Community Chat

[ThinkingOutLoud]

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@Jersey Born wrote:

It is going to be horrendous.  A contact tracer (someone trained to do this) is going to make a phone call to you, if you become ill and test positive for Covid-19.  You will be questioned by the tracer about everyone you have been in contact with, and they will have access to your online media accounts, and be able to access bluetooth, GPS data, etc. to question you further.  Then, those you mention to the tracer (or people they can determine you were near from your, and their, phone's data) will be contacted and told to self-isolate.  It will be an exponential explosion of people who must self-isolate for 14 days.  Support services will be offered.  Children will be removed from their parent's custody and homes, to who knows where, if there are not enough bathrooms (or perhaps even bedrooms) for all family members to use separately in their home. Everyone is going to feel that their privacy has been taken from them and that they are not free to associate with anyone.

People will find ways around this tracking.  Some people will deny they visited anyone.  Some will leave their cellphone at home.  I do not believe that the tracking will be voluntary.  I believe officials and employers will insist the tracking app be on your phone in order for you to be permitted to return to work, or go on a bus, or a train, or a plane, etc. It is all going to be a hot, painful mess. How is a business to remain open, upon reopening, if everyone working there is repeatedly quarantined, even when they are not sick, but merely exposed to someone who is sick?  How is this sustainable without a further crash in the economy?  How are people to be expected to have the money to buy food, pay their mortgage, pay for insurance of any kind, or even pay for their phone bill?  The sick joke is on all of us.

---

No, @Jersey Born. This will not happen. I hear talk about how some people are fearmongers because they still worry about the virus. Well, I think that your statement here is true fearmongering.

The government has not removed children during this pandemic, there's not even been a whiff of such a policy, so there is absolutely no reason to think that they would start that now. .

---

I heard that California mentioned 'relocating' people.

[Jersey Born]

@wildcat fan I wish I knew.  He is going forward with "an army" of 7,000 paid contact tracers, without having solicited any public comment either for or against the plan, and without any law from the state legislature sanctioning it or even specifying how it is to be paid for.  He is acting on his own without disclosing to the public what drives his stages of reopening the state, and he is refusing to share that information even with legislators of his own party.  It is all a great mystery and it is an outrage.  

[hckynut]

@Mz iMac 

Thank you, 

hckynut 🏒

[pitdakota]

---

@Jersey Born wrote:

Actually, our governor mentioned placing people sick with Covid-19 elsewhere. He actually mentioned it as part of his plan to reopen the state.  Sorry.  I wish it were untrue, but it most certainly is not.

It is embedded in Phase 4.  Anyone can be relocated:

http://d31hzlhk6di2h5.cloudfront.net/20200427/db/2d/77/6c/2a8a498ff2edda855c3f456d/The_Road_Back_-_R...

---

_______________________________________________________

This is fear mongering to say the very least.  As a public health person, they don't put sick people  or those testing positive somewhere else just because.  Any good public health plan  worth its salt has a plan to place individuals that are sick with the disease and have no place to isolate in an area at no cost to them in which they are safe and can isolate.  But if you have your own place to isolate, they don't make you go anywhere else.  

There are a number of people that live in multifamily homes that if they test positive or exhibit symptoms, there is no way with the set up in the home along with multiple other individuals in the home where they can really isolate.  There may be elderly or other at risk individuals living in that same home in which it would be very risky for them if the sick individual tries to stay in the home.  There may be no viable option for the at risk individual to go somewhere else while the coronavirus positive person stays in that home and that person has no other place to go in order to quarantine or isolate.

So, in that instance they will provide a place for that person to go where they can isolate.  Doesn't mean they make you go there no matter what to isolate for goodness sake.  And you know, homeless people contract covid-19 too.   They need places to offer people other options if the one they are living in might expose other high risk individuals. 

As a matter of fact, universities that are planning on having students to return to dorms this fall are working out plans to have separate dorms for students that need to isolate or quarantine during the school year if they can't go home.  In some instances, parents may be able to drive to pick up their student and take them home, if they just need to quarantine.  But if that isn't possible or if the family home is not set up for that student to quarantine safely at home, there will be rooms available in a separate dorm for quarantine.  Doesn't mean they are put there like a prison for goodness sake. 

