors offices are closed? Are you cool with the coming higher divorce rates caused by the pandemic economic and mental health effects? Are you cool with business owners losing their life savings because they can't open their businesses or conduct business as necessary? Are you cool with the coming commercial real estate depression? Are you cool with the likely hyperinflation that is going to ensue with every dollar the government is printing? Are you cool with what these stay at home orders are doing to children in terms of education and development?
You see there are a whole host of negative effects that aren't COVID-19. Yes, COVID-19 is terrible if you get it and suffer serious symptoms. But the vast majority of people don't. Absent a cure, a vaccine or COVID-19 disappearing on its own very soon, we are going to have to have these very tough balancing conversations. I would note that these same conversations were had during the Spanish Flu pandemic (1918-20), Asian Flu (1957-58), and the Hong Kong Flu (1968-70). These pandemics were more deadly worldwide than COVID-19 so far,
It is not just as simple as put on a mask, stay home (or social distance) and all will be fine. It never was. Everyone may not be in the same size boat as you to ride out the storm.
Last edited by GWRising (6/25/2020 10:08 am)
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/25/2020 10:34 am | #22 |
GWRising, so are you in agreement with Bill Maher's opinion that millennials without underlying conditions should essentially proceed with their lives as if Covid-19 does not exist? Because that's what I am referring to, Bill Maher using his platform to give what I felt was an insensitive opinion.
Of course I am not cool with all of the serious non-Covid ramifications you pointed out. And, nobody is suggesting that there are any simple solutions to any of this. So again I'll ask: are you in agreement with Bill Maher's solution to help stimulate the economy? If so, that's fine. We can agree to disagree. Wouldn't exactly be the first time. 
|
Posted by GWRising 6/25/2020 12:38 pm | #23 |
GWRising, so are you in agreement with Bill Maher's opinion that millennials without underlying conditions should essentially proceed with their lives as if Covid-19 does not exist? Because that's what I am referring to, Bill Maher using his platform to give what I felt was an insensitive opinion.
Of course I am not cool with all of the serious non-Covid ramifications you pointed out. And, nobody is suggesting that there are any simple solutions to any of this. So again I'll ask: are you in agreement with Bill Maher's solution to help stimulate the economy? If so, that's fine. We can agree to disagree. Wouldn't exactly be the first time.
I'd hate to agree with Maher on most things. However, I don't think it's a simple yes or no answer - it's more nuanced. Absent a cure or vaccine, I think we will get to the point soon (by Fall) when based on statistics that may well become the answer. Was he premature in thought? Perhaps. Was he flat out wrong for saying what many including some medical professionals have been thinking about? No.
Posted by jf  Online!6/25/2020 1:41 pm | #24 |
Not comfortable talking here about issues non-GW basketball related,but this hugely affects GW basketball.
Was going to add talking about controversial issues, but don't really understand how things like science in general and wearing a mask, which people even knew to do 100 years ago is controversial, but sadly it is.
Saw the Bill Maher disappointing and dangerous comment live, but he probably doesn't even have the scientific and medical credentials of the Doctor Scholl's or even Sholl's cafeteria.
And Maher bravely made his statement from the safety of his Hollywood area home, where his show is now broadcast from and he receives deliveries of everything from food to pot. Every time people are urged to do things that can spread the virus, our extremely slim hopes of seeing GW basketball in person, slide toward none.
Also don't understand how, if we already printed money to pay for it anyway as GW Rising said correctly, we can't afford the economic costs of trying to slow down the effect of the virus, particularly since it will cost the economy more if more people become significantly ill.
But again, this particular venue comes down to GW basketball. In the many radical changes that this has forced upon people, was hoping to see a GW game this year. Even if often painful in its own way. GW basketball is an escape from the regular world. Don't believe that will happen because it may not be an option and not worth the risk for most here. Colleges as planning to shut down at Thanksgiving, as Dr. Mike, who has some important personal insight on this, points out.
