COVID-19 Response: An issue that shouldn't be at all political....yet here we are

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by debo

1. Rephrase your first paragraph. The last sentence should be “Mike Pence should have worn a mask and he didn’t; he deserves to be criticized.

2. LOL

---

hehe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo

I don't have an argument, just an opinion. My opinion is that these producers can take the measures to stop the spread in their plants. Up until several weeks ago, I was in these plants weekly. My crews are there daily. The measures they take to secure our food is crazy and why they can't take similar measures to secure their employees health is even crazier. Have you ever been in a meat processing facility?

---

Knowing what my store does (timer set for 30 minute handwashing, 30 minute high touch point sanitization and encouraging social distancing) as well as constantly adding/changing procedures, it can be a lot. But if you want to stay in business, they have to adapt.

With the strong measures we've taken, we had someone who had Covid-19 in one of our locations. No one else got it. We are on a smaller scale than a meat processing plant, but following what is laid out there by the CDC should help these places, and then there are additional ways to curb the spread of the virus.

And guess what, if I have to pay more because of it the next time price negotiations come up, that's fine with me. I know that big chains like mine have a lot of buying power, and contracts that are extended well into the future.

I know that the restaurant and grocery store supply chains are, for the most part, separate, but do you have any information on when some of the restaurant supply chain could be folded into, or repurposed (for a time) towards grocery stores? Or this might help restaurants if there is a shortage of meat in the stores, both from selling meals or choosing to sell meat in bulk (some of the restaurants in downtown Annapolis are doing this since there aren't any grocery stores there.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

Taking away a MAJOR source of food for the planet will kill a lot of people.

Keep in mind that the reserve pipeline in toilet paper of 2% was exhausted the first day the shelter was started and took weeks to recover, and TP is not perishable like veggies are. Moving people to a vegetable diet will result in mass panic if nothing else, and panic almost always results in some deaths.

---

Well good thing we're not there yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeW-Star

This is spot on. The invisible hand of poverty, or looming poverty, leaves so many without a real choice in so many matters.

If a job reopens that could put them at risk, and they are told they need to go back to work or they will lose their job, what options do they really have?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Growing fruits and vegetables for an entire city obviously.

Still no word as to what Chris Hayes thinks we should do.

130 million people facing starvation by the end of the year- https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u...nturn-n1189326

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThomasTomasz

130 million people facing starvation by the end of the year- https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u...nturn-n1189326

---

Is that more or less than are starving now????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

Well good thing we're not there yet.

---

Indeed. Plus I really do like BBQ.

Big news as far as a treatment goes- https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...-treatment-nyt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

Still no word as to what Chris Hayes thinks we should do.

---

Your not good at inferring things


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThomasTomasz

Big news as far as a treatment goes- https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...-treatment-nyt

---

Trump must have come out against the use of remdesivir.

I must have missed that press conference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThomasTomasz

Big news as far as a treatment goes- https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...-treatment-nyt

---

It's not statistically significant but just running a simple analysis it had to be just a hair above .05.

The number needed to treat (a calculation of how many people would need to be treated by a drug to have the effect over placebo) would be 26.... that means (according to the data) for every 26 people treated by this new drug it will save a life. That's a really poor number needed to treat in normal times... but if we are talking about treating a million... That's 38 thousand saved lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

Is that more or less than are starving now????

---

Read the article.......it says right at the top it's an additional 130 million.

I'm sure a lot of that are in third world countries, who likely rely on countries like the US for aid, aid that won't be coming with problems inside our borders. And on a local level, I'm sure most of your food banks, like the ones around me, are depleted because of the huge need. The chances of them being full again anytime soon isn't going to happen with the current financial climate. They had this same problem with the recession two decades ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by debo

The “such a ****ing Edison” comment on that thread is *chef’s kiss*

---

Yes!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://twitter.com/mchammer/status/...902941184?s=21

****ing wtf

I really hope they have “do not ventilate” tattooed on them.