Will DeWine shut Ohio down again?

LICKING COUNTY FAN

Well-known member
Numbers are creeping upward. First new cases, which could see more hospitalizations, with more deaths the end result.

Not looking for an argument.
A simple yes or no, with maybe a reasoning behind it.
 

bob22

Well-known member
Full shutdown- no, unless it really blows up late fall/winter.

steps back in certain sectors - likely
 

lotr10

Well-known member
Numbers are creeping upward. First new cases, which could see more hospitalizations, with more deaths the end result.

Not looking for an argument.
A simple yes or no, with maybe a reasoning behind it.
I don't think so but then again DeWine has done some stuff I wouldn't have thought he would have done.

IMO only a significant uptick in deaths would trigger him to shut things back down. The fact is that deaths are dropping in the face of more cases. The 7 day average deaths per day nationally was 912 from 5/31 - 6/6 and it has dropped to 594 the week of 6/21 - 6/27.

If DeWine shuts the state down again then he will be facing major money shortfalls in his budget. Major.
 

lotr10

Well-known member
What makes you think that he understands that? I hope you're right but that's not how I interpret it.
I agree. At least publicly DeWine seems to be fixated on cases. I'm hoping that privately he rates deaths a lot higher then cases. In some ways this might be a smart political move by the Governor. He knows that if he doesn't talk about increased cases as being a big problem the media will turn on him. The fact that DeWine is a bit of a media darling probably makes his job easier.
 

SMARTY22

Well-known member
Will the current Health Director advise Dictator DeWine that a 2nd shut down is necessary? Dictator DeWine’s 1st choice for HD was a disaster, will see if Dewines 2nd choice brings any improvement in this area.
 

USMC6789

Active member
I agree. At least publicly DeWine seems to be fixated on cases. I'm hoping that privately he rates deaths a lot higher then cases. In some ways this might be a smart political move by the Governor. He knows that if he doesn't talk about increased cases as being a big problem the media will turn on him. The fact that DeWine is a bit of a media darling probably makes his job easier.
He’s right to be fixated on cases over deaths. If you wait to see how many die to make a decision it’ll be too late to stop the train. Deaths lag cases not the other way around. What on earth would make you think that deaths are the way to go on deciding when to stop and start.
 

wolves82

Well-known member
He’s right to be fixated on cases over deaths. If you wait to see how many die to make a decision it’ll be too late to stop the train. Deaths lag cases not the other way around. What on earth would make you think that deaths are the way to go on deciding when to stop and start.
Exactly right. Cases lead to inundated ICU units, which lead to deaths. Can't just watch the number of deaths before taking action. Having said that, another shutdown would be crippling, so we need to keep as much open as possible. I think Dewine understands that.

As for the mask debate, it isn't hard to wear a mask, and mandate will be forthcoming. If anyone cares about avoiding a shutdown, they would be wearing masks in public already. Only hard-headed nitwits refuse. My favorite quote I've seen: "Masks are not a political debate, they are an IQ test."
 

USMC6789

Active member
Exactly right. Cases lead to inundated ICU units, which lead to deaths. Can't just watch the number of deaths before taking action. Having said that, another shutdown would be crippling, so we need to keep as much open as possible. I think Dewine understands that.

As for the mask debate, it isn't hard to wear a mask, and mandate will be forthcoming. If anyone cares about avoiding a shutdown, they would be wearing masks in public already. Only hard-headed nitwits refuse. My favorite quote I've seen: "Masks are not a political debate, they are an IQ test."
It seems that so much of the southern outbreaks are coming from bars. We would be wise to either shut them now or start hard enforcement on non compliant bars. You start yanking a few liquor licenses or issuing large fines and owners will get the idea in a hurry.

I have no idea why the resistance to masking is so fierce. The only thing that makes sense to me is that this is the ultimate out come of the tea party.
 

lotr10

Well-known member
We will be in masks in less than a week and bars will be shut down by July 6th. Bars should probably be shut down now based on the evidence we’ve seen in the states that are breaking out.
Are you basing this on deaths? ICU capacity? Hospitalizations or just caseload?

With Deaths continuing to go down fast and hospitals/ICU not being overwhelmed in 99.9% of the country I have a hard time figuring out how they would justify drastic actions like this.

We should continue to reopen and flow resources to "hot spots" as they appear. And a hot spot is NOT a place with a lot of new cases. A hot spot is a place where the hospitals & ICU are being overwhelmed.
 

lotr10

Well-known member
It seems that so much of the southern outbreaks are coming from bars. We would be wise to either shut them now or start hard enforcement on non compliant bars. You start yanking a few liquor licenses or issuing large fines and owners will get the idea in a hurry.

