COVID-19: a discussion

(Disclaimer:  I am not a medical doctor.  I have no qualifying scientific degrees.  But, at almost 78 years of age I am in the "at risk" category according to all reports, and as a retired, multiple degree holding individual who is curious and has the time, I have been reading all I can find about this virus and trying to establish a layman's understanding of just what the SARS-CoV-2 threat is all about.  That leaves me with questions as well as a lot of ideas and my intent is to share them with anyone who is also curious and wants to take the time to consider my findings and thoughts.  So...I am not TELLING anyone what to do or what to think...just musing out loud...or in print, to be accurate.  Proceed at your own risk)

My assumptions (perhaps better termed, "presumptions"):

• The "unknown" causes fear
• Sudden "unknown" causes contagious fear
• Fear eliminates logic
• Lack of logic makes for bad or flawed decisions

About the beginning of this year presented reports of a rapidly growing health threat from an unknown extremely contagious virus that held out danger of inordinately large mortality rates on a world-wide basis with no medical solution or intervention known to exist.

The fear was immediate and grew exponentially.  The "flee or flight" instinct took immediate hold, with "fight" not apparently in play so "flee" was the almost universal reaction.  Just what "flee" meant was varied but generally became what we now refer to as "lock-down" and "spacing."  "Logic" was still on holiday, albeit with some groups and individuals attempting to approach the danger looking for solutions that would bring "fight" back into contention.

One of the perils of having some folks attempting to repond logically to a threat when the majority is still in "flee" mode is that even if the logical approach presented in incomplete and/or in error, it SEEMS like the siren of truth, logic and reason and rarely is questioned or doubted.  But...almost inevitably there ARE errors and gaps.  These are to be expected.  But...what SHOULD happen is that these presumptions be examined almost daily to discover, correct or eliminate all that is wrong.  Consider the following:

• Predictions of enormous loss of life were predicated on estimates that were flawed.

One of the errors was basing projections on no effective steps taken to minimize the effect and the spread of the virus from person to person.  

• Initial presumptions were that the virus was long-lasting on various surfaces and was virtually impossible to avoid between individuals closer than 6 feet from one to another.

This has turned out to be largely untrue, as current reports by the medical community suggests that the virus does not remain dangerous on most surfaces for more than a short time.

Then there were the errors and presumptions that caused authoritative declarations to be made (and largely accepted) closing businesses, transportation, community interaction and person to person contact of all kinds.  Some of these errors:

1. Not recognizing that "lock-downs" were ineffective when the virus was already present;
2. Even while recognizing that the elderly and those with pre-existing medical challenges were primarily at risk for loss of live, Governors chose to send recovering patients to Nursing and Old Age Homes resulting in infection of others already at risk of death.
3. Reacting politically rather than logically in an election year by deciding that they (the politician office holders) had to do SOMETHING lest the voters think they didn't care.  Clearly the right action in some situations is to NOTHING until or unless PROVEN FACTS point to a specific line of action.

When one reflects on the fact that just over two years ago (2017, Fall) America went through an immensely severe flu season that resulted in as many deaths as has resulted from COVID-19 and no one lifted an eyebrow or even thought, much less suggested, that we "lock-down" for safety, a question and set of facts comes to mind.  Every bug, every virus we have experienced has an approximately two (2) year life span.  The Spanish Flu in the last century ran its course in two years.  Others have the same record.  So...I suggest the following questions are appropriate to put to the medical community for responses and answers:

• If enormous funding results in a vaccine claimed to be effective and is available in a year, will it be claimed that it is the vaccine that eradicates the occurrence of this virus?  Or will its virtual disappearance be the result of the natural two (2) year life cycle?
• Does the "lock-down" approach truly operate to lessen, minimize, or otherwise protect the public from the effects of this virus?  Doesn't such "isolation actions" lessen or even prevent a development of a "herd immunity"?  
• Has medical research adopted the proper presumptions as to optimal treatment?  Some articles have reported that the oxygen level of COVID-19 sufferers have dipped dangerously low WITHOUT fever or corresponding obstruction of lung function (these come later, suggesting to some that the lung problems result from the virus, and are not the direct cause).  And other reports are that the implementation of respirator treatment puts the lungs under pressurized oxygen with actually has been shown to decrease the ability of the lung tissue to absorb and oxygenate blood, actually acting to deprive patients of oxygen and contribute to death.  Some reports and at least one presentation on Youtube, by Dr. Zach Bush ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DqZs9tLZIU ), suggests that upon diagnosis of the low oxygen blood levels prior to any fever or lung obstruction it might be wise to consider a treatment such as used for cyanide poisoning, currently involving three (3) injections.  If that increases blood oxygen levels, then there may be no development of lung obstruction eliminating all but liquids and bed rest to recover.  Shouldn't medical authorities have to respond to this concept...and any others?

And finally...at least for now...can't we all agree that in an medical event Government, Politicians, and holders of elected office should not be allowed to "not allow an emergency to go to waste" and seize control of our lives in a way that we would never allow if not for the fear that they encouraged, fed, and enlarged in order to try to validate their power grab(s)?

What do you think? 

Why are we fat?

Those who study these things report that, as a nation, Americans are fat.

• Is that true?
• If so, why? and,
• Can or should we do something about that?

Statistics suggest that more Americans are overweight than ever before.  Moreover, general observance and anecdotes back up those statistics, so it seems that the we are fat.

