1) I was looking for something related to inyana d'yoma to share from R Nachum Rabinovich, R"Y of Birkat Moshe in Maale Adumim, who passed away today, and what caught my eye was the concluding paragraph to a teshuva in Siach Nachum on the topic of shaving during chol ha'moed, the three weeks, and sefira. I feel a little bad as it's almost too small a point to even remark on given the greatness of the man. After going through an analysis of the geder of the issur of haircuts and shaving during aveilus and moed, which I wont get into, R' Rabinovich turns his attention to sefira. He notes that the minhagei aveilus are not brought in Rambam or many other Rishonim; the Tur merely says "yesh nohagim she'lo l'histaper." We find in Achronim that there were communities that kept the minhag and communities that didn't -- it was not a universal practice. Furthermore, the minhag seems to refer to avoiding haircuts, not shaving. Based on these considerations, R' Rabinovich concludes there is ample room to be lenient and shave during sefira and during the three weeks up until the 9 days, especially if one is doing so l'kavod Shabbos. Ad kan the technical details of what any posek might tell you. Rav Rabinovich then adds: with respect to any minhag, one must consider how one's community and one's peer group acts so that he is not "standing when other are sitting or sitting when others are standing," (Derech Eretz Rabbah ch 7) i.e. acting out of lockstep of the norm. He advises that with respect to what to do, one should follow the practice of one's father. You would expect the teshuvah to justify this based on something like "al titosh," but that's not what he says. The justification is that if one's father is clean shaven but one walks around with a beard, or vica versa it would surely create embarrassment and be a source of friction between parent and child. Kibud av outweighs the minhag.
Psak is not a cut and dry accumulation of facts -- the teshuvah reflects tremendous sensitivity for kavod ha'briyos, for the impact behavior may have on others, for "darkei no'am." A model to emulate.
2) Maybe I should make providing information like the article below into a daily feature -- I have mixed feelings about it. Anyway, here is a letter in The Lancet (pretty chashuv) from a doctor who points out that, "There is
very little we can do to prevent this
spread: a lockdown might delay
severe cases for a while, but once
restrictions are eased, cases will
reappear. I expect that when we count
the number of deaths from COVID-19
in each country in 1 year from now,
the figures will be similar, regardless
of measures taken."
So basically, all this sitting in our bunkers is saving no one and just inflicting unnecessary misery on people. Which brings us to the headline of the day from CNBC: "Cuomo says it's 'shocking' most new coronavirus hospitalizations are people who had been staying at home." It's only shocking if you stick your head in the sand and refuse to accept reality.
About #2: Except if they all hit the hospitals at once, there are fewer staff available, less equipment available, and more of those people will die. The whole idea of "flattening the curve" was not to reduce the number of people getting CoVID-19 or even getting severe symptoms. Yes, that number won't change. But if we slow down the pace, making a wide low curve instead of a high narrow one, we can save far more people. Even though the integral, the area under the curve, ie the number of sick people, will be the same.
ReplyDeleteThe question facing us now is whether enough people are now immune that even if we open our doors we won't have a spike that overwhelms the medical system. This depends on the model. See this summary by the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/forecasting-us.html The University of Texas and Youyang Gu (and one or two other) models don't show us as having fully flattened the curve yet, but the vast majority of models are more optimistic.
Mind you, none of these models take into account the thick net of social ties, the large shul attendance (once social distancing ends) and the large family sizes of the Orthodox community. We can spread disease a lot faster among ourselves than other communities can. We need to be more conservative than generic recommendations.
"We need to stay home for 30 days."
DeleteOk.
"I mean 60 days."
Ugh, fine.
"Sorry a little longer."
How will I eat?
"Government will take care of you."
*calls government, no answer*
real data shows the lockdown is killing people. what is the halachic justification for causing people's death now based on a model's prediction (and all these models have been consistently off by huge margains of error) of deaths that MAY result otherwise?
ReplyDeleteWhat "real data" is that?