I have no idea why the resistance to masking is so fierce. The only thing that makes sense to me is that this is the ultimate out come of the tea party.
For me it stems from a couple of things:

1) Mask wearing by the general public is not very effective at stopping the spread of outbreaks like this. The best studies I've seen were conducted in hospital settings and looked at flu transmission. In these studies proper (disposable surgical masks) masks were properly worn by experienced health care workers conducting examinations in small rooms and examining dozens of infected people for 15 - 20 minutes each. The reduction in flu transmission was about 50%. Certainly demonstrating the efficacy of masks in this situation.

But what about the real world? Fifty % reductions in ideal situations are likley to drop to almost nothing in a real world setting. In the real world the general public mostly interacts with the infected for only a minute or so; in the real world the quality of the masks is all over the place; in the real world masks are often not worn properly and most interactions with other people are outdoors or in much larger indoor spaces then hospital examination rooms. Add this all up and I would be surprised if in the real world masking was 10% as effective as what they saw in the controlled studies.

2) There are rare but very real health risks to wearing masks involving oxygen deprivation. Also should we really assume that people are throwing their "disposable" masks away after one wearing or if using cloth coverings are they properly cleaning them? How many are walking around with the equivalent of plague blankets covering their face? I don't know if you've noticed but I'm starting to see discarded masks showing up as LITTER along the side walk. Care to pick that up to throw away?

3) But the biggest danger to making the general public wear masks is that it maintains the idea that we're living in very dangerous times. If this was a highly contagious version of Ebola it would be warranted. But covid is not virulent enough to warrant that level of concern. It's a problematic virus that is very dangerous to a small group of people. Targeted mitigation is called for not general mitigation.

And there is a cost to creating fear in a population. One is the devastating effects of sustained stress on health. The other is playing out right before our eyes - there are a sizable number of people afraid to go to their doctor. Afraid to go near a hospital for diagnostic procedures. Even worse they're afraid to bring their children in to see the doctor or get vaccinated. And do you blame them? The government is telling them that it's so dangerous out there EVERYONE needs to wear a mask.

4) The only way to repair the economic & public health damage done by the shut down is to get back to normal ASAP. And it's not normal to have the whole population wearing masks. It's abnormal and as long as we maintain an environment of abnormality then we'll be dealing with the collateral damage.
 

USMC6789

Active member
For me it stems from a couple of things:

1) Mask wearing by the general public is not very effective at stopping the spread of outbreaks like this. The best studies I've seen were conducted in hospital settings and looked at flu transmission. In these studies proper (disposable surgical masks) masks were properly worn by experienced health care workers conducting examinations in small rooms and examining dozens of infected people for 15 - 20 minutes each. The reduction in flu transmission was about 50%. Certainly demonstrating the efficacy of masks in this situation.

But what about the real world? Fifty % reductions in ideal situations are likley to drop to almost nothing in a real world setting. In the real world the general public mostly interacts with the infected for only a minute or so; in the real world the quality of the masks is all over the place; in the real world masks are often not worn properly and most interactions with other people are outdoors or in much larger indoor spaces then hospital examination rooms. Add this all up and I would be surprised if in the real world masking was 10% as effective as what they saw in the controlled studies.

2) There are rare but very real health risks to wearing masks involving oxygen deprivation. Also should we really assume that people are throwing their "disposable" masks away after one wearing or if using cloth coverings are they properly cleaning them? How many are walking around with the equivalent of plague blankets covering their face? I don't know if you've noticed but I'm starting to see discarded masks showing up as LITTER along the side walk. Care to pick that up to throw away?

3) But the biggest danger to making the general public wear masks is that it maintains the idea that we're living in very dangerous times. If this was a highly contagious version of Ebola it would be warranted. But covid is not virulent enough to warrant that level of concern. It's a problematic virus that is very dangerous to a small group of people. Targeted mitigation is called for not general mitigation.

And there is a cost to creating fear in a population. One is the devastating effects of sustained stress on health. The other is playing out right before our eyes - there are a sizable number of people afraid to go to their doctor. Afraid to go near a hospital for diagnostic procedures. Even worse they're afraid to bring their children in to see the doctor or get vaccinated. And do you blame them? The government is telling them that it's so dangerous out there EVERYONE needs to wear a mask.

4) The only way to repair the economic & public health damage done by the shut down is to get back to normal ASAP. And it's not normal to have the whole population wearing masks. It's abnormal and as long as we maintain an environment of abnormality then we'll be dealing with the collateral damage.
I see you dodge my other post. Come on LOTR explain to me how using deaths as the determining factor for shutdowns is the best way? Why should we use the absolute last marker to make decisions instead of the first (cases) or even hospitalizations/icu. Educate us oh wise one show us the way!

