3 ms·
Some comments on the concluding remarks: > So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two.
by leto_ii 7y ago
Some comments on the concluding remarks:
> So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two.
Sure, but it also means these deaths are piled up on top of everything else. It's not like people will stop dying of other causes.
> many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period
This strikes me as completely unfounded. Diabetes or an age > 70 aren't imminent death sentences in a developed country.
> if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality
In a sense this is a tautology. Of course, if we keep deaths to a low number there won't be an impact on mortality rates.
- monadgonad 7y ago> Sure, but it also means these deaths are piled up on top of everything else. It's not like people will stop dying of other causes. You're misunderstanding: the people who die of COVID-19 will stop dying of other causes, because they've died of COVID-19. There will be a decrease in other-cause mortality... >In a sense this is a tautology. Of course, if we keep deaths to a low number there won't be an impact on mortality rates. ...thus what it means is that if the COVID-19 deaths are kept to people who are ill enough that they would have died within the year anyway, those deaths won't be extra mortality across the year. If on the other hand COVID-19 spreads a lot and kills people who wouldn't have otherwise died, there will be extra mortality.
- leto_ii 7y agoEven among the chronically ill and the elderly, the number that die in any given year will be dwarfed by that of covid deaths (if the virus burns through the population).