55 ms·

The US is predicting 60k deaths. Millions is quite an exaggeration. Would you still give up your privacy to save a few thousand lives?

andruby 7y ago
60k deaths in the US on a population of 330M, guess how much that would mean for the world? 7700M/330M * 60K = 1.4M. OP is absolutely right. Countries with lower standard of healthcare than the US will have a higher death rate.
- graeme 7y ago
  It’s also surely an undercount in the US. We’ll get accurate numbers when all cause mortality comes out. In Europe the totals were underestimated by a factor of two in most countries. For example, in NYC, this chart shows roughly 5500 excess deaths on april 4th. Whereas on that day nyc had only counted 3500 coronavirus deaths. https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1248905714124414976/photo/1 https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1248905714124414976/...
- Zenbit_UX 7y ago
  The US is an extreme example, their news stations were downplaying it and calling it a hoax, they didn't follow social distancing in most places until it was too late, they were late to the "this is not the flu" party by a month and grossly incompetent leadership combined with the CDC literally lying to its people === the perfect storm. Further, those numbers are based on NYC hospitals being completely overwhelmed which sky rocketed the death rate. If a country can flatten their curve what is happening in New York doesn't have to happen again.
  - acdha 7y ago
    “Fox and OAN” are not the same as “news stations”. If you got your news anywhere else this was reported accurately by the middle of January[1] and there were plenty of experts calling for social distancing by February. The decision to politicize medicine will go down in history’s list of bad calls but it’s a function of the right-wing propaganda network, not the news media or public health experts. 1. Yes, there was that dweeb with the NYT opinion piece saying it wasn’t worse than the flu. There’s a reason that ran in the opinion section.
  - rootusrootus 7y ago
    The US is pretty much in the middle of the pack when it comes to how typical western democracies have responded to the crisis.
jfoster 7y ago
Millions doesn't seem like an exaggeration: 1. The US, despite currently suffering the most, will probably not end up being the country with the most casualties. Once covid-19 takes hold in more densely populated poorer countries, there will be immense suffering. 2. 1918 flu cost up to 100 million lives, 1957 flu about a million lives, and 1968 flu about a million lives. 3. Total deaths worldwide is already >100k, and the known cases are still less than 0.03% of the population. Would I give up my privacy to save a few thousand lives? Yes, but the scenario is incorrect. There isn't really a privacy sacrifice involved. I'm trying to think of the worst-case scenario in terms of privacy, but there just isn't one. Someone finds out that a device with ID 00:11:22:33:FF:EE spent 15 minutes with a device with ID 01:31:24:53:EF:AE. It's not worth so many people losing their lives for.
codeulike 7y ago
60k if everyone stays in lockdown for the rest of time/until vaccine developed and mass vaccination achieved source: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/04/09/coronavirus-deaths-u-s-could-closer-60-k-new-model-shows/5122467002/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/04/09...
easymodex 7y ago
US already has 20k deaths and only 500k confirmed infections. Not all of those infections have had an outcome and not all infected have been confirmed so it's hard to do an exact calculation but based on that data more than a million deaths is very likely. So yeah, it's worth it.
- Zenbit_UX 7y ago
  Not sure about your math there, a million deaths in the US seems impossible, worst case 100-200k. Did you mean the world? Even that seems a bit high.
  - acdha 7y ago
    Where’s your source for that worst case? All credible sources are in the 7 figure range until we get a vaccine or reliable drug regimen.
  - dboreham 7y ago
    Impossible? Why? 1% infection fatality rate with 70% population infected would give 2 million.
    - jfoster 7y ago
      Plus you're saying that based on the current data. The fatality rate only worsens as the infection rate goes up and hospitals become even more overwhelmed.
    - rootusrootus 7y ago
      The reputable estimates for IFR aren't suggesting 1%, thankfully.
      - dboreham 7y ago
        True, but no estimate is lower than 0.3%, which is still very high (600,000+ dead in the USA). The next step in walking back the fatality rate of course will be to define an IFR that's "net of people who were probably going to die soon anyways".

andruby 7y ago

60k deaths in the US on a population of 330M, guess how much that would mean for the world? 7700M/330M * 60K = 1.4M. OP is absolutely right. Countries with lower standard of healthcare than the US will have a higher death rate.

graeme 7y ago
It’s also surely an undercount in the US. We’ll get accurate numbers when all cause mortality comes out. In Europe the totals were underestimated by a factor of two in most countries. For example, in NYC, this chart shows roughly 5500 excess deaths on april 4th. Whereas on that day nyc had only counted 3500 coronavirus deaths. https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1248905714124414976/photo/1 https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1248905714124414976/...
Zenbit_UX 7y ago
The US is an extreme example, their news stations were downplaying it and calling it a hoax, they didn't follow social distancing in most places until it was too late, they were late to the "this is not the flu" party by a month and grossly incompetent leadership combined with the CDC literally lying to its people === the perfect storm. Further, those numbers are based on NYC hospitals being completely overwhelmed which sky rocketed the death rate. If a country can flatten their curve what is happening in New York doesn't have to happen again.
- acdha 7y ago
  “Fox and OAN” are not the same as “news stations”. If you got your news anywhere else this was reported accurately by the middle of January[1] and there were plenty of experts calling for social distancing by February. The decision to politicize medicine will go down in history’s list of bad calls but it’s a function of the right-wing propaganda network, not the news media or public health experts. 1. Yes, there was that dweeb with the NYT opinion piece saying it wasn’t worse than the flu. There’s a reason that ran in the opinion section.
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  The US is pretty much in the middle of the pack when it comes to how typical western democracies have responded to the crisis.

jfoster 7y ago

Millions doesn't seem like an exaggeration: 1. The US, despite currently suffering the most, will probably not end up being the country with the most casualties. Once covid-19 takes hold in more densely populated poorer countries, there will be immense suffering. 2. 1918 flu cost up to 100 million lives, 1957 flu about a million lives, and 1968 flu about a million lives. 3. Total deaths worldwide is already >100k, and the known cases are still less than 0.03% of the population. Would I give up my privacy to save a few thousand lives? Yes, but the scenario is incorrect. There isn't really a privacy sacrifice involved. I'm trying to think of the worst-case scenario in terms of privacy, but there just isn't one. Someone finds out that a device with ID 00:11:22:33:FF:EE spent 15 minutes with a device with ID 01:31:24:53:EF:AE. It's not worth so many people losing their lives for.

codeulike 7y ago

60k if everyone stays in lockdown for the rest of time/until vaccine developed and mass vaccination achieved source: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/04/09/coronavirus-deaths-u-s-could-closer-60-k-new-model-shows/5122467002/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/04/09...

easymodex 7y ago

US already has 20k deaths and only 500k confirmed infections. Not all of those infections have had an outcome and not all infected have been confirmed so it's hard to do an exact calculation but based on that data more than a million deaths is very likely. So yeah, it's worth it.

Zenbit_UX 7y ago
Not sure about your math there, a million deaths in the US seems impossible, worst case 100-200k. Did you mean the world? Even that seems a bit high.
- acdha 7y ago
  Where’s your source for that worst case? All credible sources are in the 7 figure range until we get a vaccine or reliable drug regimen.
- dboreham 7y ago
  Impossible? Why? 1% infection fatality rate with 70% population infected would give 2 million.
  - jfoster 7y ago
    Plus you're saying that based on the current data. The fatality rate only worsens as the infection rate goes up and hospitals become even more overwhelmed.
  - rootusrootus 7y ago
    The reputable estimates for IFR aren't suggesting 1%, thankfully.
    - dboreham 7y ago
      True, but no estimate is lower than 0.3%, which is still very high (600,000+ dead in the USA). The next step in walking back the fatality rate of course will be to define an IFR that's "net of people who were probably going to die soon anyways".