Thread: "Opening up" is neither a singular policy nor a moment in time. As I've been reviewing "opening up" policies globally, it is clear we have a naming problem. It allows for these non-debates and silly editorials, as if there is a pro-isolation and anti-isolation crowd. 1/

So, let's be clear. . . We will open up lest anyone doubt that those of us pushing for stay-at-home orders were loving this. Nope, it buys us time. That time hopefully is working. Critics clamoring to open are acting like they are first to think that isolation is temporary. 2/

It is (say it again) the preparedness paradox, the tiresome refrain from those who say "look, it's not that bad (debatable), you folks all panicked, let's be free." That notion caricatures what social distancing was really about, creating camps where there are none. 3/

"Opening up" is neither a singular policy nor a moment in time. Parks open in Germany allowing only two people together. New Zealand allows patio restaurants. Retail opens in Georgia with curbside pickup. Colorado experimenting with recreation. Michigan allowing golf. 4/

University presidents, such as at Brown and Indiana, are mapping out strategies to return to school in September; controversial but worth thinking through. Employers distributing PPE. Vulnerable populations protected. It's the beginnings of our adaptive recovery stage. 5/

These are often great experiments and while we need much more testing, we also have to come to the realization that we may not be able to wait for the perfect. We will accept losses that might have been avoidable. We have to admit that to ourselves and each other. 6/

But there is responsible "opening up" and then there are tattoo parlors. They are not the same. So those "opening up" intellects, give us the details of how. I suspect they are exactly the same as those who pushed for isolation in the first place. Paradox? Exactly. 7/7