By now most fact based readers have witnessed that the original estimates related to positive cases and unfortunate death from COVID-19 are starting to prove untrue. The worst case scenarios of millions of deaths are nowhere near these estimates. Yes, the infectious rates and general spread of the virus are not acceptable by most citizens and there is still trepidation of what can still happen versus, what has happened. However, throwing darts at a dartboard and hoping for the best is not acceptable to a vast population. If we go back to original estimates and revisit the “million / hundreds of thousands” of deaths forecasts, we would have done anything to stop this from happening. You know what, we did, by forcing non-essential businesses from opening, schools from instructing, sports from participating and the general population from congregating in groups of 10 plus. We instituted a social distancing policy of being six feet away from our neighbors. We started wearing PPE like masks and gloves. We ran out of anti-bacterial products like wipes, gels and sprays. We even witnessed neighbors calling the police on neighbors for going outside their own homes. Yes. this may have flattened the curve, but so may have seasonal changes. I’m not here to debate our reaction to neighborhood rhetoric, but I do want to talk about taking a righteous stance.
We Prepared for The Worst
I think mentally, we have all prepared for the worst of situations. We read, saw, discussed the possibility of millions of individuals dying from a virus we had no control over. We added that extra sebaceous layer to our psyche, hoping that we would not unravel at the possibility of assumptions coming to fruition. Then things started to level out, or what some have called flattening of the curve. The extraordinary death toll estimates started to come down down exponentially and the worst case scenarios began to see a softening. We started to allocate resources to locales that underestimated their assets. We started to see hotspots appear in low exposure areas, requiring a repositioning of resources and material to address the anomaly. Fortunately we proved that we can pivot and adapt as required, as long as the scenario was not beyond reasonable forecasts. Soon hotspots were squelched and a dialog of optimistic “light at the end of the tunnel” started to happen in conversations. Was this time to start preparing for hyperphagia in our virus journey? Ultimately we knew what was incorrect based on data and what was skewed based on emotion.
Accepting Error
At this point we realize that our readers comments, posts and dialog were being prefaced by preconceived thought and ratification of emotion. No matter how much data, intellect and knowledge is applied to the conversation, our emotional well-being is always the ruling party. For instance, if my colleague had lost a loved one during the current crisis, no matter how much I mention underlying symptoms, or a predisposition to the impact that the virus may have to them, will go unheard. If we can segment the hard numbers, from the soft, perhaps we will begin to witness acceptance in the scenarios that envelope us all. It will always be a matter of separating emotion from fact.
De Lio Tech Trends 