3 ms·

Simple numbers tell us the deaths so far from covid-19 have been less than an average flu season. But so what? You're not actually suggesting anything so there

by jmull 7y ago

Simple numbers tell us the deaths so far from covid-19 have been less than an average flu season. But so what? You're not actually suggesting anything so there's nothing to get directly angry about. But since you don't suggest anything, you leave it to people to infer what you really mean, and then there may be good reason to get angry. Are you suggesting that we should have treated covid-19 like the flu -- although one without a vaccine -- and just went about our normal lives? If so, how much faster do you think our medical systems would have been overwhelmed and what do you think we could have done about that? You can crunch numbers... estimate the numbers dead from covid-19 without any curve-flattening efforts and the additional dead due to the medical system being overwhelmed. Or are you suggesting something else? We can't read your mind over the internet.

dekhn 7y ago
Hmm, that's a good point. my main point is that we should treat flu more seriously (personally I would prefer legally mandated vaccines with extremely limited exceptions, and more funding into improved vaccines that have a higher effectivity). My second point is about the response to covid. To me it's unclear (and it won't be clear to the epidemiologists for a few years) whether the reactions we have taken had the effects we predicted. Much of what we're doing now, it's actually unclear what would have happened if we hadn't has social distancing etc, due to the extremely low rate of testing. Another issue is that large numbers of scientists have dropped their regular work and are working on covid... most of them will not produce useful results (in terms of health care) and instead, their daily work is being forgotten. This will have long-term consequences for scientific productivity without having a large outcome for covid. I think making predictions on how many people "could have died" when we're doing extremely limited testing isn't helpful.
- jmull 7y ago
  > we should treat flu more seriously Agreed (though in the US we do have a yearly nation-wide vaccination program, imperfect as it is, and largely staff and equip hospitals to handle the high-water mark of cases). > I think making predictions on how many people "could have died" when we're doing extremely limited testing isn't helpful. I disagree with that. The alternative to making imperfect predictions (predictions are imperfect by nature) is to not make predictions. Without predictions you can't make reasonable decisions to direct your future. Of course, when your predictions are too far off you can't make good decisions to direct your future either, but that just suggests you should try to make the best predictions you can (hence the science and study of epidemiology), not that you shouldn't make predictions. If you don't make predictions (or you make them based on hunches or by other low quality means) you're just throwing yourself randomly into the future and are unlikely to get good outcomes.
nickthemagicman 7y ago
Since there's no vaccine...what you're suggesting is a perpetual game of Covid whack-a-mole. We come out of quarantine it blows up again, we go back into quarantine. That's as infeasable solution as this current lockdown quarantine.
- dekhn 7y ago
  So far most data I've seen shows that people who were infected have some immunity. However, it's not clear yet what the annual effect of immunity will be - for example, we haven't sampled enough people/viruses to know in detail whether that immunity persists when the virus mutates. Epidemiologists are likely to know the answers to these sorts of questions in a few years.
  - nickthemagicman 7y ago
    Every single other known Coronavirus builds immunity. Hundreds of thousands of patients and no reports of repeat healthy patients. Preliminary studies with macaque monkeys show that an immunity is built. There's plenty of data to show that an infection is built.
    - nickthemagicman 7y ago
      *immunity to infection

by jmull 7y ago

dekhn 7y ago

Hmm, that's a good point. my main point is that we should treat flu more seriously (personally I would prefer legally mandated vaccines with extremely limited exceptions, and more funding into improved vaccines that have a higher effectivity). My second point is about the response to covid. To me it's unclear (and it won't be clear to the epidemiologists for a few years) whether the reactions we have taken had the effects we predicted. Much of what we're doing now, it's actually unclear what would have happened if we hadn't has social distancing etc, due to the extremely low rate of testing. Another issue is that large numbers of scientists have dropped their regular work and are working on covid... most of them will not produce useful results (in terms of health care) and instead, their daily work is being forgotten. This will have long-term consequences for scientific productivity without having a large outcome for covid. I think making predictions on how many people "could have died" when we're doing extremely limited testing isn't helpful.

jmull 7y ago
> we should treat flu more seriously Agreed (though in the US we do have a yearly nation-wide vaccination program, imperfect as it is, and largely staff and equip hospitals to handle the high-water mark of cases). > I think making predictions on how many people "could have died" when we're doing extremely limited testing isn't helpful. I disagree with that. The alternative to making imperfect predictions (predictions are imperfect by nature) is to not make predictions. Without predictions you can't make reasonable decisions to direct your future. Of course, when your predictions are too far off you can't make good decisions to direct your future either, but that just suggests you should try to make the best predictions you can (hence the science and study of epidemiology), not that you shouldn't make predictions. If you don't make predictions (or you make them based on hunches or by other low quality means) you're just throwing yourself randomly into the future and are unlikely to get good outcomes.

nickthemagicman 7y ago

Since there's no vaccine...what you're suggesting is a perpetual game of Covid whack-a-mole. We come out of quarantine it blows up again, we go back into quarantine. That's as infeasable solution as this current lockdown quarantine.

dekhn 7y ago
So far most data I've seen shows that people who were infected have some immunity. However, it's not clear yet what the annual effect of immunity will be - for example, we haven't sampled enough people/viruses to know in detail whether that immunity persists when the virus mutates. Epidemiologists are likely to know the answers to these sorts of questions in a few years.
- nickthemagicman 7y ago
  Every single other known Coronavirus builds immunity. Hundreds of thousands of patients and no reports of repeat healthy patients. Preliminary studies with macaque monkeys show that an immunity is built. There's plenty of data to show that an infection is built.
  - nickthemagicman 7y ago
    *immunity to infection