Just saw Bowdoin College pres on CNBC and they are having really big changes--no fall athletics, only freshman, temperature checked daily, everyone on campus tested twice a week. Only single rooms. Now this is hardly GW in terms of location, nor would it probably work to have Thurston Hall as single rooms only (though many may have dreamed of that, particularly those in the room of 6s). Nor are Bowdoin athletics comparable at all to even us. But it does provide food for thought as how universities will handle this--and what will happen if the virus hits universities mid-semester.
Think we may start out with the idea that there can be limited attendance. And social distancing, unfortunately, is rarely a problem with GW basketball. But there are only a few entrances and communal bathrooms. Can we sit safely next to the people we've had tickets with or near for years who are not members of our households?
There will be a second wave, at least according to the experts. Hope not, but it seems likely. And compounding this, we haven't gotten past our first wave. It is increasing in other parts of the country and we we are scheduled to play games in a lot of different states and locations.
It's folly to say that young people are not seriously affected because many have been, even though proportionally less. Still a significant amount of needless deaths and severe lifetime consequences. Who wants our younger generations to be the canaries in the coal mines?
There is a possibility of playing games without fans with regular testing. Hard to see the NCAA giving up its March Madness cash cow for the second time and it was a shame to see Dayton's great No. 1 hopes extinguished, even though it was of course, necessary.
If this had been handled properly from the beginning, instead of sadly becoming a political football and outlet for bizarre grandstanding on scientific issues not only by leaders but individuals, we might have been in a situation where could return to GW basketball. This would have been great contribution to our sanity (or insanity as a Colonial fan) as we could personally indulge in our passion.
But the age demographics of the GW season ticketholder and the current trendlines work against it for many people, especially here. Maybe they will come up with something about testing players and we can see the games on the Internet/TV. That might be the best we can hope for.
Hopefully, in this thread, we can keep it polite and as centered on arguments whether we will have GW basketball as possible.
Losing the chance to see GW basketball not even a blip on the sacrifice scale of human tragedy and everyday heroics. It is a very small thing, and yet another manifestation of the current disturbing situation.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/25/2020 2:52 pm | #25 |
I hear what you are saying jf. But I do want to respond what you are saying about "science". There seems to be this notion that the "science" here is settled. It is not. There is still far more that we don't know about this virus, who is most at risk and why, and the most likely methods of transmission, than we do know. If that wasn't the case, we'd already have this under control. While some look to our elected leaders to solve this, they have been influenced by some science and in some cases some bad science because so much is unknown. Did Cuomo send COVID-19 positive patients back to nursing homes because he came up with the idea or because his "science" people told him to do that? Did Trump really believe in February that this was not going to be a problem or was he influenced by Fauci telling Americans just a couple of weeks before that this was nothing we really needed to worry about? Was testing a political or scientific failure as thousands of tests were contaminated in the early days and not usable? We were told by WHO that airborne transmission was not a risk, it was some of the risk and now the primary risk. There are just so many things that already happened that turned out to be a problem that it is not hard to understand some skepticism over the "science".
The point of all that is that people throw science around like it is established static thing. We are evolving daily in our scientific understanding of COVID-19. One day we will look back and realize there was so much we didn't know and that resulted in some poor decision-making by our elected leaders.
|
Posted by 22ndandF 6/25/2020 3:51 pm | #26 |
GWRising, thank you for expressing your point of view. While I don't see how you (and a lot of people who agree with you) can come to certain conclusions about the science being unsettled, at least as it relates to ways to dramatically minimize the spread, I do respect that you have considered many other points of view and believe you are presenting what you consider logical.
I wish you peace and good health in your journey toward obtaining more facts, proof and, truth. Between now and then, I hope you'll join me in doing whatever you can bring yourself to do in order to make life safer and happier for our great GW players, their families, and our fellow citizens.
