5 ms·

Stop pretending this is just "the flu" either. When we talk about flu stats: most people have some immunity to the flu thanks to flu shots (even if they haven'

Stop pretending this is just "the flu" either. When we talk about flu stats: most people have some immunity to the flu thanks to flu shots (even if they haven't gotten one for this past year) and general herd immunity, which we DO NOT HAVE for this virus, and won't gain without either a vaccine or a few million dead from this thing running rampant. The stats you're quoting are WITH the level of serious intervention we've had so far, which is why as certain states are reopening, we're starting to see the numbers ticking back up again and looking just as bad if not worse.

SlowRobotAhead 6y ago
I don't think he did compare it to the flu. But look, as unpopular as that comparison is, we just don't have numbers that support the original estimates that caused lock downs of 2 million dead in the US. The media pushed worst case over and over, and still is. I think an uncomfortable stat this coming year will be just how few people will have been reported to died in 2020 of regular flu. It's not saying Covid19 isn't bad in any way to realize that number, will be almost nothing, and that will be suspicious to people going forward for NextTime.
- DougWebb 6y ago
  We don't have those numbers because of the lockdowns, which were obeyed in part because of the media coverage. The alternative would have been China's approach of physically locking people inside their homes, or much lower compliance and higher infection and death rates.
  - tathougies 6y ago
    > We don't have those numbers because of the lockdowns, which were obeyed in part because of the media coverage. The alternative would have been China's approach of physically locking people inside their homes, or much lower compliance and higher infection and death rates. Complete and utter lies. While true that the lockdown certainly reduced death rate, the death toll was never likely to be 2 million by summer, as widely was reported in the media. For example, The media reported that Sweden would have 40k deaths by now. In reality they have 3000. Sweden is the only data point, since they're the only place that didn't shut down. That is an incredibly faulty model.
    - dasil003 6y ago
      Are you suggesting Swedish people have not changed their behavior?
      - tathougies 6y ago
        They certainly have, but not due to a 'shutdown' like the ones that were being encouraged in every other country. The media stats said that we were in for 2m deaths in the United States if the government did not shut things down. That was wrong. A proper media response would have anticipated that -- even if the gov't didn't shut things down -- people would have been more cautious by making individual decisions. That would have lead to a better government response.
    - inpdx 6y ago
      Sweden didn't have an official lockdown, but they encouraged safer behavior and already have more work from home and single people living alone than other places. That would not have worked in the US, and in truth it didn't work as well as their neighbors.
  - Gibbon1 6y ago
    There is the small matter that deniers make the claim that government lockdowns are forcing people to stay home, not work, etc. When the data tends to show people were starting to shelter in place well before governments took action. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-didnt-wait-for-their-governors-to-tell-them-to-stay-home-because-of-covid-19/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-didnt-wait-fo...
  - SlowRobotAhead 6y ago
    You sure? https://mobile.twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1261353327113244675?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthedonald.win%2F https://mobile.twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/126135332711324...
- DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
  How do you square this with what happened in Lombardy, Spain, France and other places in which the healthcare systems were overwhelmed and tens of thousands of people died in just a few weeks?
  - briandear 6y ago
    Do you know how many flu deaths happened in Italy during the 2016/17 flu season? Compare that to the Coronavirus deaths. The numbers are really close. Italy isn’t particularly an outlier in terms of Coronavirus severity when you look at their historical flu numbers compared to the rest of Europe. Their Coronavirus deaths follow the same trend as with their flu fatalities. Really nothing surprising in Italy, but the media lost their minds over it. https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/fulltext https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/ful...
    - maxerickson 6y ago
      Did Italy lock down for 2 months in 2016/17 to combat the flu? Do you think that information is relevant to a comparison?
    - SomeoneFromCA 6y ago
      Yes you are exactly right. It has always been normal to send the dead bodies to neighboring towns, when your crematoriums are full, and they did it every year in Lombardy. No one just noticed previously. I think we need to blame their mayor, for not encouraging building bigger better crematorium.
    - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
      I asked you about the collapse of the healthcare system in Lombardy, within a few weeks of the virus appearing. When has the flu done that? You're presenting what happened in Lombardy as some sort of mass hysteria. Was the healthcare system overwhelmed, or was that a mass hallucination? There have been 30,000 confirmed CoVID-19 deaths in Italy, which is about double a normal flu season. What do you think that number would have been without any social distancing measures? As I see it, the numbers are not that difficult to estimate. About 70% of people would need to catch CoVID-19 before herd immunity brought R below 1. With an IFR of 0.5%, and a population of 60 million people, that would mean about 200,000 deaths. Is that enough to "lose one's mind over"?
- cozzyd 6y ago
  The inferred IFR from serological prevalance and deaths in NYC is ~1%. NYC's demographics skew favorably compared to the nation, but assuming ~60% of the country would get COVID-19 if not for restrictions, 2 million is right on the money.
  - pnako 6y ago
    Assuming 12.38 million people would die of it, 12.38 million people would die of it. Stop assuming things.
    - cozzyd 6y ago
      It's a conservative assumption based on a low estimate of R_0 without mitigations. It's hard to make inferences about the world without assumptions.
    - selectodude 6y ago
      You're the one trying to make OP prove a negative.
  - greedo 6y ago
    And this also ignores those who survive COVID-19. Roughly 5% are being hospitalized with potential long term effects. Everyone assumes that we're over the hump. The only place in the US that I would consider over the hump is NYC. Everywhere else has nowhere to go until herd immunity is reached.

