Dutch Prime Minister gives a different approach to Corona

[stvdv]

I don't think boris will back down, i think he sees this as getting rid of the burden of elderly and homeless. A great saving on pension and welfare payments.

These were exactly my thoughts, and it took enormous will power to not write these down. So, thank you for sharing
Our Prime Minister Rutte did Business School, so he will know that if the elderly/sick die, it will safe a few billion euros for sure.

I have been thinking, why USA goes on Lock Down. Totally not Trump's idea, being a business man. Why Holland does not go Lock Down.
I think Rutte being single has something to do with it. From Italy it's well known "Family first", so I understand Lock Down.
And I know there are very rich and influential people in America, having families, so that might be the reason for their Lock Down.

Times like these show us a lot how people really are.

 

[stvdv]

Yes, IF. We do not know enough about this virus to make any sweeping policies on 'herd immunity'. It is even possible one could relapse; a nurse who had ebola became sick again after doctors thought she had recovered.

I have read that "relapse" is not just possible, it's quite expected.
Hence I trust most my instinct "total lock down for stvdv" for at least a few month.
I am very fortunate to live in a remote area, but even 8 km from here the first 3 caught the virus already.

I have seen a video from a Dutch woman living in Italy, warning the Dutch for the terror of Corona virus, going in full detail what to do and what not to do. Shoes out, cloth out when entering your house. I was surprised she did not mention to take a shower. Wash your close after having gone out. My God, she had like dozens of tips. Much easier to stay inside then keeping track of all these rules.

 

[Lyndon]

Thank you for your advice.
Last week I have been doing some extra shopping, a few kg of rice and wheat flour and potato flour and tomato paste. So, I easily can stay inside for maybe 2 month now. Which might be the smartest thing to do in my situation (almost 60 years old, with quite a few physical challenges)

I suggest spending a bit more on food you really like as that diet could get so boring you break your quarantine to get out!!

 

[shmogie]

Thank you. That is for sure 'uncharted territory, mistakes will be made'.
It's good to keep vigilant, we as public, because sometimes government might make mistakes.
But this being global now and all are having internet, probably those mistakes will be found out soon.

We are lucky, that we have China and Italy with a lot of experience.
Imagine China, who got it first. Must have been tough for them. I think they did great, taking those extreme steps immediately.

If China had been open and honest about their virus, the rest of the world would be better off right now.

They censored and punished their own doctors for trying to raise the alarm about the bug.

They lied to the world about what was going on, and didn't stop flights from Wuhan (where it began) when they knew the virus was rampant in that population.

They would allow no experts from the rest of the world in to study the Chinese pandemic.

They are now saying that the US somehow infected them with the virus.

They lie about everything, so any data from them on this is worthless.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think this is a steep learning curve even for ‘experts’.
We can only proceed and learn what we learn.

The expectation that ‘they’ know what to do is naive. No one has had enough experience with pandemics of a novel kind to be an expert.

The virus itself isn’t fully understood yet, and it is mutating. The economic and social ramifications are a whole new ball game.

We don’t know diddly.

But we will soon.

The fact that current expert knowledge on coronavirus is lacking doesn't by any means equate it to a layperson's knowledge. They still know what to do or at least know how to give a general outline thereof better than most non-experts.

We have no perfect option at the moment; it's just that following expert guidance is more reasonable and prudent than trying to arrive at a solution via layperson intuition.

 

[Lyndon]

I have read that "relapse" is not just possible, it's quite expected.
Hence I trust most my instinct "total lock down for stvdv" for at least a few month.
I am very fortunate to live in a remote area, but even 8 km from here the first 3 caught the virus already.

I have seen a video from a Dutch woman living in Italy, warning the Dutch for the terror of Corona virus, going in full detail what to do and what not to do. Shoes out, cloth out when entering your house. I was surprised she did not mention to take a shower. Wash your close after having gone out. My God, she had like dozens of tips. Much easier to stay inside then keeping track of all these rules.

If you keep yourself the only one in your house and don't allow guests, you don't have to worry about virus in your house except when you bring in new supplies, thouroughly wash yourself and don't touch the supplies again for three days, maybe a week if they're plastic

 

[Howard Is]

The fact that current expert knowledge on coronavirus is lacking doesn't by any means equate it to a layperson's knowledge. They still know what to do or at least know how to give a general outline thereof better than most non-experts.

We have no perfect option at the moment; it's just that following expert guidance is more reasonable and prudent than trying to arrive at a solution via layperson intuition.

I totally agree.

 

[Lyndon]

If China had been open and honest about their virus, the rest of the world would be better off right now.

They censored and punished their own doctors for trying to raise the alarm about the bug.

They lied to the world about what was going on, and didn't stop flights from Wuhan (where it began) when they knew the virus was rampant in that population.

They would allow no experts from the rest of the world in to study the Chinese pandemic.

They are now saying that the US somehow infected them with the virus.

They lie about everything, so any data from them on this is worthless.

Sounds like exactly the disinformation campaign the USA is now waging about the scope of their own coronavirus emergency, Australia published statistics of flown in COVID 19 patients, guess which country the most of them came from?? USA by about twice as much as the next country China.