Last edited by 22ndandF (6/25/2020 3:52 pm)
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/25/2020 3:56 pm | #27 |
For the record, Fauci did say twice in January that Covid-19 was not something Americans needed to worry about...RIGHT NOW. He also said that Covid-19 was an evolving situation, something that had to be looked at every day, and pointed out that the situation could change. That was in January. By February, Dr. Fauci's tune had changed quite a bit because the virus had begun spreading in the U.S. If Trump had been influenced by Dr. Fauci's remarks in January, he should have done an about face in February. He didn't because this deathly virus was bad for his reelection prospects. So he called it a hoax. He said it would fade away. Said warm weather would eradicate it. Strongly recommended on many occasions that anyone infected should take a medication that ended up nearly killing a high school classmate of mine who did take it.
It's more than funny, GWRising, that you would rightfully acknowledge that our scientific understanding of Covid-19 does change over time and in practically the same breath, question whether Trump's judgment was negatively impacted by Fauci IN JANUARY. Having a president who has not evolved, who defiantly refuses to evolve, who sees wearing masks as a sign of weakness, and who so blatantly disrespects and disregards virtually any and every health and safety protocol that is being recommended by health officials is why things are so terrible right now in the U.S. I don't blame Trump for the virus entering the U.S. It's his absurd reactions, attitudes, and behavior ever since that have made things so much worse. The man only cares about being reelected and literally nothing else.
|
Posted by Hugh 6/25/2020 4:05 pm | #28 |
Just listen to the damn experts giving recommendations based on what's known at the time. They spend their lives studying this stuff, and people think they know more than experts based on what they see come across their Facebook timelines. Yes, scientific understanding is evolving, but that doesn't mean don't trust or listen to the experts. They're the ones who know best how to interpret the data and give actionable recommendations based on what is known at a given time.
Fauci never said it's nothing to worry about. He said there's no reason to change behavior, at the point when evidence of community spread was low. Since then, we've learned just how much asymptomatic transmission has contributed to the pandemic, which makes critical the importance of social distancing, wearing a mask, and robust testing scaled to the population. But the administration's gross negligence and incompetence, and the president's utter lack of caring about anyone other than himself, means this is going to last longer than it otherwise would and there is going to be incalculable additional suffering. All this talk about the trade-off about opening the economy versus containing the virus is pointless. The economy doesn't open UNTIL the virus is contained. I don't understand why that's so difficult to comprehend. If, say, the president shuts things down one week earlier, two weeks earlier, comes up with a real plan to contain the spread other than tweeting that cases will be at 0 by next week, not only are lives saved, but there is less impact on the economy and things can get relatively closer to "opening" sooner. But he's just not smart enough, and doesn't care enough, to think strategically about these things. Other countries are starting to get through this, while we're setting records right now for cases. It's not just a coincidence or bad luck.
|
Posted by Cutis 6/26/2020 6:31 am | #29 |
In great agreement with Hugh’s insightful post. One point , a poster stated there is no proof that masks are effective in stopping the transmission of Covid-19. This is absolutely false . One recent study out of The University Of Washington predicted that there would be 30,000 less cases if masks were worn in a specific region. Other studies, TNTC, show similar data. Wear masks, stop transmission of this disease. A fact. Some masks are more effective than others. The N 95 mask is the gold standard. No masks are useless. Returning to the poll question, I believe that several schools that announced that they will open in the fall, will thereafter shortly find students who test positive and will receive pressure from parents and potential law suits to close down. Basketball this season, I truly doubt it.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/26/2020 9:51 am | #30 |
Cutis, I assume you are referring to me. I did not say masks do not work. I said there is no definitive proof that they do. The study you cite is not evidence for that ... it is a predictive model based on estimates of deaths (which by the way has a range) which also includes social distancing and hand washing practices so it is hard to distill out the effects of the mask alone versus those other practices. Plus, I would caution you that this particular UW group has made very wrong predictions before about deaths before both high and low. I am not criticizing them just saying this is further evidence that there is a lot more that we don't know than we do know.
