7 ms·

One of the comments made in the video (referenced in the article as well) is "We always have between 37,000 and 60,000 deaths in the United States, every singl

One of the comments made in the video (referenced in the article as well) is "We always have between 37,000 and 60,000 deaths in the United States, every single year. No pandemic talk. No shelter in place. No shutting down businesses." Since early Feb we've seen ~54K deaths from Coronavirus alone (excluding influenza deaths) [0]. The argument that this is just part of the normal flu cycle doesn't make any sense. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/case...

joshuamorton 6y ago
And that's despite nearly nationwide shelter in place measures. If those hadn't been implemented, the toll could well be an order of magnitude higher.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- shakopeeant 6y ago
  And I guess these guys "could" be right also.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
  What happens to at-risk people lockdown ends? They could continue to shelter, but if the rest of the world isn't, anybody they make contact with will put them at higher risk due to decreased practice of social distancing.
  - forgot_my_pwd 6y ago
    A natural byproduct of a functioning society has always been otherwise avoidable deaths: car accidents, workplace accidents, flu deaths, etc. The idea that we can hide out until the virus completely disappears is a fantasy. The only sustainable path forward is targeted lockdown and isolation for the most vulnerable along with mustering our energies for testing and treatment.
    - dboreham 6y ago
      Not quite true because you can avoid overshooting herd immunity with the slowed spread we will hopefully see now.
      - djrogers 6y ago
        That’s not a good argument - we cannot possibly get to herd immunity with the infection rates we’re seeing under lockdown. Without loosening of the restrictions and a measured return to work, we’ll be stuck in Shelter mode for years before we get to 60+%...
- manfredo 6y ago
  Are infections and death tolls in the countries with much less restrictive measures an order of magnitude higher?
  - jaggederest 6y ago
    Yes, actually. Here's an example, probably the best natural experiment we're going to see in this context. Five times more, depending on your idea of "order of magnitude". https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/europe/sweden-coronavirus-lockdown-strategy-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/europe/sweden-coronavirus-loc...
    - joshuaheard 6y ago
      An order of magnitude usually means 10x, ie 140 vs 14. According to your article, Sweden has had a lower death rate than the UK, Spain, or Italy.
      - jaggederest 6y ago
        Ah, this is hacker news - to me, an order of magnitude means double, 2^n where N=2 and N=>4, on deaths per 100k. Those are different countries, though, with much higher population density. This is the only case where culturally and demographically similar countries pursued different courses in a way that makes them eligible for direct comparison.
      - kaitai 6y ago
        One can compare it to its immediate neighbors (Finland, Denmark, Norway) and get your order of magnitude right there. Norway: 206 deaths, population a bit over 5.8 million. Finland: 199 deaths, population a bit over 5 million. Sweden: 2,355 deaths, population a bit over 10 million. I'll let you carry out the division yourself. Comparing to its geographical and cultural neighbors helps deal with differences in city structure, public health system, trust in government, population density, etc.
        djrogers 6y ago
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  And yet Sweden is doing fine without such orders: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/no-lockdown-in-sweden-but-stockholm-could-see-herd-immunity-in-weeks.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/no-lockdown-in-sweden-but-st... Sorry but there are other paths to containing the virus without resorting to draconian measures, especially when those measures are indiscriminate blunt instruments (for example applying same restrictions to urban and rural areas).
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Sweden's first case with community spread was from the end of February, so it's been spreading for a month or two less than in, say, Germany. Despite that Sweden has the same per capita infection rate and a per capita death rate of around 3x Germany's. And that's still with some social distancing requests, there just isn't a stay at home order. So yes, unless Sweden tightens restrictions, I'd expect to see it hit an order of magnitude harder than nations doing more restrictions, despite still having some.
fzeroracer 6y ago
This is not to mention that Japan's going through some problems right now too in various ways. Not only did they experience a spike in COVID-19 cases early this month due to lax measures, Hokkaido actually had to go into lockdown again because they lifted the shelter in place order and it resulted in an even larger second wave of cases. The fact that we're delusional enough to think that we're somehow safe from the same thing occurring here is absurd. And this is in a country that's far better about following shelter orders and mask-wearing guidance!
colmvp 6y ago
And that's recorded cases. There might be people who died from Covid-19 who weren't tested post-mortem, especially in February when the virus was flying under the radar. NYTimes had an article which showed a number of places around the world have had a surge in deaths compared to the same time period in previous years. And even if you subtract the known Covid-19 cases, there's still a sharp increase in the count.
- busymom0 6y ago
  That's the exact opposite of what's happened. The number of deaths being reported includes "probable deaths". It's even more than the actual confirmed cases. Look at the graph on the last page for NYC for example: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-deaths-confirmed-probable-daily-04222020.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-d...
  - mennis16 6y ago
    Just because they are counting probable deaths does not mean they aren't also undercounting the true deaths. Given the rate of testing confirmed is clearly << true, so I don't see why there is so much objection to using some form of probable deaths. And I haven't seen any legit claims that the specific mechanism for determining probable deaths used in NYC is net overcounting. Excess death data so far suggests that they are indeed undercounting true deaths. While it is certainly possible lockdown has caused some additional immediate deaths, it is also likely other deaths (eg decreased car accidents) have gone down. So it will require further analysis once this is all said and done and more data is available, but my money is that the US has undercounted deaths thus far.
  - cycomanic 6y ago
    Well the flu deaths are all counted as probable deaths, what you call "confirmed cases" for flu deaths is at least an order of magnitude lower (in Germany in the 2017/18 flu outbreak it was a couple of hundred, while the outbreak is typically blamed for around 25000 deaths in that year, based on statistics). To highlight the spike in deaths being significantly higher than even the worst flu over the last years look at the data from Euromono https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ It's even worse if one considers that so far the deaths have been quite localised compared to e.g. the flu.
kryogen1c 6y ago
> The argument that this is just part of the normal flu cycle doesn't make any sense. those deaths are after the seasonal flu is heavily vaccinated against. in 2017-2018, flu vaccine generation was at a record high [0] (in the US). its heavily vaccinated against (with many sectors like military and healthcare requiring vaccination) exactly because its dangerous. isnt this a normal flu? what would happen if we stopped producing normal flu vaccines? in other words, what if a new flu came out that ignored our current vaccines - a novel virus? [0] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.htm#anchor_1534865891939 https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.ht...
p1necone 6y ago
Exactly - there's so many people spreading this conspiracy theory bullshit and it's completely farcical even at a glance. Like do they think it's normal during flu season to have to bring in tens of refrigerated trucks to act as temporary morgues? [1] The pattern is so transparent too - telling us to listen to "both sides", and implying we're being biased when we dismiss obvious misinformation. I can't help that the American right is so detached from reality. There's a global pandemic. This bullshit will literally kill people. YouTube is a private company, and they have every right to remove this from their system. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/nyregion/coronavirus-new-york-bodies.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/nyregion/coronavirus-new-...
- shard972 6y ago
  Then they are a publisher
mixmastamyk 6y ago
Flu season is only a few months. What would the numbers be if it were the entire year? Flu season is vaccinated against. Also it has been known that cv has a larger multiple death rate.

