Pace aside, they should have laid out back then what a reopened Bahamas would like since COVID isn't going anywhere. The image was that COVID would be wiped out once we lockdown. The problem is that doesn't explain what happens when cases come when we reopen.

Drs. Dahl-Regis and Minnis have rejected the idea of mass testing for COVID, so I don't see mass antibody testing anytime soon. Unless they reverse the policy.

I do think there was a claim of a Japanese person having it twice early (though that the time testing so sure). wired.com/story/did-a-woman-get-coronav…

Interesting point. I can somewhat see the beach closure but it is strange that if beaches are a risk and required closing then all gatherings not involving immediate family should have been as well.

it seems to me that we have adopted policies that punish certain industries. though the risk seems comparable to others. Alcohol sales, number shops, Arawak Cay, and now beaches. While these industries remained closed, similar industries (fatty food/cigarette sales, other non-essential establishments, other restaurants all over Nassau, all other places where gathering can happen) were allowed to be open.

Actually it raises another ironic thing, exercise was limited while ordering McDonalds was basically unrestricted.

Problem is that the government had not adequately put out this message before.

Because they've essentially tied 'a good job' with a slowdown in confirmed cases, they haven't stressed that "when we slowly reopen cases may come, don't be alarmed, we need to manage hospitalizations, the elderly etc".

So now we meet fork in the road.

Press on with the reopening and quit bragging about the current confirmed case count and no new cases in X weeks, tell people that we will get new cases and we need to do XYZ to manage

OR

Try to minimize your numbers, go back to knockdowns, or close the borders, etc.

Lets see what we do from here.

One of the first rules in a good debate is not to insult the person you are trying to persuade. I posed what I thought was a simple question about how the article is worded.

The article is not completely clear in linking the first and last sentences. It says that there are measures in place, however, they still post risk and ends with a quote mentioning that we cannot take that risk. fi the risk we cant take is not quarantining asymptomatic carriers from the Caribbean who don't have a negative test in hand but need to quarantine, the article could mention that the PM then went on to speak to defend the decision to quarantine those with no COVID test results...(or whatever it was he was referring to).

Also, I hope all is well since the demise of B.I.com.

You're the most honest with your friends!

Can someone make sense of this line:

“We say they show symptoms at the 14th day, but during that time they can shed the virus, (on the) third day, (on the) fifth day and infect all of us yet they’re normal. We cannot take this risk.”

So if we cannot take the risk then........? Is he arguing for or against his policy?

let me summarize the article:

Your mechanic last yar told you that your car a/c will be better than it was in the history of summers. Better than when your old mechanic used to look at it.

After saying that, your A/C rarely worked last year.

The mechanic) tells you the problem was the compressor.

He spent all of last year trying to rebuild, fix, find old compressors.
.
Finally, at the end of the summer, you get a new compressor.

This year your a/c runs, just not as strong, causes your car to overheat and causes cuts out from time to time.

You go to your mechanic,
He says, I know your car cools sometimes but its better than last year.

You say, but sir it still don't work as well is expensive to run and doesn't deliver when I need it the most.

He says:
It may be acting funny due to radiator cap, water pump, sensor, and thermostat but count your lucky stars your compressor works.

The issue as I said is poor public relations and messaging.

This is the issue of many govts making. If you close your borders and tell persons to keep the virus out we need to keep other people out you need an exit ramp.. The key is to explain to people what the ramp is an do so properly. Now that we need the money we have conditioned people to want to isolate.

Poor communication is part of the issue. You tell persons, that, on the one hand, you should not travel because you're going to a hotspot and can cause lockdowns to return while on the other hand welcoming people from the said hotspot.

He didn't 'recommend' you not to go to church or the movies, bars, barbers, salons, beaches, exercising, gas station after 1 pm, outside of your home for non-essential stuff, or locked down on the weekend, the food store on a Wednesday if your surname ends in J.

They ordered it, saying it would save lives. So if indeed he believes what he says and Bahamians traveling can bring lockdown to the country once more, then he would back that with an order. Of course, it will then be asked why then allow tourists to come in, but Bahamians not out.

Herein lies the box he put himself in by making the statement about the dangers to the country that travel to the US creates when he needs travelers from the US.

104 confirmed cases. You can bet we had many more cases. If some places are testing much more of the population they are going to find lots more asymptomatic cases. If in the run-up to 104 confirmed we tested say 10k persons the numbers would be different. the focus has shifted around the world from confirmed cases to hospitalized cases now..