3 ms·

As far as I'm aware, no-one actually knows the true mortality rate yet, nor things like which demographics are more or less severely affected other than in a fe

As far as I'm aware, no-one actually knows the true mortality rate yet, nor things like which demographics are more or less severely affected other than in a few clearly distinct cases. Most of the US seems to be a bit behind Europe in where it is on the curve, so it also seems premature to compare statistics. Until we know when and how different places have implemented lockdown conditions, track-and-trace programmes and other responses, possibly in several stages over an extended period, and how successful each place has been at limiting total excess deaths caused by the virus and at avoiding unwanted side effects from those responses, it will be difficult to draw any reliable conclusions. That seems to be a big part of the problem we face: the data we have so far is still well short of what we'd like to know in order to accurately assess the threat and decide on a proportionate response. Consequently, everyone is basing policy largely on educated guesswork and hoping to avoid any catastrophic escalation happening too fast to react, with some increasing awareness that the more severe responses will probably have serious consequences of their own if maintained for more than a very short period and we don't necessarily fully understand those either.

rpiguy 7y ago
We have excellent data now, which has caused all numbers to be revised down week after week from a ridiculous 3.4 million dead to 70K by July (the Flu killed 80K in the 2018-2019 season). There is enough data for me to decide it is not worth giving up any privacy or civil liberties for while numbers are going down. If the numbers start to go the other way, then I will reconsider. We should adapt to information as we receive it. Of course it will be tenuous and disingenuous for any political ad to make statements about the success or failure of containment strategies. I was only pointing out what we will be said, and what people will believe, not what was rational. Irrationality is not a roadblock in politics, lol.
- Silhouette 7y ago
  We have excellent data now? Please share the sources, because over here the lack of solid data seems to be the biggest obstacle to better policy making. We have official figures for COVID-19 deaths that only cover some cases and don't line up with the excess above seasonal rates. We have no idea how many people have already had it without major symptoms and estimates vary by an order of magnitude. We do not know the long term implications for those who have recovered in terms of immunity. Media sources are trying to work out fatality rates naively by dividing deaths so far by confirmed cases so far, ignoring the multi-week lag, so they are comparing incompatible figures and producing figures that may be very optimistic. Who is doing better than this right now?

rpiguy 7y ago

We have excellent data now, which has caused all numbers to be revised down week after week from a ridiculous 3.4 million dead to 70K by July (the Flu killed 80K in the 2018-2019 season). There is enough data for me to decide it is not worth giving up any privacy or civil liberties for while numbers are going down. If the numbers start to go the other way, then I will reconsider. We should adapt to information as we receive it. Of course it will be tenuous and disingenuous for any political ad to make statements about the success or failure of containment strategies. I was only pointing out what we will be said, and what people will believe, not what was rational. Irrationality is not a roadblock in politics, lol.

Silhouette 7y ago
We have excellent data now? Please share the sources, because over here the lack of solid data seems to be the biggest obstacle to better policy making. We have official figures for COVID-19 deaths that only cover some cases and don't line up with the excess above seasonal rates. We have no idea how many people have already had it without major symptoms and estimates vary by an order of magnitude. We do not know the long term implications for those who have recovered in terms of immunity. Media sources are trying to work out fatality rates naively by dividing deaths so far by confirmed cases so far, ignoring the multi-week lag, so they are comparing incompatible figures and producing figures that may be very optimistic. Who is doing better than this right now?