And as far as not going to the grocery store or other retail areas, encounters are rated by public health officials.  Just because you are shopping in a Kroger at the same time someone else was there that tests positive does not mean they are going to track you down and make you quarantine.

Just stop to think about that.  There are grocery stores in every single state that have had employees that tested positive and were working when people were shopping.  When did you hear about a public announcement stating if you shopped in that grocery store at that time that you needed to quarantine only because an employee that worked there tested positive!  They didn't run film and check shopper cards.  They knew who the employee had  "close" contacts with and those people were instructed to quarantine. 

There are different levels of encounters and risks from those certain exposures.  The contact tracers work with public health officials to determine those that had high or significant exposures and those people are then contacted and requested to quarantine.  Just shopping in a grocery store in which someone else there tested positive isn't a signficant risk.  

If someone eating in a certain indoor establishment tests positive, that could be a high risk situation since you are indoors in an enclosed space for a period of time.  They might look back at other customers at that time and ask them to quarantine based on where the sick individual was sitting.  But they look at the certain situation to determine what customers would have had a high risk of an exposure.  Not just that you were there at a certain time when someone else that tested positive was there.

And per the link you provided, it is principle 4, not phase 4 and that would be standard protocol for people that need resources that don't have a suitable area to isolate or quarantine if necessary.  Good public health practice!  

If anyone just stopped to think for a minute, even during the worst of the outbreaks in Calif, Washington state, New York, and New Jersey, they didn't take people that tested positive or exhibited symptoms and remove them from their home.  In fact, they told people to stay at home, isolate or quarantine.  They had empty hotel rooms at the time to put people if they needed them.  But they didn't come remove you on an order if you had a place to isolate or quarantine and place those people anywhere.  That doesn't change with contact tracing.  If you test positive and have an acceptable situation in which to quarantine or isolate, no problem.  If you need a place to go in order to quarantine or isolate, no problem....they will provide it for you and other resources such as food and meals. 

[suzyQ3]

---

@pitdakota wrote:

---

@Jersey Born wrote:

Actually, our governor mentioned placing people sick with Covid-19 elsewhere. He actually mentioned it as part of his plan to reopen the state.  Sorry.  I wish it were untrue, but it most certainly is not.

It is embedded in Phase 4.  Anyone can be relocated:

http://d31hzlhk6di2h5.cloudfront.net/20200427/db/2d/77/6c/2a8a498ff2edda855c3f456d/The_Road_Back_-_R...

---

_______________________________________________________

This is fear mongering to say the very least.  As a public health person, they don't put sick people  or those testing positive somewhere else just because.  Any good public health plan  worth its salt has a plan to place individuals that are sick with the disease and have no place to isolate in an area at no cost to them in which they are safe and can isolate.  But if you have your own place to isolate, they don't make you go anywhere else.  

There are a number of people that live in multifamily homes that if they test positive or exhibit symptoms, there is no way with the set up in the home along with multiple other individuals in the home where they can really isolate.  There may be elderly or other at risk individuals living in that same home in which it would be very risky for them if the sick individual tries to stay in the home.  There may be no viable option for the at risk individual to go somewhere else while the coronavirus positive person stays in that home and that person has no other place to go in order to quarantine or isolate.

So, in that instance they will provide a place for that person to go where they can isolate.  Doesn't mean they make you go there no matter what to isolate for goodness sake.  And you know, homeless people contract covid-19 too.   They need places to offer people other options if the one they are living in might expose other high risk individuals. 

As a matter of fact, universities that are planning on having students to return to dorms this fall are working out plans to have separate dorms for students that need to isolate or quarantine during the school year if they can't go home.  In some instances, parents may be able to drive to pick up their student and take them home, if they just need to quarantine.  But if that isn't possible or if the family home is not set up for that student to quarantine safely at home, there will be rooms available in a separate dorm for quarantine.  Doesn't mean they are put there like a prison for goodness sake. 

And as far as not going to the grocery store or other retail areas, encounters are rated by public health officials.  Just because you are shopping in a Kroger at the same time someone else was there that tests positive does not mean they are going to track you down and make you quarantine.

