It is difficult, frankly, to view people refusing to join the rest of us in attempting to contain the COVID-19 coronavirus as anything but spoiled brats. The vast majority of them appear to be young.

At least reports from our country, such as those of college students packing beaches for spring break, are relatively passive rejections of warnings about the disease. More disturbing and infuriating news is coming from abroad.

In Germany, young adults “hold ‘corona parties’ and cough toward older people,” The Associated Press has reported.

Other hard-hit countries report widespread failure to follow the disease containment rules — though not to the extent seen in Germany. Both France and Spain are having to use police to enforce bans on large gatherings.

As we have seen here, the situation sometimes requires government to intervene. Florida’s governor had to formally close the state’s beaches to clear them of partying college students.

COVID-19 is dangerous primarily to older people with underlying medical conditions. But, as public health officials point out, younger adults are far from immune. The disease strikes them, too.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo noted that half his state’s COVID-19 cases are in the 18-49 age group. “You’re not Superman and you’re not Superwoman,” he warned young people.

Containing COVID-19 is an imperative if we are to avoid the enormous death toll experienced in other countries. In Italy, where public health officials were slow to act, the death toll passed 5,500 during the weekend.

We hope all Americans — and it needs to be emphasized not all the scoffers are college-age — will get the message and stop engaging in risky behavior. If that does not occur, however, local, state and federal officials should not hesitate to use law enforcement to make social distancing stick.

(30) comments

newshound

I’m hopeful that a vaccine will be developed for this new strain of coronavirus and an inoculation will protect you. But until then, i’m afraid One’s own immune system is the only true defense going forward as the “social distancing” can’t last forever—or how can one get a much-needed haircut?? [crying]

Donald

A prediction: Because of the frenzy of handwashing (Matthew 27:24), “social distancing” (Matthew 16:23), and cancelling large scale get-togethers and business closings (Matthew 21:12) over the Wuhan virus there will be a lot fewer flu deaths this season. Oh, and STDs will be down as well.

Donald

Mr. Whalebroc, I would suggest that to the public at large the vision of the Wuhan virus is one of a hazy undefined cloud of uncertainty. At a minimum the data that should be supplied would be a demographic breakdown of those most susceptible to death from this virus based on sex, race, ethnicity and age bracket, and underlying conditions. Such information would not only lift much of the uncertainty, but also give people a knowledgeable approach to protecting themselves and others in more susceptible groups without undue fear.

When we read or hear that x number of “Americans” have died from the Wuhan virus or that y number of “Italians” have died, it is almost certainly a lie and useless as information (have no non-Americans or non-Italians died in America or Italy?).

How useful would it be to identify the highest risk groups so individuals within those groups will know they should take extra precautions and their friends and co-workers would know to be extra careful not to pass on germs to them? Would it not provide an employer with the knowledge she could use in being more liberal with sick leave for the most susceptible group while still maintaining a workforce of less susceptible people thus being less damaging to the economy?

And, to answer the question as to why this information is not being made available I would suggest that to make it available or give it any legitimacy would be to call into doubt – or actually refute – the false narrative built up over decades that race is nothing more than a social construct without any basis in biology or genetic distinction. This would have a far reaching impact on ‘Progressive’, far leftist, and corporate agendas. Given that the corporate media is populated with a couple of generations of unquestioning people who were and are steeped in this false narrative it is probably best not to hold one’s breath in anticipation of useful and potentially life-saving data being willingly brought forth. It would cost them (and any scientist/academic who broached the subject) their livelihoods.

Driller

Whalebroc. The one downplaying the "Virus" and what is going on is the voice that counts, The Presidents. You and your family also have good health.

LVW

Here ya go, boys. Happy Easter.

Donald

Okay. Now, that was funny.[beam]

LVW

The frustrating thing about this is if we had fast tests available -- if we knew right now who was infected and who wasn't -- we could end this thing immediately, instead of resorting to this primitive "social distancing" stuff.

newshound

There are 219 virus species (in 2012)that are known to be able to infect humans. The first of these to be discovered was yellow fever virus in 1901, and three to four new species are still being found every year.

The unavoidable conclusion is that we must anticipate the emergence and/or discovery of more new human viruses in the coming years and decades. By no means all of these will pose a serious risk to public health but, if the recent past is a reliable guide to the immediate future, it is very likely that some will.

Firstly, emerging viruses are everyone's problem: the ease with which viruses can disperse, potentially worldwide within days, coupled with the very wide geographical distribution of emergence events, means that a coordinated, global surveillance network is essential if we are to ensure rapid detection of novel viruses. This immediately highlights the enormous national and regional differences in detection capacity, with the vast majority of suitable facilities located in Europe or North America. Secondly, reporting of unusual disease events is patchy, even once detected, reflecting both governance issues and lack of incentives. Thirdly, we need to consider extending the surveillance effort to other mammal populations as well as humans, because these are the most likely source of new human viruses.

Improving the situation will require both political will and considerable investment in infrastructure, human capacity and new tools.