 

[Shad]

From economical POV I can understand, a small country like Holland has less buffer, so maybe this is the best economical (and also hospital wise) option for Holland. Time will tell, probably soon, seeing what happened in Italy and China, when even under 'full lock down', still Italy having ca. 350 death daily in the last 7 days.

Few nations are capable of being self-sufficient in good times let alone now.

 

[Revoltingest]

If China had been open and honest about their virus, the rest of the world would be better off right now.

They censored and punished their own doctors for trying to raise the alarm about the bug.

They lied to the world about what was going on, and didn't stop flights from Wuhan (where it began) when they knew the virus was rampant in that population.

They would allow no experts from the rest of the world in to study the Chinese pandemic.

They are now saying that the US somehow infected them with the virus.

They lie about everything, so any data from them on this is worthless.

I notice that Trump is calling it the "Chinese virus".
That's gotta cause some hostility.

The 2nd option in the poll...
"Let virus run unchecked (option 2 in article)"
....is the worst.
The infections would peak rapidly. This would overload
the health care system far more than keeping the rate down.
It would maximize the death total.

 

[Revoltingest]

I just heard Trump's reason for calling it the "Chinese virus",
ie, it's cuz China blamed the US Army for unleashing it in China.
This actually seems to be a reasonable (if unproductive) retaliation.

 

[sun rise]

If China had been open and honest about their virus, the rest of the world would be better off right now.

Maybe some good will come from this after all given how often I'm agreeing with you folk on the right these days.

I just heard Trump's reason for calling it the "Chinese virus",
ie, it's cuz China blamed the US Army for unleashing it in China.
This actually seems to be a reasonable (if unproductive) retaliation.

I'm not bothered by Trump calling it the "Chinese virus". I agree it's unproductive outside of reminding people where it started (true), how China tried to cover it up (true) and how they're trying to blame us for their own screw-up (true).

 

[Howard Is]

I just heard Trump's reason for calling it the "Chinese virus",
ie, it's cuz China blamed the US Army for unleashing it in China.
This actually seems to be a reasonable (if unproductive) retaliation.

A wise fellow once said to me “When you are caught in a wildfire, there is no point looking for the match”.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Bar anyone working in the medical field and having the relevant credentials, no one here is qualified to answer the poll question. I don't see the point in it, nor do I feel I'm qualified to answer it in good conscience.

My only answer right now is, "Whatever the experts such as WHO decide is the wisest approach to follow."

So-called medical and biology "experts" once endorsed eugenics. Would you blindly agree with them then?

 

[Debater Slayer]

So-called medical and biology "experts" once endorsed eugenics. Would you blindly agree with them then?

When I speak of expert opinions, I typically refer to modern scientific consensus. Things are significantly different from the times when eugenics was more popular among some scientists.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

When I speak of expert opinions, I typically refer to modern scientific consensus. Things are significantly different from the times when eugenics was more popular among some scientists.

Fair enough. But who's to say that the scientific consensus of today is correct? Having said that, I agree that medical experts know more than I do, however, I do think it's important to question everything, even decisions made by experts. A society that never questions its "authorities" in the name of "safety" is a society on a slippery slope toward authoritarian rule.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Fair enough. But who's to say that the scientific consensus of today is correct? Having said that, I agree that medical experts know more than I do, however, I do think it's important to question everything, even decisions made by experts. A society that never questions its "authorities" in the name of "safety" is a society on a slippery slope toward authoritarian rule.

Questioning statements and not being blindly accepting of whatever experts say is fine. There is, however, a fine line between blind acceptance and appopriate, reasonable deferment to expert opinion. Finding this line is crucial to healthy skeptical thought, as far as I can see--and it should never be replaced with rejection of expert wisdom or knowledge altogether.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Questioning statements and not being blindly accepting of whatever experts say is fine. There is, however, a fine line between blind acceptance and appopriate, reasonable deferment to expert opinion. Finding this line is crucial to healthy skeptical thought, as far as I can see--and it should never be replaced with rejection of expert wisdom or knowledge altogether.

I agree we should defer to expert opinion in general, unless expert opinion is demonstrably incorrect or obviously immoral and dangerous.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

So-called medical and biology "experts" once endorsed eugenics. Would you blindly agree with them then?

When I speak of expert opinions, I typically refer to modern scientific consensus. Things are significantly different from the times when eugenics was more popular among some scientists.

Worth pointing out that 'herd immunity' via 'let everyone get it and let the weak die' is, in fact, eugenics. That's what that pathway is suggesting. And it's immoral and puerile tunnel-vusioned nonsense which will get a lot of people needlessly killed.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not bothered by Trump calling it the "Chinese virus". I agree it's unproductive outside of reminding people where it started (true), how China tried to cover it up (true) and how they're trying to blame us for their own screw-up (true).

I heard a news type say that calling it the "Chinese virus" is racist.
"Chinese" is not a race.
And "Chinese" is the adjective for the country where it started.
Anti-Trumpers will say anything to defend the commies, & attack Trump, eh.