joshuamorton 6y ago

And that's despite nearly nationwide shelter in place measures. If those hadn't been implemented, the toll could well be an order of magnitude higher.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
shakopeeant 6y ago
And I guess these guys "could" be right also.
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
What happens to at-risk people lockdown ends? They could continue to shelter, but if the rest of the world isn't, anybody they make contact with will put them at higher risk due to decreased practice of social distancing.
- forgot_my_pwd 6y ago
  A natural byproduct of a functioning society has always been otherwise avoidable deaths: car accidents, workplace accidents, flu deaths, etc. The idea that we can hide out until the virus completely disappears is a fantasy. The only sustainable path forward is targeted lockdown and isolation for the most vulnerable along with mustering our energies for testing and treatment.
  - dboreham 6y ago
    Not quite true because you can avoid overshooting herd immunity with the slowed spread we will hopefully see now.
    - djrogers 6y ago
      That’s not a good argument - we cannot possibly get to herd immunity with the infection rates we’re seeing under lockdown. Without loosening of the restrictions and a measured return to work, we’ll be stuck in Shelter mode for years before we get to 60+%...
manfredo 6y ago
Are infections and death tolls in the countries with much less restrictive measures an order of magnitude higher?
- jaggederest 6y ago
  Yes, actually. Here's an example, probably the best natural experiment we're going to see in this context. Five times more, depending on your idea of "order of magnitude". https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/europe/sweden-coronavirus-lockdown-strategy-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/europe/sweden-coronavirus-loc...
  - joshuaheard 6y ago
    An order of magnitude usually means 10x, ie 140 vs 14. According to your article, Sweden has had a lower death rate than the UK, Spain, or Italy.
    - jaggederest 6y ago
      Ah, this is hacker news - to me, an order of magnitude means double, 2^n where N=2 and N=>4, on deaths per 100k. Those are different countries, though, with much higher population density. This is the only case where culturally and demographically similar countries pursued different courses in a way that makes them eligible for direct comparison.
    - kaitai 6y ago
      One can compare it to its immediate neighbors (Finland, Denmark, Norway) and get your order of magnitude right there. Norway: 206 deaths, population a bit over 5.8 million. Finland: 199 deaths, population a bit over 5 million. Sweden: 2,355 deaths, population a bit over 10 million. I'll let you carry out the division yourself. Comparing to its geographical and cultural neighbors helps deal with differences in city structure, public health system, trust in government, population density, etc.
      - djrogers 6y ago
throwawaysea 6y ago
And yet Sweden is doing fine without such orders: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/no-lockdown-in-sweden-but-stockholm-could-see-herd-immunity-in-weeks.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/no-lockdown-in-sweden-but-st... Sorry but there are other paths to containing the virus without resorting to draconian measures, especially when those measures are indiscriminate blunt instruments (for example applying same restrictions to urban and rural areas).
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Sweden's first case with community spread was from the end of February, so it's been spreading for a month or two less than in, say, Germany. Despite that Sweden has the same per capita infection rate and a per capita death rate of around 3x Germany's. And that's still with some social distancing requests, there just isn't a stay at home order. So yes, unless Sweden tightens restrictions, I'd expect to see it hit an order of magnitude harder than nations doing more restrictions, despite still having some.