SlowRobotAhead 6y ago

I don't think he did compare it to the flu. But look, as unpopular as that comparison is, we just don't have numbers that support the original estimates that caused lock downs of 2 million dead in the US. The media pushed worst case over and over, and still is. I think an uncomfortable stat this coming year will be just how few people will have been reported to died in 2020 of regular flu. It's not saying Covid19 isn't bad in any way to realize that number, will be almost nothing, and that will be suspicious to people going forward for NextTime.

DougWebb 6y ago
We don't have those numbers because of the lockdowns, which were obeyed in part because of the media coverage. The alternative would have been China's approach of physically locking people inside their homes, or much lower compliance and higher infection and death rates.
- tathougies 6y ago
  > We don't have those numbers because of the lockdowns, which were obeyed in part because of the media coverage. The alternative would have been China's approach of physically locking people inside their homes, or much lower compliance and higher infection and death rates. Complete and utter lies. While true that the lockdown certainly reduced death rate, the death toll was never likely to be 2 million by summer, as widely was reported in the media. For example, The media reported that Sweden would have 40k deaths by now. In reality they have 3000. Sweden is the only data point, since they're the only place that didn't shut down. That is an incredibly faulty model.
  - dasil003 6y ago
    Are you suggesting Swedish people have not changed their behavior?
    - tathougies 6y ago
      They certainly have, but not due to a 'shutdown' like the ones that were being encouraged in every other country. The media stats said that we were in for 2m deaths in the United States if the government did not shut things down. That was wrong. A proper media response would have anticipated that -- even if the gov't didn't shut things down -- people would have been more cautious by making individual decisions. That would have lead to a better government response.
  - inpdx 6y ago
    Sweden didn't have an official lockdown, but they encouraged safer behavior and already have more work from home and single people living alone than other places. That would not have worked in the US, and in truth it didn't work as well as their neighbors.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  There is the small matter that deniers make the claim that government lockdowns are forcing people to stay home, not work, etc. When the data tends to show people were starting to shelter in place well before governments took action. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-didnt-wait-for-their-governors-to-tell-them-to-stay-home-because-of-covid-19/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-didnt-wait-fo...
- SlowRobotAhead 6y ago
  You sure? https://mobile.twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1261353327113244675?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthedonald.win%2F https://mobile.twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/126135332711324...
DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
How do you square this with what happened in Lombardy, Spain, France and other places in which the healthcare systems were overwhelmed and tens of thousands of people died in just a few weeks?
- briandear 6y ago
  Do you know how many flu deaths happened in Italy during the 2016/17 flu season? Compare that to the Coronavirus deaths. The numbers are really close. Italy isn’t particularly an outlier in terms of Coronavirus severity when you look at their historical flu numbers compared to the rest of Europe. Their Coronavirus deaths follow the same trend as with their flu fatalities. Really nothing surprising in Italy, but the media lost their minds over it. https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/fulltext https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/ful...
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    Did Italy lock down for 2 months in 2016/17 to combat the flu? Do you think that information is relevant to a comparison?
  - SomeoneFromCA 6y ago
    Yes you are exactly right. It has always been normal to send the dead bodies to neighboring towns, when your crematoriums are full, and they did it every year in Lombardy. No one just noticed previously. I think we need to blame their mayor, for not encouraging building bigger better crematorium.
  - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
    I asked you about the collapse of the healthcare system in Lombardy, within a few weeks of the virus appearing. When has the flu done that? You're presenting what happened in Lombardy as some sort of mass hysteria. Was the healthcare system overwhelmed, or was that a mass hallucination? There have been 30,000 confirmed CoVID-19 deaths in Italy, which is about double a normal flu season. What do you think that number would have been without any social distancing measures? As I see it, the numbers are not that difficult to estimate. About 70% of people would need to catch CoVID-19 before herd immunity brought R below 1. With an IFR of 0.5%, and a population of 60 million people, that would mean about 200,000 deaths. Is that enough to "lose one's mind over"?
cozzyd 6y ago
The inferred IFR from serological prevalance and deaths in NYC is ~1%. NYC's demographics skew favorably compared to the nation, but assuming ~60% of the country would get COVID-19 if not for restrictions, 2 million is right on the money.
- pnako 6y ago
  Assuming 12.38 million people would die of it, 12.38 million people would die of it. Stop assuming things.
  - cozzyd 6y ago
    It's a conservative assumption based on a low estimate of R_0 without mitigations. It's hard to make inferences about the world without assumptions.
  - selectodude 6y ago
    You're the one trying to make OP prove a negative.
- greedo 6y ago
  And this also ignores those who survive COVID-19. Roughly 5% are being hospitalized with potential long term effects. Everyone assumes that we're over the hump. The only place in the US that I would consider over the hump is NYC. Everywhere else has nowhere to go until herd immunity is reached.