I agree,
but by the same argument...
It's very wrong for govt to be forcing the closure of business and harming people's health without the data showing their actions save overall harm. (once the hospitals have capacity.)
That shutdown was so damaging in so many areas and yet... when
we came out of shutdown the virus came back.
So what good did it do after the first 3 weeks? Why were the low risk group locked down?
In fact, this would be the time of the year to lockdown... not when we were locked down.
No data... no govt action.
but by the same argument...
It's very wrong for govt to be forcing the closure of business and harming people's health without the data showing their actions save overall harm. (once the hospitals have capacity.)
That shutdown was so damaging in so many areas and yet... when
we came out of shutdown the virus came back.
So what good did it do after the first 3 weeks? Why were the low risk group locked down?
In fact, this would be the time of the year to lockdown... not when we were locked down.
No data... no govt action.
Let's take a look at what this "DeSantis for the win" thread is all about... to remind you of the proper context.
Is it acceptable for a government administration to hide, manipulate and be less than transparent with public health data in the midst of a global pandemic in order to drive a political agenda of an elected executive official. Either you believe:
A) The very foundational basis of public trust is built on transparent health data -- and hiding, manipulating or being less than transparent with data is fundamentally unacceptable.
-- or --
B) It is perfectly acceptable for a governor's administration to be less than transparent with data to drive his political agenda.
I obviously believe in A) while you believe in B)
Last edited: