3 ms·

Even w/o those non-positives, the death count for NYC is in the neighborhood of 8,000[0] (and still rising at a decent clip) for a population of 8 million. That

Even w/o those non-positives, the death count for NYC is in the neighborhood of 8,000[0] (and still rising at a decent clip) for a population of 8 million. That's 0.1%. You can also look at individual counties[1] and you get some variation but the same picture. Ex. 2.7k deaths in Queens for a population of 2.3mil, 0.4k deaths in Richmond for a population of 0.4mil (That's 0.1% for the entire population and not even nearing the maximum yet, so obviously the IFR's and CFR's will be even higher.) [0]https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-deaths-confirmed-probable-daily-04152020.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-d... [1]https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities?%3Aembed=yes&%3Atoolbar=no&%3Atabs=n https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Track...

glofish 7y ago
also while this may sound insensitive 0.1% of the population is not the same as X percent of old and sick people it is not like the virus takes down everyone equally. The overwhelming majority of those affected are both old and fairly sick already. Again I am not implying anything other than there is clear skew and the measures should target those that are at risk. It makes no sense to create generic, unworkable rules where we lock up all 20 year olds that have no risk whatsoever. It is not realistic.
- macintux 7y ago
  There’s also the problem that healthy young adults are generally very stupid when it comes to assessing risk. Sure, they’re probably only at mild risk of days of debilitating hospitalization, but they’re also going to be fairly careless about people at greater risk around them. Locking everyone up gives us a chance to gather data, prepare treatments, and find a way to protect those at risk. Letting spreaders run around carelessly will not make anything but the economy better.

glofish 7y ago

also while this may sound insensitive 0.1% of the population is not the same as X percent of old and sick people it is not like the virus takes down everyone equally. The overwhelming majority of those affected are both old and fairly sick already. Again I am not implying anything other than there is clear skew and the measures should target those that are at risk. It makes no sense to create generic, unworkable rules where we lock up all 20 year olds that have no risk whatsoever. It is not realistic.

macintux 7y ago
There’s also the problem that healthy young adults are generally very stupid when it comes to assessing risk. Sure, they’re probably only at mild risk of days of debilitating hospitalization, but they’re also going to be fairly careless about people at greater risk around them. Locking everyone up gives us a chance to gather data, prepare treatments, and find a way to protect those at risk. Letting spreaders run around carelessly will not make anything but the economy better.