— From a 2012 Report by .. Centre for Immunity, Infection and Evolution, University of Edinburgh, Ashworth Laboratories, Kings Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, UK

Whalebroc

Your govt regs and agencies again contributed to that one. To be fair though, tests can show neg one day and the person could get it a day later.

And...Who gets tested? How often? What is the cost? , etc, etc.

LVW

Whaler: I'm just saying that "social distancing" is something that is so primitive, it could have been used during the Black Death. One would think we've progressed since then.

Whalebroc

LV, you’re right. Even the name is hinkie. Social distancing.....hah, Somebody at CDC or WHO probably got a promotion for coming up with that progressive sounding phrase.

Programmer

If people would follow God and do what He says in all ways it would go much better for all.

But don’t eat the meat of any of the following birds: eagles, vultures, falcons, kites, ravens, ostriches, owls, sea gulls, hawks, pelicans, ospreys, cormorants, storks, herons, and hoopoes. You must not eat bats. Deuteronomy 14:12-18.

Please open your Bible and read it and take the time to understand it. A good place to start would be the Gospel of John.

DANT

Why do they keep not telling us the facts? How many people who have died from this virus were healthy young or old folks, how many were already at risk because of other health issues? There is absolutely no reason this info can't be put out there unless of course you don't want the general public to know. Something smells fishy with this whole thing and the steps being taken are way out of proportion to other health crisis we've been through...which is more costly for most people? Losing everything you've worked for, losing your job and having to start over, or maybe getting sick for a few days?

Neal Frankel

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e2.htm

"As of March 16, a total of 4,226 COVID-19 cases had been reported in the United States, with reports increasing to 500 or more cases per day beginning March 14 (Figure 1). Among 2,449 patients with known age, 6% were aged =85, 25% were aged 65–84 years, 18% each were aged 55–64 years and 45–54 years, and 29% were aged 20–44 years (Figure 2). Only 5% of cases occurred in persons aged 0–19 years.

Among 508 (12%) patients known to have been hospitalized, 9% were aged =85 years, start highlight36%end highlight were aged 65–84 years, 17% were aged 55–64 years, 18% were 45–54 years, and 20% were aged 20–44 years. Less than 1% of hospitalizations were among persons aged =19 years (Figure 2). The percentage of persons hospitalized increased with age, from 2%–3% among persons aged start highlight=19end highlight years, to =31% among adults aged =85 years. (Table).

Among 121 patients known to have been admitted to an ICU, 7% of cases were reported among adults =85 years, 46% among adults aged 65–84 years, 36% among adults aged 45–64 years, and 12% among adults aged 20–44 years (Figure 2). No ICU admissions were reported among persons aged =19 years. Percentages of ICU admissions were lowest among adults aged 20–44 years (2%–4%) and highest among adults aged 75–84 years (11%–31%) (Table).

Among 44 cases with known outcome, 15 (34%) deaths were reported among adults aged =85 years, 20 (46%) among adults aged 65–84 years, and nine (20%) among adults aged 20–64 years. Case-fatality percentages increased with increasing age, from no deaths reported among persons aged =19 years to highest percentages (10%–27%) among adults aged =85 years (Table) (Figure 2)."

Whalebroc

Neal, thanks for the post. This is a classic example of selective information or selective quantifying. Why is there such a large gap in age groupings at the lower end. They use ages 20-44 for a category. That is a 100+% difference in ages.....basically from an adolescent to middle aged folks. Why don’t they break it down by decades, 0-9, 10-19, 20-29, etc?? I think I know why....but don’t have the same resources that they do.

LVW

If 20-44 weren't its own category, you wouldn't have anything to build another conspiracy theory on. The CDC is doing you a favor, sponsored by the MSM and probably Hilary Clinton, of course.

DANT

Good post Whalebroc....a lot of unanswered questions that should be some of the first things put out there!

Whalebroc

LV, why when someone keeps pointing out the fallacies of many of your gov’t cronies, and agencies, do you jump to conspiracy theory? When facts are around, no need for a theory, my friend.

At least the CDC is worried about a real epidemic this time, instead of chasing ghosts like the vaping “boogeyman”. Perhaps if they would have put resources to use for a valid cause, it would be less strain on us with this virus.

LVW

Whaler: The facts are there; you just don't like the way they are presented, and it seems to me that you are claiming there is a nefarious reason why they are presented that way. But maybe I'm overreacting.

Whalebroc

“Even keeled” LV, I know you would never over react. But, you of all people should have extra radar out for how numbers and facts are presented. Again, IF you were truly wanting to find out who at risk people are, would you advise putting adolescents in with middle age people? Ok, on 3, shake your head East to west.

LVW

Whaler: Rather than ages, I want to know locations. We have the country shut down from coast to coast, and it seems to me that we could avoid that if we had reasonable data by location (relevant to my testing post above). God help me, I sound like Trump.

Whalebroc

We’ll Wheels, ask and ye shall receive. That’s already provided on the weather channel app. It gives the numbers of cases and deaths for a city, county, or state.

