3 ms·

> "...deploy the military...save a huge number of lives..." really, that's the best solution to saving lives? if you were really worried about preventable dea

> "...deploy the military...save a huge number of lives..." really, that's the best solution to saving lives? if you were really worried about preventable deaths, why don't you direct your fear-mongering and authoritarianism toward eradicating distracted driving, since car accidents kill a million people a year? otherwise, wash your hands and keep a little distance from coughers/sneezers. if you get sick with (1) a high fever and (2) a dry cough, don't go out for 14 days after you feel better, unless you're so sick you need to go see a doctor. that's it. stop with the hysteria.

CydeWeys 7y ago
Your proposed alternative is woefully inadequate and doesn't stop the exponential spread of the disease anytime short of most people getting it. You flat out do need to shut down most things to get the spread rate below 1.0. Cancel all gatherings of people, shut down non-essential businesses, etc. That's all that works.
- clairity 7y ago
  that's presuming the need to stop the virus at all costs. if we were dealing with the black plague, or even the 1918 flu, that would be entirely reasonable. but with covid-19, that's still debatable, especially given the costs of doing so. we're apparently collectively ok with 30K americans dying of flu (or alternatively, auto accidents) every year, so it doesn't make sense to go nuts on stopping this virus that's looking more and more like it's a little worse than the yearly flu. the point being risks need to be properly assessed and proportionately addressed, without hysteria. the underlying question about whether we value human lives enough is another matter we certainly should continue to discuss (for the record, i think we should value human lives a little more relative to economic considerations, and the response to something like covid-19 would correspondingly be a little more proactive, but still not hasty and panicked).
  - earthtourist 7y ago
    "this virus that's looking more and more like it's a little worse than the yearly flu." You're spreading ignorance. Every medical expert is saying it is 5-20x deadlier than the seasonal flu, because that's what the data says. They're predicting 40-70% infection rates. A low estimate of 0.05% mortality rate with 40% infected is: 640,000 dead in the US alone. It could end up being a 1.5% mortality rate with 70% infected: 3,360,000 dead in the US alone. Please do some reading: https://www.flattenthecurve.com https://www.flattenthecurve.com
    - ummonk 7y ago
      It would likely be >1% mortality rate even with adequate healthcare. If it hit 40-70% of the population though, people would be basically on their own, so mortality rate would be 5-10%. Tens of millions of deaths. Of course, this would never happen, since we as a society would enact major policies to slow the spread long before it got anywhere near that bad, just as Italy is doing for example. It just doesn't make any sense to wait for things to get worse to start enacting policies to slow its spread; if we're going to have to do it at some point, might as well do it early and reduce the spread.
earthtourist 7y ago
It's not the case that I'm hysterical but that you're blissfully ignorant. Fewer than 40,000 people die per year from car accidents in the US. Even optimistic estimates say Covid-19 might kill 400,000 Americans over the next year. It could kill 4,000,000 potentially, and that's not hysteria, that's what the sober math says. Some percentage, maybe 10% or more, could be young and healthy people. It all depends on how badly hospitals are overrun, how well social distancing works, and a variety of other variables that no one has the values for. You may be lucky to be young/healthy enough so that you only have a 0.2% chance of dying. Older people, that you will get sick by being cavalier, may have a 20% chance of dying. But if you want to kill your grandparents, or someone else's, that's on you. If anything, I'm a freedom-extremist. There's absolutely nothing authoritarian about the justified deployment of military personnel in times of disaster. The time to object to military force is when it's being abused. This is not abuse. And it would leverage one great US advantage: the fact that the US has a very capable military force. That's it. Stop with your dangerous ignorance.

CydeWeys 7y ago

Your proposed alternative is woefully inadequate and doesn't stop the exponential spread of the disease anytime short of most people getting it. You flat out do need to shut down most things to get the spread rate below 1.0. Cancel all gatherings of people, shut down non-essential businesses, etc. That's all that works.

clairity 7y ago
that's presuming the need to stop the virus at all costs. if we were dealing with the black plague, or even the 1918 flu, that would be entirely reasonable. but with covid-19, that's still debatable, especially given the costs of doing so. we're apparently collectively ok with 30K americans dying of flu (or alternatively, auto accidents) every year, so it doesn't make sense to go nuts on stopping this virus that's looking more and more like it's a little worse than the yearly flu. the point being risks need to be properly assessed and proportionately addressed, without hysteria. the underlying question about whether we value human lives enough is another matter we certainly should continue to discuss (for the record, i think we should value human lives a little more relative to economic considerations, and the response to something like covid-19 would correspondingly be a little more proactive, but still not hasty and panicked).
- earthtourist 7y ago
  "this virus that's looking more and more like it's a little worse than the yearly flu." You're spreading ignorance. Every medical expert is saying it is 5-20x deadlier than the seasonal flu, because that's what the data says. They're predicting 40-70% infection rates. A low estimate of 0.05% mortality rate with 40% infected is: 640,000 dead in the US alone. It could end up being a 1.5% mortality rate with 70% infected: 3,360,000 dead in the US alone. Please do some reading: https://www.flattenthecurve.com https://www.flattenthecurve.com
  - ummonk 7y ago
    It would likely be >1% mortality rate even with adequate healthcare. If it hit 40-70% of the population though, people would be basically on their own, so mortality rate would be 5-10%. Tens of millions of deaths. Of course, this would never happen, since we as a society would enact major policies to slow the spread long before it got anywhere near that bad, just as Italy is doing for example. It just doesn't make any sense to wait for things to get worse to start enacting policies to slow its spread; if we're going to have to do it at some point, might as well do it early and reduce the spread.

earthtourist 7y ago

It's not the case that I'm hysterical but that you're blissfully ignorant. Fewer than 40,000 people die per year from car accidents in the US. Even optimistic estimates say Covid-19 might kill 400,000 Americans over the next year. It could kill 4,000,000 potentially, and that's not hysteria, that's what the sober math says. Some percentage, maybe 10% or more, could be young and healthy people. It all depends on how badly hospitals are overrun, how well social distancing works, and a variety of other variables that no one has the values for. You may be lucky to be young/healthy enough so that you only have a 0.2% chance of dying. Older people, that you will get sick by being cavalier, may have a 20% chance of dying. But if you want to kill your grandparents, or someone else's, that's on you. If anything, I'm a freedom-extremist. There's absolutely nothing authoritarian about the justified deployment of military personnel in times of disaster. The time to object to military force is when it's being abused. This is not abuse. And it would leverage one great US advantage: the fact that the US has a very capable military force. That's it. Stop with your dangerous ignorance.