1. You are basing your decision for coronavirus off studies that looked at mask usage with the influenza virus. You do realize that Influenza isn’t a coronavirus right? I’m absolutely dumbfounded by this.

2. If you point a loaded gun at your head it very very rarely might go off. That doesn’t mean we stop using guns. It’s up to the individual to maintain their own masks. Just like it’s up to the individual to maintain their own clothing and hygiene. Masks on the ground should be punished the same as any other form of littering.

3. I sense much fear in you. There’s over 125K Americans dead from this virus but it’s not virulent enough for you? What’s the number of dead Americans for you to wear a mask? 200k? Is it ok because it’s the elderly? They only had a few years left right? Why should you have to wear a mask to protect anyone else right? Not your responsibility right?

4. Explain to us all how all of us wearing masks would hinder our economic recovery? In fact it would probably enable us to resume spectator sports and much of the entertainment industry. Imagine concerts and festivals once again pumping money into economy.

The bottom line is something I spotted and called you on before. You yourself are scared of masks and can’t push past it. So you’re going to make excuses both plausible and ridiculous to cover that up. That’s on you to get over before Dewine tells you that your going to get over it.
 

eastisbest

Well-known member
For me it stems from a couple of things:

4 yadas
But why in heck would you care if HE wears a mask? MYOB are the operative words for people regards this. hat said, "then stay away from me," but doesn't qualify he'd do the same. People objecting to masks are just control freaks or have an inability to adjust to simple changes in their surroundings. There's no common safety issue here. No infrastructure issue. It's personal choice.

Objecting to mandated masks? That's greyer for sure. A non-essential business should have clear authority on this; wear, don't wear, customer choice.
 

lotr10

Well-known member
I see you dodge my other post. Come on LOTR explain to me how using deaths as the determining factor for shutdowns is the best way? Why should we use the absolute last marker to make decisions instead of the first (cases) or even hospitalizations/icu. Educate us oh wise one show us the way!

1. You are basing your decision for coronavirus off studies that looked at mask usage with the influenza virus. You do realize that Influenza isn’t a coronavirus right? I’m absolutely dumbfounded by this.

2. If you point a loaded gun at your head it very very rarely might go off. That doesn’t mean we stop using guns. It’s up to the individual to maintain their own masks. Just like it’s up to the individual to maintain their own clothing and hygiene. Masks on the ground should be punished the same as any other form of littering.

3. I sense much fear in you. There’s over 125K Americans dead from this virus but it’s not virulent enough for you? What’s the number of dead Americans for you to wear a mask? 200k? Is it ok because it’s the elderly? They only had a few years left right? Why should you have to wear a mask to protect anyone else right? Not your responsibility right?

4. Explain to us all how all of us wearing masks would hinder our economic recovery? In fact it would probably enable us to resume spectator sports and much of the entertainment industry. Imagine concerts and festivals once again pumping money into economy.

The bottom line is something I spotted and called you on before. You yourself are scared of masks and can’t push past it. So you’re going to make excuses both plausible and ridiculous to cover that up. That’s on you to get over before Dewine tells you that your going to get over it.
No need to be testy oh rude one. Can't we have a serious and polite conversation on this topic?

I'm using deaths as the key marker because of the unreliability of the other two measures. The # of cases is still dependent on how many tests are being run and among what patient groups are tested. Hospitalizations was a good read when hospitals across the country were behaving similarly in only admitting the very sickest covid patients. We now know that admission criteria varies from region to region and even from hospital to hospital.

ICU is a decent measure and this has either held steady or gone down as the country reopens.

As for coronovirus not being the flu you are aware that almost all the suggested remedies and practices being offered up by health departments are things that we learned about in dealing with the flu? In the absence of good studies on the covid, using the flu as a surrogate makes a whole lot of sense.

You seem to ignore the predictable behavior of human beings. This is something you have in common with the public health officials who've been directing us through the pandemic. People throwing used masks on the ground was always going to happen. Punishing them in the rare instances you actually catch someone doing it will not lesson the public health concern this represents.

And for the record contaminated masks are not the same kind of litter as gum wrappers.

I'm very confident I haven't infected anyone. I had the covid the first week in April and strictly self quarantined for 17 days. I continue to maintain strict social distancing and keep my visits to stores to a minimum. And in spite of having the antibodies I take my temperature twice per day. Do you check your temperature daily as a way to monitor your own possibility of infection?

As far as my fear is concerned and reading beyond your emotional outburst in your 3rd bullet point, I have worn masks on several occasions where they were either required or it made sense to wear them (taking a friend to the doctor recently). I have a P95 3M mask and about 45 disposable surgical masks left from the 50 I bought from Amazon in April. I'll be flying in a few weeks and will be wearing a mask in the airport and on the plane.
 
.
Top