Posted on by Californiacontrarian

“Covid Conundrum”

From Townhall:

Call it a ‘COVID conundrum,’ in states with the strictest measures in the country, like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and much of New England, cases are on the rise,” a Today Show report this week started. “While in the south, states like Arkansas and Texas that have reopened businesses and ripped away mask mandates are seeing their numbers drop.” 

Infection rates are surging to near record levels…in states with lockdowns and mask mandates, and they are sinking in states without them. So-called experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci can’t explain this, which means no one in media can either since he’s the only person they believe on the subject, no matter what.

Let’s take a look at this apparent conundrum from a different vantage-point. Basically what is being asked is, “Why aren’t these lockdowns working?” Is it possible that we are asking the wrong question? Perhaps we should be asking the following question instead:

Could it be that lockdowns in the past have now made the present Covid situation worse? 

Those who drift to the left of the political spectrum are now smirking, while those on the right are perhaps saying, “Hmmm!” and scratching their chins.

First we know that this virus spreads more efficiently indoors as opposed to outdoors. Early on there were detailed accounts comparing the number of individuals living under one roof and the proclivity of the virus to infect a higher percent of individuals in the more crowded households. Obviously if a household was able to completely, one-hundred percent isolate itself from all contacts (let’s call this, “a super-lockdown,”) then there would be no way for these super-locked down individuals to get infected, and in the short term these “super-lockdowners” were able to avoid getting infected. However for most of us a super-lockdown was not possible, as there were certain things that most could not avoid . . . like eating and working and coming back home. In other words we know that lockdowns were not perfect even in the short term. But what about in the long run?

I have had this suspicion about lockdowns making Covid worse in the long run, but have had a difficult time finding a proper analogy or metaphor. Let’s try this – keeping in mind that it will not be perfect.

Assume that the general populace in an area is similar to a large vat which holds water. Let’s further assume that water level is the metaphor here for Covid infections. If there were a fair number of “super-lockdowners” or “pretty dam close to super-lockdowners” in this area, then there would be less Covid infections, visa-vi less water in the vat. Similar to a bathtub let’s assume that this vat has a drain near the top to prevent overflow onto the floor if the water continued to be added to the tub. This drain would be the metaphorical equivalent of herd immunity. Those areas that promulgated many and frequent lockdowns (blue states) in essence are now left with less water in their vat, and hence a lot of room for more water to accumulate -i.e. now having more Covid infections. Whereas those areas which were more open all along (red states) now have a higher water level in their vat most likely due to asymptomatic infections . . . in other words they are close to reaching or have already reached herd immunity. 

Could this be an explanation for why Texas is doing well after opening up? When asked about this Dr. Fauci was apparently befuddled – “I’m not really quite sure,” he told MSNBC this week.

If anyone can get a message to him please inform him about my vat metaphor as an explanation to this “Covid conundrum.”

122 Replies to ““Covid Conundrum””

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.