"Why" is always going to be an individual answer if total accuracy is your goal.  But for the purposes of this discussion, general habits and behavior will be the focus.  Two primary reasons for obesity and being overweight suggest themselves:

1. Over-eating; and
2. lack of sufficient exercise.

And it is likely that a combination of the two would have the most impact.  Certainly there are individuals who have medical challenges that cause increased body mass, but generally it is clear that more food (or bad choices of food) and less exercise are the cause.

But...what are the root cause(s) of those factors?  Again, observation suggests three major causes:

1. Television;
2. development of the two income family; and
3. The internet.

The advent of Television in the late 1940's was the beginning of a quantum shift in children's attitude and interest in physical activities.  Oh, it didn't show up immediately; children and teenagers had developed habits over the years of playing baseball, football, basketball, hockey in the winter, and other activities such as dodge ball, hide & Seek and others that exercised their growing bodies and those habits stayed with them.  But parents with children born in the early 1950's and later found that it was easier to get housework done and get some needed "down time" if their children weren't out running around, getting hurt and into trouble in the neighborhood, but instead watching "educational" programs on the Television.  And if the kids stayed quiet and out of harms way even as the found that they could switch the channel to watch cartoons...well, how harmful could that be...it was make-believe.

Following World War II, men came home to a nation where women had gotten used to working, earning money outside the home, to a nation where new and better products were available and a general desire to own a home and live better than before.  So men got jobs too, and grandparents watched children during the day. On weekends parents "caught up" on household matters and acted as parents once again.

That wonderful new thing...Television...turned out to be a soporific tool for young children not available before.  So, little by little, parents weren't heard commanding their children to, "go out and play, it is a beautiful day!"  Instead they were content to enjoy the peace and quiet of the house, bothered only by the occasional need to tell the kids to"turn the sound down" on the television.  

Of course, there was still (and that continues today) the "gym period" at school.  But that doesn't really provide physical activity, as studies report that on perhaps 20 +/- minutes of activity occur since most of the time is spent standing around as the upcoming activity is being described and teams and/or pairings are set up.  Gym periods were and are only a light reminder of the intense sports and exercises that used to be the norm at recess (no longer much in existence), after school and on weekends.  So Gym is of little effect and/or consequence.

Those "television children" grew up be parents that did not exercise themselves and certainly were less and less likely to make their children do any different.  Meanwhile, the
"two income" family became the norm, leading to less consideration being given to meal preparation; tv dinners, take-out meals became more ubiquitous, and kids home from school found lots of high calorie snacks in the refrigerator to eat while the sat on the couch watching....wait for it....television.  They were NOT going out over the neighbor's kids house to play sandlot baseball or shoot hoops.  No...none of that was or is happening today.

For years, the only exercise some kids got was when they had a report due for school and had to...gasp...walk or travel to the library and research the subject.  

But even that tiny bit of exercise was about to be made elective. Because now the Internet came into existence.  Now neither child or adult had to leave the easy chair or the chair in front of the personal computer.  Exercise?  Why?  For what purpose?  Besides, life is becoming more complicated and more things have to be learned, so eliminating running in the park (or even walking) puts more stress on one's time...so that takes a back seat (and often doesn't remain in the vehicle).

The Internet and the television became more highly developed, so it then gave birth to the "smart phone" (although that confuses me, as I have had one for more that 15 years and it still hasn't made me any smarter).  Now both kids and adults don't even have to meet to talk; I caught my two grandsons texting each other across the same room!  I have a friend who, when he visits his children and grandchildren, confiscates the kids phones as he arrives and only gives them back as he is packing to leave, telling them that they are going to learn how to converse with him and each other person to person with their voices and looking each other in the eye.  After a painful day, he says the begin to enjoy it...and he has hopes that they actually may be able to negotiate their way through a job interview at some time in the future.  But I wonder if some will even be able to do that...or maintain concentration on anything for more than 45 seconds.

But...getting back to the subject...our parents AND we took the easy way out even while intending, perhaps, to do the right thing.  We failed to balance our desire that our kids learn (from educational programs) with their need to develop their bodies to carry their brains through a long life...and that inevitably led (and continues to lead) to shorter life spans and increased pain and discomfort during the latter years.  

For some time I have thought that most families (both adults and children) would benefit from shutting down all forms of electronic access for a week each month...maybe even on at least one weekend day each week...and instead schedule outdoor physical activities (games, hikes, walks) to coincide with face to face conversations.

I know many families who even now require that all phones be muted or turned off and left in another room while the family has dinner at the table and combines the dinner hour with conversation.  That should be an "always" thing...for all of us.

If we don't work to change our ways, I fear the the fictional "Matrix" as seen in the movie of the same name will become a very unpleasant and unenjoyable reality.  However, if today's parents recognize the benefit of, and the need to, reverse this process, it can be reversed.  But it means making a conscious and consistent effort to push children away from the computer, the cell phone and the couch to make them "go out and play."  It means getting other parents with children of the same age on the same page,getting together in the park and letting (perhaps, in the beginning) making them get involved in pick-up games of dodge ball, hide & seek, flag and touch football, baseball.  NOT organized, like Little League and the such...although those are great.  It is the non-athlete who needs to add physical activities to an otherwise seductive sedentary life style.  Jogging, hikes are good too.  And this all has the advantage of also refreshing the mind and actually making the time in front of a computer more productive.

I sincerely hope that just thinking about all of this will cause at least a few to take the steps to truly show a way to save (or at least better benefit) our wonderful children.