5 ms·

Nobody has any idea what is actually happening in China, and most of the numbers are more propagandistic than informative, so we should probably just stop specu

Nobody has any idea what is actually happening in China, and most of the numbers are more propagandistic than informative, so we should probably just stop speculating entirely. The best numbers I've seen for projecting US cases and deaths honestly seem to be pretty good: https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections This projects less than 100k deaths in the US this year. Compare that to heart disease (largely preventable) at 650k a year. That'd also make it only about 5 times worse than a bad flu year. (Edit: thanks for the correction below; if correct, this would be only about 2 times worse than a bad flu year.)

StrangeDoctor 7y ago
I also like this model but be careful with it. That’s just the first wave, and this assumes we adhere to strict social distancing in all states.
sundaeofshock 7y ago
100,000 dead in three months is not “pretty good”. Honestly, I don’t understand the casualness that people seem to have around the number of deaths. “It’s not that bad” is such a callous take.
- nostromo 7y ago
  Are you incapable of understanding relative terms? Compared to the millions of people dead in the US that many were projecting just a few days and weeks ago, this is indeed good -- in fact, very good, because it seems many fewer people will die.
  - sundaeofshock 7y ago
    100,000 - 250,000 dead is not something to celebrate. It is a reflection of the failure by the current administration to take this seriously all the way back in January. That number would be much lower if proper steps were taken back then. Also, that 100,000 assumes everyone in the country follows proper physical distancing, hand washing, etc. Last I checked, the state of Florida is still allowing for church services during their "lock-down".
    - RickJWagner 7y ago
      Your post reveals that you are viewing things through a political lens. It's true the administration could have acted sooner. It's also true the opposite party was smearing 'racism' and 'xenophobia' even as shutting flights down was obviously the right move. This is not a scenario where any politician can claim to have done better. In fact, world-wide we have seen a variety of responses, with no definitive answer on what has been good and what has been bad. It's a horrible situation for any national leader. As to the number of dead.... it is what it is. Is it good? Certainly not. Could it be worse? Certainly. Does anyone have all the optimal answers. Certainly not.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
almost_usual 7y ago
This is with extreme social distancing measures. We’re in “virus time” now and there will not be an end until a vaccine is manufactured and distributed. On again off again quarantines are now ‘normal’.
xscott 7y ago
2017-2018 was a bad flu season at 61k US deaths. So, if this turns out to be 100k, it's not 5 times worse than that.
- gremlinsinc 7y ago
  Experts estimated we'd be at 20k cases roughly by March 31st...we were at like 200-300k... so yeah experts don't know much either on how this will turn out. Some of the states not taking it seriously will drive numbers way up beyond experts best guesses. Best way to guage the toll is take a glance at deaths in 2019 vs 2020 and the difference is covid-19 related. Even if it's a heart attack who couldn't get into the ER because it was full...etc..
01100011 7y ago
Death rates really don't capture the full picture. What if zero people died from the disease directly, but it still caused painful illness with possible long term complications and overwhelmed health care systems? The economy would still be shut down. Social distancing would still be in place. The economic damage has very little to do with how many people die, and very much to do with how many people are unwilling or unable to participate in the economy.
- xscott 7y ago
  Do you know anywhere that is reporting stats on how many people are maimed by this?
  - 01100011 7y ago
    I haven't seen it but I'm guessing that won't show up until next year. I'd figure that people who survive the virus and can breathe on their own have to wait for follow up since resources are tight.
orwin 7y ago
This is with lockdown in place. No lockdown and you could aim for 600 to 2M death in the US alone. ten to twenty time a bad flue year. Also some people are out of the ICU (at least in France) and will have to do 3 to 6 month of reeducation for the best cases. For the worst cases (still in ICU at the moment, at least in Colmar), its 20 years shoved off (lung fibrosis), one of them is younger than me. I guarantee you lethality might be what we're talking about now, but next year it will become secondary.
- orwin 7y ago
  Can't edit anymore (too late) I was wrong, fibrosis did not only appear in ICU patients, but also in patients who were healthy enough to stay home. This is shittier than i thought.

StrangeDoctor 7y ago

I also like this model but be careful with it. That’s just the first wave, and this assumes we adhere to strict social distancing in all states.

sundaeofshock 7y ago

100,000 dead in three months is not “pretty good”. Honestly, I don’t understand the casualness that people seem to have around the number of deaths. “It’s not that bad” is such a callous take.

nostromo 7y ago
Are you incapable of understanding relative terms? Compared to the millions of people dead in the US that many were projecting just a few days and weeks ago, this is indeed good -- in fact, very good, because it seems many fewer people will die.
- sundaeofshock 7y ago
  100,000 - 250,000 dead is not something to celebrate. It is a reflection of the failure by the current administration to take this seriously all the way back in January. That number would be much lower if proper steps were taken back then. Also, that 100,000 assumes everyone in the country follows proper physical distancing, hand washing, etc. Last I checked, the state of Florida is still allowing for church services during their "lock-down".
  - RickJWagner 7y ago
    Your post reveals that you are viewing things through a political lens. It's true the administration could have acted sooner. It's also true the opposite party was smearing 'racism' and 'xenophobia' even as shutting flights down was obviously the right move. This is not a scenario where any politician can claim to have done better. In fact, world-wide we have seen a variety of responses, with no definitive answer on what has been good and what has been bad. It's a horrible situation for any national leader. As to the number of dead.... it is what it is. Is it good? Certainly not. Could it be worse? Certainly. Does anyone have all the optimal answers. Certainly not.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

almost_usual 7y ago

This is with extreme social distancing measures. We’re in “virus time” now and there will not be an end until a vaccine is manufactured and distributed. On again off again quarantines are now ‘normal’.

xscott 7y ago

2017-2018 was a bad flu season at 61k US deaths. So, if this turns out to be 100k, it's not 5 times worse than that.

gremlinsinc 7y ago
Experts estimated we'd be at 20k cases roughly by March 31st...we were at like 200-300k... so yeah experts don't know much either on how this will turn out. Some of the states not taking it seriously will drive numbers way up beyond experts best guesses. Best way to guage the toll is take a glance at deaths in 2019 vs 2020 and the difference is covid-19 related. Even if it's a heart attack who couldn't get into the ER because it was full...etc..

01100011 7y ago

Death rates really don't capture the full picture. What if zero people died from the disease directly, but it still caused painful illness with possible long term complications and overwhelmed health care systems? The economy would still be shut down. Social distancing would still be in place. The economic damage has very little to do with how many people die, and very much to do with how many people are unwilling or unable to participate in the economy.

xscott 7y ago
Do you know anywhere that is reporting stats on how many people are maimed by this?
- 01100011 7y ago
  I haven't seen it but I'm guessing that won't show up until next year. I'd figure that people who survive the virus and can breathe on their own have to wait for follow up since resources are tight.

orwin 7y ago

This is with lockdown in place. No lockdown and you could aim for 600 to 2M death in the US alone. ten to twenty time a bad flue year. Also some people are out of the ICU (at least in France) and will have to do 3 to 6 month of reeducation for the best cases. For the worst cases (still in ICU at the moment, at least in Colmar), its 20 years shoved off (lung fibrosis), one of them is younger than me. I guarantee you lethality might be what we're talking about now, but next year it will become secondary.

orwin 7y ago
Can't edit anymore (too late) I was wrong, fibrosis did not only appear in ICU patients, but also in patients who were healthy enough to stay home. This is shittier than i thought.