fzeroracer 6y ago

This is not to mention that Japan's going through some problems right now too in various ways. Not only did they experience a spike in COVID-19 cases early this month due to lax measures, Hokkaido actually had to go into lockdown again because they lifted the shelter in place order and it resulted in an even larger second wave of cases. The fact that we're delusional enough to think that we're somehow safe from the same thing occurring here is absurd. And this is in a country that's far better about following shelter orders and mask-wearing guidance!

colmvp 6y ago

And that's recorded cases. There might be people who died from Covid-19 who weren't tested post-mortem, especially in February when the virus was flying under the radar. NYTimes had an article which showed a number of places around the world have had a surge in deaths compared to the same time period in previous years. And even if you subtract the known Covid-19 cases, there's still a sharp increase in the count.

busymom0 6y ago
That's the exact opposite of what's happened. The number of deaths being reported includes "probable deaths". It's even more than the actual confirmed cases. Look at the graph on the last page for NYC for example: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-deaths-confirmed-probable-daily-04222020.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-d...
- mennis16 6y ago
  Just because they are counting probable deaths does not mean they aren't also undercounting the true deaths. Given the rate of testing confirmed is clearly << true, so I don't see why there is so much objection to using some form of probable deaths. And I haven't seen any legit claims that the specific mechanism for determining probable deaths used in NYC is net overcounting. Excess death data so far suggests that they are indeed undercounting true deaths. While it is certainly possible lockdown has caused some additional immediate deaths, it is also likely other deaths (eg decreased car accidents) have gone down. So it will require further analysis once this is all said and done and more data is available, but my money is that the US has undercounted deaths thus far.
- cycomanic 6y ago
  Well the flu deaths are all counted as probable deaths, what you call "confirmed cases" for flu deaths is at least an order of magnitude lower (in Germany in the 2017/18 flu outbreak it was a couple of hundred, while the outbreak is typically blamed for around 25000 deaths in that year, based on statistics). To highlight the spike in deaths being significantly higher than even the worst flu over the last years look at the data from Euromono https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ It's even worse if one considers that so far the deaths have been quite localised compared to e.g. the flu.

kryogen1c 6y ago

> The argument that this is just part of the normal flu cycle doesn't make any sense. those deaths are after the seasonal flu is heavily vaccinated against. in 2017-2018, flu vaccine generation was at a record high [0] (in the US). its heavily vaccinated against (with many sectors like military and healthcare requiring vaccination) exactly because its dangerous. isnt this a normal flu? what would happen if we stopped producing normal flu vaccines? in other words, what if a new flu came out that ignored our current vaccines - a novel virus? [0] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.htm#anchor_1534865891939 https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.ht...

p1necone 6y ago

Exactly - there's so many people spreading this conspiracy theory bullshit and it's completely farcical even at a glance. Like do they think it's normal during flu season to have to bring in tens of refrigerated trucks to act as temporary morgues? [1] The pattern is so transparent too - telling us to listen to "both sides", and implying we're being biased when we dismiss obvious misinformation. I can't help that the American right is so detached from reality. There's a global pandemic. This bullshit will literally kill people. YouTube is a private company, and they have every right to remove this from their system. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/nyregion/coronavirus-new-york-bodies.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/nyregion/coronavirus-new-...

shard972 6y ago
Then they are a publisher

mixmastamyk 6y ago

Flu season is only a few months. What would the numbers be if it were the entire year? Flu season is vaccinated against. Also it has been known that cv has a larger multiple death rate.