DeleteMeanwhile, compare losses in Benei Braq vs Petach Tiqva, in Sweden vs Israel, in RCBC territory vs Lakewood or Monsey, and tell me we only have models to go on to conclude social distancing is saving lives.
Any region where people died because of a lack of beds, eg Italy, compared to those where social distancing slowed the rate of spread of the disease provide actual data.
Meanwhile, there haven't been errors in the models. There have been models that have been self-denying prophecies because people changed their behavior BECAUSE of the models. The models drove us into the social distancing. Those alleged errors are related to the number of people saved.
Most recent source: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.21.20073114v2
DeleteThere have been numerous articles even in the NY Times, of all places, reporting on people dying from heart attack and stroke because they either cannot get treatment they need or are afraid to go to a hospital thanks to the hysteria. You can google, but I'll get you started here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/25/health/coronavirus-heart-stroke.html
"Fear of the coronavirus is leading people with life-threatening emergencies, like a heart attack or stroke, to stay home when ordinarily they would have rushed to the emergency room, preliminary research suggests. Without prompt treatment, some patients, like Mr. Virachan, have suffered permanent damage or have died."
I don't even need to get involved in proving the models wrong (the numbers they "predicted" even in April, after lockdown started, have been wrong). Even if the models were right, even you think you saved people, you need a makor to justify doing it at the cost of the life of Mr Varachan and all other like him that the lockdown has killed.
Waiting for your sources.
-- "1) ...clean shaven"...vs. bearded "a source of friction"
ReplyDeletewhat of a bearded religious fledgling soldier facing a clean shaven secular veteran officer? the plot problems thicken for a leader of a hesder yeshiva...
-- "Kibud av outweighs the minhag"
mussar avicha (halacha) outweighs ["'al titosh'"] toras imecha (custom)
-- the religious soldier may experience a Torah-validated ["2)] lockdown" of his own, restricted to his unit once the clock strikes !WAR! (Rashi to Devarim 20:9) {locked into the prospect of violent death, rather than into the [governmental] hope of salvation}
I do not know why the following point has not been discussed in the media, professional or social. It is true that nobody is immune. It is true that whoever has the "tof" on his forehead, those people that have the genetic or medical misfortune to be particularly vulnerable, will die no matter how quickly they intubate. Care, to this point, is palliative, not therapeutic. BUT! Every single day there is talk of medicines that might decrease the severity of the infection. Two months ago, Remdesivir was not on the menu. Dr Fauci says, based on his experience with HIV, that now that Remdesivir has demonstrated a tiny little mitigation of the course of the disease, it can be added to, till you have a cocktail that will render the infection asymptomatic.
ReplyDeleteThe Ribono shel Olam is a Borei Refu'os, not Barah, Borei, because every single day He inspires men to find a way to fix what is broken and cure the sick.
No, it's probably not Chloroquine, or garlic water, or slices of lemon in your tea, or the notorious blow drier. But there are game changers within sight, and there were not two months ago.
So delaying infection, for individuals, very might well save countless lives.
The economic damage is horrendous, and might result in greater loss of life. But from a purely medical perspective, quarantine will save lives.
In my personal case, I can manage what I need to from home. If it turns out it was not done as I want, heads will roll, but I'm not risking disaster or default or hunger. For me, isolation is smart.
And for every day that you keep things in lockdown delaying doctors visits, surgeries, treatments, etc. for things other than corona, from a purely medical perspective you endanger countless lives. Same argument as you are making, just to support the opposite conclusion.
DeleteThis has been discussed in a few places.
I too have the luxury of working from home, but watching our society being destroyed (I would add loss of civil rights to your list) for no reason is frustrating, to say the least.
One lesson that I think we ought to learn, but won't, is against stupidity Torah is not meigin, and our Tefilla is not meigin, and our tzedakah is not meigin.
ReplyDeleteWell put.
Deletei think hashem allows baalei bechira great latitude. we suffer the consequences of our (or our leaders) bad choices - thats the system hashem created.
Deleteabsolutely. I've seen it time and time again.
Delete