Again, I am not anti-mask and in fact wear them everywhere. But it is not as crazy as some in the media would lead you to believe to think otherwise currently and that was my point.
There are studies that suggests that masks do not reduce the spread of viruses like COVID-19.
Please read the science cited in the below article:
https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy
Now, it is true that most of the studies looked at face mask use in health care, not community, settings. And they were observational, not the gold standard of science, a randomized controlled trial of COVID, which would obviously be very unethical to conduct in the midst of a pandemic given the potential for death and serious illness.
So the answer is we really don't really know for sure - there is evidence pro and con - and that is all I was saying. I come down on the side that if we don't know err on the side of caution. Others may take a different view. I may disagree but I don't think they are bat shit crazy to question it.
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/26/2020 11:18 am | #31 |
No definitive proof? What you're missing is that there does not need to be definitive proof. Why would anyone concern themselves with distilling out the effects of a mask relative to social distancing and/or hand washing? Do them all!!!! If lifelong epidemiologists and health and safety experts are urging us to do these things, why would anyone be questioning them? Because this is akin to taking away individual freedom? Stop it. What this is akin to is saving lives. And if you're not willing to conclude this, then I'm fine using the language of a predictive model. It's doing the most likely things we can be doing to help save lives and prevent the spread of the disease. Why on earth should anyone be against this? Or in your words, question it?
|
Posted by Hugh 6/26/2020 11:45 am | #32 |
Cmon, you're holding up one phd saying masks don't work, compared to 99% of other public health experts saying they do, including the CDC. Now is not the time to wait for 'definitive' (RCT) proof, but if you need it, we can wait a few years because the U.S. is providing a very nice natural control group of non-masks wearers, compared to the rest of the world. I disagree with you, anyone questioning recommendations from public health experts during a global pandemic are batshit crazy.
|
Posted by 22ndandF 6/26/2020 11:49 am | #33 |
Cutis, I assume you are referring to me. I did not say masks do not work. I said there is no definitive proof that they do. The study you cite is not evidence for that ... it is a predictive model based on estimates of deaths (which by the way has a range) which also includes social distancing and hand washing practices so it is hard to distill out the effects of the mask alone versus those other practices. Plus, I would caution you that this particular UW group has made very wrong predictions before about deaths before both high and low. I am not criticizing them just saying this is further evidence that there is a lot more that we don't know than we do know.
Again, I am not anti-mask and in fact wear them everywhere. But it is not as crazy as some in the media would lead you to believe to think otherwise currently and that was my point.
There are studies that suggests that masks do not reduce the spread of viruses like COVID-19.
Please read the science cited in the below article:
https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy
Now, it is true that most of the studies looked at face mask use in health care, not community, settings. And they were observational, not the gold standard of science, a randomized controlled trial of COVID, which would obviously be very unethical to conduct in the midst of a pandemic given the potential for death and serious illness.
So the answer is we really don't really know for sure - there is evidence pro and con - and that is all I was saying. I come down on the side that if we don't know err on the side of caution. Others may take a different view. I may disagree but I don't think they are bat shit crazy to question it.
GWRising, I am fascinated by your posts on this subject. I have a very simple question for you. If you have any parents that are still alive, or if you have a significant other or any children, would you let a surgeon perform an operation on any of them without a mask?
|
Posted by GWRising 6/26/2020 12:17 pm | #34 |
Cmon, you're holding up one phd saying masks don't work, compared to 99% of other public health experts saying they do, including the CDC. Now is not the time to wait for 'definitive' (RCT) proof, but if you need it, we can wait a few years because the U.S. is providing a very nice natural control group of non-masks wearers, compared to the rest of the world. I disagree with you, anyone questioning recommendations from public health experts during a global pandemic are batshit crazy.