DANT

That helps some (thanks for posting) but it still doesn't tell us if the deaths were patients who were already at risk from other health issues....

Driller

Dant, thanks for finally being honest and wondering why Con Don and his Administration is holding back these numbers. You seem more concerned about the economy, the losing of everything, your losing a job or getting sick for a few days. , Sure these are important things in our life but what about the possibility of losing your Grandparents, Parents, children and losing your own life. If being sick for a couple of days was all that happens, that would be uncomfortable but we would be OK. Think off all the lives that have already been lost and we are just starting this pandemic. Explain to me how much all the reasons you have given, amount to anything, if you are DEAD.

Whalebroc

Cuomo’s comment hardly relates to the issue. Including up to 49 yr olds in his assertion is misleading at best and disingenuous at worst. And the 20’s and 30 year olds are smart enough to realize the scare tactics. Plus, at their age, they think anyone in their late 30’s is over the hill.

There is a fine line between pointing out the facts of the virus and fearmongering. There is way too much virtue signaling and end of the world scenarios being put out there from the media .....again. Should we expect anything less?

This is no defense of “coughing towards others” or similar idiocy. However, the constant intentional gross exaggerations and scares, ie.”we will be the next Italy”, as even cited here, are far from useful. Italy’s death rate is almost 10 times worse than ours, for various reasons.

Perhaps a little less emphasis on the fearmongering and virtue signaling, and treating the younger people as adults (which we don’t do in other areas either) would work better.

prodigalson

Good post Whalebroc. I agree.

Driller

Whalebroc, The 20 and 30 year olds are really smart and continue to act like nothing is wrong. You along with them are dead wrong!! Why is telling people that gathering in groups will harm them fearmongering? Even Con Don is saying the same thing, the CDC experts are saying. More and more information shows younger people are more able to catch the disease than first thought, but that is not the worst part, passing the disease on to someone else that could be very devastated by the disease is the worst part. If you were the mayor and your city has an epidemic, would you give a worst case scenario or would you be like Con Don and the Republicans and deny this is going to be a major problem. Wake up man and realize there is near 100,000 cases in this country and nearly 1,500 deaths, and going up. Quit blaming the Media, they are only telling you the numbers the government is giving out, and showing health care professionals that are scared and need more PPE. Listen to Dr. Fauci an expert and not Con Don a B.S. machine.

Whalebroc

Driller, lots of points here, a couple valid ones. If a younger individual is healthy and not around older people, there is little use for them to shackle into their house for 6 weeks. They could be back working instead.

IF, and that is a huge IF, the media only presented the facts and news (as you suggested), that would be great! But, they are trying to overstate, and exaggerate any angle they can to sell papers, and ads. They also can’t leave the progressive liberal politics out of it.

You mention Dr Fauci.....the same one who has stated he is very satisfied with how Trump has handled this? One thing to remember, “experts”are to be consulted and are not the policy makers. They are to be consulted for advice and then real life decisions have to be made. They are sometimes right but can and are often times wrong. This is due to presenting worst case scenarios. Great Example, the “expert” in the U.K. who admitted his “model” showed a large probability of 500,000 dead in the U.K.

He now says it won’t come close.

Wrong models????....gee where have we heard that before?? Cough, cough, global warming.

Remember, we need the govt solution to not be worse than the problem. Have you thought, even for a second, what happens next year, when the next flu strain hits?

It’s a fine line, but I think we are on or over that already.

Driller

Whalebroc, Dr. Fauci says he is satisfied with Con Don's handling of this problem , but when asked about the Con Don's misstatements he said, what do you want me to do knock him off the stage. Yes, the experts are often wrong but then again, many times they are right. I remember only a few weeks ago, a none expert said he could have been a Dr., said there are only15 cases in the country and soon there will be 0, and the experts said it will get very much worse. Who was right? This is an example that the experts were right. Again, as I have said you can claim global warming is not true, but like me, you won't see if is true or not, but your Grandchildren and Great Grand Children will. I hope for their sake you are right. I have thought about next year, if we have a vaccine for this "Virus" by then, we will probably be ready for the next flu, but you are wrong in calling this a flu, it's a "Virus". If we have another "Virus" we could be in the same shape we are in now, depending on the "Virus". But if we get a new flu , we will probably have a vaccine for it. Hopefully,we won't have to worry about it next year.

Whalebroc

Driller, not sure what one person underplaying the virus has to do with the majority of “experts” on this topic. There are always extremes out there; an estimated10% of the population doesn’t think the moon landing occurred.

Also, I did not call the virus (Wuhan), a flu. I do see how you could read it that way though. I was referring to the next flu strain we would get the next year. The flu will probably kill more people than this virus, and they could start using those numbers to justify further restrictions. The virus has the higher mortality risk, but the flu affects more people, even world wide. Once emboldened, the govt takeover of rights rarely dissipates. That’s where I am looking ahead to that scary potential.

Good health to you and your family.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.