Jackson Jambalaya

As a non-Hodgkins lymphoma patient in remission and scheduled for the annual CTscan in May, I must make a decision to either come out of seclusion and enter Forrest General for the scan or stay in my rural Shangrila.
Is that a Hobson/Hodgkins choice?
I'm scart!

Hobson's Choice gives one option. You have two.

The CT scan would reveal whatever the case is and the fact of that will be what it will be with or without the scan.

Leaving your safe space presents certain risks. Not having the scan presents none.

So, there appears a risk to have the scan but none to not have it. Well...other than angst and worry.

It is truly sad that you post such an excellent report by Dr. Osterholm and garner so few comments. Does it reflect your readers' intelligence that when a thought-provoking, intelligent scientist makes strong projections, your audience takes a pass?

This should be required listing for anyone wanting to make a comment on this blog. It should also be required listening for anyone (NAACP, are you listening?) for anyone wanting to make comments about health disparities.

Listened to the entire interview. We have no choice but to sacrifice hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people in order to save the country. If you don't want violence then the lockdown foolishness must end.

People don't listen to hour long podcasts for the most part around here.

Does it reflect your readers' intelligence ...

No, but your comment does reflect your pomposity.

@11:02, some of us want the violence. Some of us have been preparing for years for the next big crash. Those that have prepared will inherit the planet.

Dr. Osterholm is part of a chorus of those who have varying perspectives based on their prior roles in the many specialties associated with epidemiology. His focus has been primarily on public health and bio-terrorism.

It was a good interview and I have nothing to dispute, but warn that those who specialize do not spend nearly enough time communicating with others whose specialties are different but could crucially overlap.

Picking one expert and ignoring what others have to contribute is not wise.

What has fascinated me after reading a variety of experts is the lack of interest/focus on repeated exposure in informing the public or evaluating why some die and others do not.

Just from observation, that those confined to spaces of varying size where repeated exposure is unavoidable, should be considered early on for action and study. That to me was especially true of the USS Roosevelt under government control. Once the Captain reported the first probable case, that sailor's close contacts and behaviors needed to be known to assess, reduce, and remove risk to prevent what we are seeing now.That required knowledgeable intervention and aid that wasn't forthcoming.

I suspect every mother knows, that the last person to be sick with a contagious illness in their home, is the sickest. That is because they had repeated exposure. But, she also knows her instinct alone isn't enough and seeks medical advice and whatever "tools" available to make sure her family is as " safe" as possible.

What the Osterholms and the Faucis and the Birxes, et al., continue to demonstrate daily is that they are incredibly bright, well learned, experienced and ready to serve their fellow man. And not a damn one of them has the foggiest idea what to expect. Testing? Can't get reagents. Distancing? Maybe it's working, we don't know. Open the economy? Expect a million plus deaths. Keep the economy closed? Expect to not have a functioning society. We are virtually helpless against natural forces. I reckon Divine intervention is all we have left.

10:07 - Since you are so focused on people listening to this hour long tape, I assume you believe there should be discussion about it. If my assumption is correct, why have you not opined on the tape rather than criticizing those you think should have but did not comment on it? You do realize that while you've assessed the intelligence of this group (without basis) you've revealed your own psychological oddity, do you not?