Hugh how many times have the public health experts been wrong on COVID-19? Remember, no human to human transmission? No threat to ordinary Americans? 2.2 million could die? Should I go on? Because I can give you a list of so-called "expert" statements that turned out wrong that would make your head spin. That's why there is little trust in some quarters with respect to the "experts". Their track record has been horrendous. Doesn't make them wrong on this but who should have a high degree of confidence that in 2 months they won't come back with a different completely opposite recommendation. If you can't acknowledge that, there is nothing I can say to you.
It's not one phd - he just organized the data and reached his own conclusions. I said read the underlying studies all done pre-pandemic. .
|
Posted by GWRising 6/26/2020 12:24 pm | #35 |
The issue with this conversation is equating risk (life) to someone else's life. Not good. Best to speak in terms of your life; you decide on the risk and accept the consequences, but do not impose your level of risk and tolerance on what actions someone else should do.
Personally, my sympathy quota for the many (states, governors and citizens) who have ignored the warnings is used up. Of course the problem with this, is that the people who ignore the warnings, also risk infecting others. And that is not acceptable.
Read Tom Boswell's article in the Washington Post on team work. From my lens, I do not see many Americans willing to sacrifice for the greater good. Actually, quite selfish.
What about the Governors like Cuomo and Murphy who sent patients back to nursing homes where 43% of the fatalities were generated - any sympathy for them? According to Cuomo "experts" told him to do that.
How about California where they have had the strictest rules and cases are now rising significantly again?
|
Posted by GWRising 6/26/2020 12:30 pm | #36 |
Cutis, I assume you are referring to me. I did not say masks do not work. I said there is no definitive proof that they do. The study you cite is not evidence for that ... it is a predictive model based on estimates of deaths (which by the way has a range) which also includes social distancing and hand washing practices so it is hard to distill out the effects of the mask alone versus those other practices. Plus, I would caution you that this particular UW group has made very wrong predictions before about deaths before both high and low. I am not criticizing them just saying this is further evidence that there is a lot more that we don't know than we do know.
Again, I am not anti-mask and in fact wear them everywhere. But it is not as crazy as some in the media would lead you to believe to think otherwise currently and that was my point.
There are studies that suggests that masks do not reduce the spread of viruses like COVID-19.
Please read the science cited in the below article:
https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy
Now, it is true that most of the studies looked at face mask use in health care, not community, settings. And they were observational, not the gold standard of science, a randomized controlled trial of COVID, which would obviously be very unethical to conduct in the midst of a pandemic given the potential for death and serious illness.
So the answer is we really don't really know for sure - there is evidence pro and con - and that is all I was saying. I come down on the side that if we don't know err on the side of caution. Others may take a different view. I may disagree but I don't think they are bat shit crazy to question it.
GWRising, I am fascinated by your posts on this subject. I have a very simple question for you. If you have any parents that are still alive, or if you have a significant other or any children, would you let a surgeon perform an operation on any of them without a mask?
Apples to oranges comparison. A surgical room needs to be as sterile as possible for obvious reasons.But even with masks there are often post-procedure infections. No one not even those who adhere to strict social distancing and masks will have or require as sterile an environment.
Last edited by GWRising (6/26/2020 2:00 pm)
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/26/2020 2:26 pm | #37 |
GWRising, if you had had any credibility whatsoever on this subject, I would say it's all but shot by now. You just claimed that the experts suggested that 2.2 million could die from this to illustrate the point that the experts have been wrong about this.
So here's what really happened...Trump asked the experts (I believe Dr. Fauci) how many Americans would die from this if "we" (his administration) had done absolutely nothing about this. Trump was trying to prove a point that the administration had taken steps to slow the virus (two months too late but still), and that millions would end up dying if the administration hadn't done anything.
Of course, doing absolutely nothing could never have been considered a realistic option. There isn't a single country in the world impacted by Covid-19 who did absolutely nothing about it. And of course had Trump acted when he should have, tens of thousands of American lives would likely have been saved.
And of course, Trump used the 2.2 million figure to continually praise how well he and his administration were doing. He repeatedly said that over 2 million would be dead had we not done anything. A completely misleading and useless comment.