Just stop to think about that.  There are grocery stores in every single state that have had employees that tested positive and were working when people were shopping.  When did you hear about a public announcement stating if you shopped in that grocery store at that time that you needed to quarantine only because an employee that worked there tested positive!  They didn't run film and check shopper cards.  They knew who the employee had  "close" contacts with and those people were instructed to quarantine. 

There are different levels of encounters and risks from those certain exposures.  The contact tracers work with public health officials to determine those that had high or significant exposures and those people are then contacted and requested to quarantine.  Just shopping in a grocery store in which someone else there tested positive isn't a signficant risk.  

If someone eating in a certain indoor establishment tests positive, that could be a high risk situation since you are indoors in an enclosed space for a period of time.  They might look back at other customers at that time and ask them to quarantine based on where the sick individual was sitting.  But they look at the certain situation to determine what customers would have had a high risk of an exposure.  Not just that you were there at a certain time when someone else that tested positive was there.

And per the link you provided, it is principle 4, not phase 4 and that would be standard protocol for people that need resources that don't have a suitable area to isolate or quarantine if necessary.  Good public health practice!  

If anyone just stopped to think for a minute, even during the worst of the outbreaks in Calif, Washington state, New York, and New Jersey, they didn't take people that tested positive or exhibited symptoms and remove them from their home.  In fact, they told people to stay at home, isolate or quarantine.  They had empty hotel rooms at the time to put people if they needed them.  But they didn't come remove you on an order if you had a place to isolate or quarantine and place those people anywhere.  That doesn't change with contact tracing.  If you test positive and have an acceptable situation in which to quarantine or isolate, no problem.  If you need a place to go in order to quarantine or isolate, no problem....they will provide it for you and other resources such as food and meals. 

---

@pitdakota, a very thorough repsonse, but it's sad to me that it even needed to be said.

[pitdakota]

@suzyQ3, sad indeed.  

Lots of misinformation here.

[PinkyPetunia]

The stay at home order may have been lifted but there is nowhere to go.  Retail stores are not open, can't get a haircut, restaurants only do delivery or takeout. 

I can go to the supermarket, pharmacy, Target or Costco.  Same places I've been going to for the past 2 months.

[wildcat fan]

 
@pitdakota 

"If anyone just stopped to think for a minute, even during the worst of the outbreaks in Calif, Washington state, New York, and New Jersey, they didn't take people that tested positive or exhibited symptoms and remove them from their home.  In fact, they told people to stay at home, isolate or quarantine.  They had empty hotel rooms at the time to put people if they needed them.  But they didn't come remove you on an order if you had a place to isolate or quarantine and place those people anywhere."

So why did New York initially order nursing homes to accept positive patients if they had all those empty hotel rooms? I never quite understood that. 

[LisaMofSLC]

Thank goodness. Saw some people from NJ on twitter complaining it wasn't open. Maybe they hadn't gotten the news.

[pitdakota]

---

@wildcat fan wrote:

 
@pitdakota 

"If anyone just stopped to think for a minute, even during the worst of the outbreaks in Calif, Washington state, New York, and New Jersey, they didn't take people that tested positive or exhibited symptoms and remove them from their home.  In fact, they told people to stay at home, isolate or quarantine.  They had empty hotel rooms at the time to put people if they needed them.  But they didn't come remove you on an order if you had a place to isolate or quarantine and place those people anywhere."

So why did New York initially order nursing homes to accept positive patients if they had all those empty hotel rooms? I never quite understood that. 

---

_______________________________________________________

Nursing home patients are not able to care for themself.  So that situation has nothing to do with having hotel space available for someone who needs to quarantine or isolate in the situation discussed here.  Obviously, that is not an option for someone that needs nursing care or assistance with activities of daily living.  It is farily obvious that the resources and arrangements talked about in this situation does  does not include those that require nursing care. 

Almost every state has nursing homes that has had to keep or receive covid-19 patients, but that is a totally different story and doesn't relate to the scare mongering post that with contact tracing someone is going to be removed from their own home and made to go somewhere else against their will or that their children will be removed from the home by I guess CPS. 

Just staying with the topic and conversation that was posted.