Q&A of the Day –Should we only shelter those most vulnerable to the virus? 

Q&A of the Day –Should we only shelter those most vulnerable to the virus? 

Each day I’ll feature a listener question that’s been submitted by one of these methods. 

Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com

Twitter: @brianmuddradio

Facebook: Brian Mudd https://www.facebook.com/brian.mudd1

Today’s entry: If one plan for the future of a dead virus seems to be more people becoming naturally immune by catching the disease, then what would be wrong with just sheltering the small percentage of us that are high risk?

Bottom Line: It’s an interesting train of thought. With the realization that every life is on hold indefinitely, would it make the most sense to only restrict those most vulnerable? With none of us knowing exactly where this story is going or how this ends it might make sense at some point even if it doesn’t now. First, let’s use the latest info to access who is vulnerable...



80+ years old


70-79 years old


60-69 years old


50-59 years old


40-49 years old


30-39 years old


20-29 years old


10-19 years old


0-9 years old


What’s the age/risk cutoff? I’d say at a minimum we should be talking about any level above 1% (1% of the US population is 3.3 million people). So, what would that entail? Something that’s not really viable. There are 111 million Americans, or more than a third, of the US population over the age of 50. It’s virtually impossible to isolate everyone over 50. For that matter, 46% of 25-year old's still live at home. How old are their parents on average?The secondary problem is the need for the virus to run its course. Having it active in any segment of society, even if the impact isn’t generally deadly, would ensure it’d stick around for a significantly longer period of time. That’s the challenge here. There aren’t good answers.

I’ve thought a lot about ideology this week, especially in the context of our elections in the middle of it. One of the biggest reasons this crisis is a potential uniting force is because typical ideological differences don’t apply to it. There isn’t a conservative or liberal solution for it. Only extremely difficult decisions no one in power wants to make. Attempting to find solutions, especially when I don’t have any good answers, has led me to this little nugget. Want to get rid of this virus as quickly as possible? Cut out as much plastic as possible. According to a study just conducted by the National Institutes for Health, the virus survives longest on plastic – up to three days. That contrasts with just hours for every other surface except stainless steel. I’m covering that one in a separate story today.

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content