Sadly, this is what your side seems to do. You parse words and take statements out of context, to the point where your statements are deceptive at best and outright lies at worst. Fauci was not wrong in saying 2.2 million under the context in which he was asked. This does not make him wrong because we will never know what the real number would have been had we done absolutely nothing because doing absolutely nothing was never plausible. You claimed that Fauci told Americans that Covid-19 was nothing to worry about but what he really said is that there was nothing to worry about right now, but that the situation was evolving and we should continue to pay attention to what was happening. Not to mention that this was said in January, he changed his thinking soon thereafter, but Trump would not adjust his thinking until April at the earliest (and even these changes were not nearly enough nor backed cobnsistently). Nevertheless, you'll stick to the story that Fauci said there was nothing to worry about as if he was saying this in February, March, April, May or today.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/26/2020 2:46 pm | #38 |
Gwmayhem do you only watch CNN? If so, I can see why you are so uneducated on the subject. The 2.2 million was not Trump's number or Fauci's. So you are flat wrong about what really happened. So wrong you should hide in shame on this topic.
The 2.2. million figure came from an Imperial College study from the UK.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
Of course, the study was later determined to have "software" errors and was later deemed to be incorrect.
https://analyticsindiamag.com/the-most-devastating-software-mistake-of-all-time-why-is-the-imperial-model-under-criticism/
As for Fauci, here is what he said ...on February 17th!!!! Not January as you claimed.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/02/17/nih-disease-official-anthony-fauci-risk-of-coronavirus-in-u-s-is-minuscule-skip-mask-and-wash-hands/4787209002/
Sadly this is what your side seems to do ... it just knows so much that isn't so.
|
Posted by porter71 6/26/2020 2:53 pm | #39 |
What amazes me is that there are people who act like we know nothing about how to stop the spread of the virus. It's such an American thing, cause if you look at the rest of the developed work, particularly Europe, Japan and Korea, they seem to have figured it out. If you compare US and EU stats on the virus, cases rose at roughly the same rate to start, then the EU dropped while the US leveled off, then rose again. Individuals wearing masks in public and social distancing, in combination with access to testing and contact tracing of infected individuals. That is how you stop the outbreak. We did little of that, and what we did do, we did poorly. At this point in time, if you don't see what the solution was to the outbreak, it's because you're actively are trying not to. Its willful ignorance due to extreme partisanship, and its why we we're in the mess we're in.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/26/2020 3:36 pm | #40 |
What amazes me is that there are people who act like we know nothing about how to stop the spread of the virus. It's such an American thing, cause if you look at the rest of the developed work, particularly Europe, Japan and Korea, they seem to have figured it out. If you compare US and EU stats on the virus, cases rose at roughly the same rate to start, then the EU dropped while the US leveled off, then rose again. Individuals wearing masks in public and social distancing, in combination with access to testing and contact tracing of infected individuals. That is how you stop the outbreak. We did little of that, and what we did do, we did poorly. At this point in time, if you don't see what the solution was to the outbreak, it's because you're actively are trying not to. Its willful ignorance due to extreme partisanship, and its why we we're in the mess we're in.
We are in the mess we are in for a number of reasons not just partisanship.
Here are just a few ...
We have lost trust in our government institutions over a long period of time not just since 2016.
We have experts contradicting each other and contradicting themselves often in the same week.
We were woefully unprepared for a pandemic of this magnitude both medically and economically for many years.
We have hyper-partisan media twisting narratives instead of reporting facts. The media is no longer trusted to be honest or informative.
We have divides in this country that are significant ... racial, religious, economic, rural versus cities
We have lost our way as a country. This didn't happen in 2016 it happened way before. 2016 was just a reaction to it.
Those systemic problems have all been revealed in this pandemic. We won't get well until we fix what ills us - all of it.
Last edited by GWRising (6/26/2020 3:36 pm)
