MennoNet.com

I've found it interesting to observe the responses of various people to this pandemic including my own response. I assume some of you have as well.

11. Other

I am skeptical of them all!!

Just a personal nitpick. But "belief" is not a word I use around science. And I say that as someone who has worked in science my entire life. Belief is a word I reserve for things like faith and deeply held philosophies like democracy.

I don't ever believe anything I read or learn about in science. I accept that the preponderance of evidence may suggest something is true. But I'm open to new evidence that points in a different direction. And I filter what I read and hear through my own common sense and past experiences. I generally trust the scientific process but also recognize it can lead to incorrect results and can be subject to manipulation as well.

When it comes to Covid, you can probably attach a a degree of certainty or uncertainty to every scientific statement or conclusion. For example:

1. The disease Covid-19 is caused by the novel coronavirus. We have a high degree of certainty about this. It's not a bacteria or fungus or genetic disorder.

2. Covid-19 is highly contagious and transmitted by airborne particles. We have a high degree of certainty about this. It isn't a blood-borne disease like HIV or Hepatitis.

3. People who have the anti-body are immune. This is much less uncertain. We don't really know how immune someone who has recovered from Covid actually is, and how long that immunity persists.

4. Certain drugs/therapies like hydrochloroquine or anti-virals like remdesivir are effective. The science here is advancing rapidly but much work still needs to be done.

5. Children are less at risk than adults. This seems pretty definitive but we are uncovering new evidence of potential long-term damage, even in children. So we don't really yet know all the long-term effects.

6. Masks and social distancing are effective means of fighting the virus. There aren't a lot of really rigorous tests about either of these two measures that are directly related to Covid-19. But we have a long history of fighting other viruses as well as common sense. And we have growing experience from around the world about what measures seem to be more effective than others. It stands to reason that you are safer if you are 6' from someone contagious than you are if you are 6" from then. And you are even safer if you are 60 ft away. But is 6' the magic distance that keeps you safe? I doubt it. LIkewise, it stands to reason that the more barriers you have between yourself and someone contagious the safer you will be. But are masks better than plexiglass? Or are paper mask better/worse than cloth masks? I don't personally know. But it stands to reason they are better than nothing and there is clinical evidence to support that conclusion. Maybe in 6 months we will know that 10 ft is the magic safe distance and that triple-ply paper masks are 75% more effective than cloth masks. Who knows. We aren't there yet. But we have to make the best call we can today based on the information we have today.

I could go on and on. We are dealing with a virus that was largely unknown to science only 6 months ago. We have advanced greatly in our understanding of it in the past 6 months but still have a long way to go. What I don't really understand is how this has gotten so political so quickly. I don't know if that is the fault of the Trump administration for politicizing it. Or if this was simply an inherently political issue that would have been just as contentious if Obama was still president. I tend to think the latter.

I find #5 and #6 the most interesting. I expected them to have opposite stats from what they are currently showing.

At least it is heartening to see that the largest number of respondents seem to trust the mainstream science as illustrated by #1, which isn't always what one picks up from the comments here.

Ken wrote:At least it is heartening to see that the largest number of respondents seem to trust the mainstream science as illustrated by #1, which isn't always what one picks up from the comments here.

I have not voted yet.

For me the topic title and the questions don't really make sense to use so interwoven.

Does a persons response automatically dictate being tied to trusting some secular group? - No, and if it does then maybe that is the persons god?

For me I went to the CDC and WHO websites early on and within 15 minutes I found they were using flawed logic to come up with their projections. I am a simple tradesman with maybe a grade 3 reading level and even I could easily see this. It had nothing to do with media or outside sources.

Furthermore the top health officials have stated they are going to declare some deaths to be from COVID without proper verification. So to trust their numbers is wilfully believing misinformation.

The fact that people continue to trust these sources without checking HOW they came up with their facts, projections, stats, and charts is strange to me.

However, that has little to do with my response. I still think COVID is dangerous and to be taken seriously. I have no good reason to not follow and obey their protocols especially out of respect and love for others. We should be motived in our response by the love and trust we have with God! And that relationship then overflows into our love and respect to others not because we feel we can line up with some secular situational ethics people.

Poll Results 7-27-2020

1. (16
2. (10
3. (10
4. (3
5. (2
6. (5
7. (1
8. (2
9. (1
10. (8

Wade wrote:For me the topic title and the questions don't really make sense to use so interwoven.

Does a persons response automatically dictate being tied to trusting some secular group? - No, and if it does then maybe that is the persons god?

Sorry, but I am not understanding your difficulty. Care to explain further?
I had no motive with this poll other than to find out how people have been thinking/responding. I just listed the different responses I have heard the last few months as well as my own.

I marked #5. I had been reading about the disease in China in January and February and was hearing directly from a friend in Wuhan about what was happening there. I couldn't believe it was happening in 2020.
Then I started reading about what was happening in NYC, and I assumed the worst. I was fearful of going to Wal-mart.

With time I realized that is really bad for some people, but most people only have mild symptoms. Some people think the virus is mutating to become more contagious but less deadly. That theory seems reasonable to me based on what I have seen so far with people I know who contracted the disease. So I am still being careful but not nearly as careful as in March and April.