7 ms·

> the risk of getting Covid19 and not getting access to hospital resources is much lower than expected, so it was true. Not quite true, NYC was over stressed a

> the risk of getting Covid19 and not getting access to hospital resources is much lower than expected, so it was true. Not quite true, NYC was over stressed and there is at least one mass grave and are still corpses in refrigerator trucks. Luckily, social distancing worked better than expected: peak daily US death was reduced to approximately 2,700 rather than approximately 3,000. And the curve was flatten more than expected with the death rate remaining at peak longer. One can't extrapolate from the success of social distancing to imply that _not_ doing social distance would be less harmful. >The results of our original experiment turned out to be different than our expectations To the contrary, the proposed solution worked as expected. The social distancing combined with state-level quick action reduced the severity of the predicted disaster. In addition, people who would normally go to the ER "just in case" did not for fear of contagion. Or because they lost medical insurance. Or because visiting a GP became difficult and so there were fewer referrals. All reducing strain on hospital resources. Certainly, The predictions of what would happen without out social distancing still stand as the data behind it is unchanged. And if that isn't enough, there is the 10x fatality rate of Sweden vs its neighbors. Since Sweden dropped from the narrative when it showed serious differences from its neighbors, it hints that criticism of social distancing is either (justifiably) emotional or (unjustifiably) politically. If it were from an honest appraisal by epidemiologists or economist, there would concrete counter projections and remedies rather than imprecise claims about it's success and ambiguous calls as to what a new policy should be. It is horrible that the US death total exceeds the Vietnam war and that there is serious economic hardship. That is the terrible truth for natural disasters when no plans are in place (let alone actual preparation) and the response is slow. I hope the lesson from this disaster is that we are prepared next time rather than convincing ourselves nothing serious happened.

ahelwer 6y ago
I wish people would stop comparing US coronavirus deaths to the Vietnam war. The comparison is intended to increase the perceived gravity of coronavirus pandemic - "Remember that war 50 years ago which had massive cultural & social impact? This is just as big!" - but implying the Vietnam war's impact was based on American bodycount is just wrong at best and appalling at worst. The Vietnam war had such an impact because the US military went on such an insane spree of war crimes and civilian massacres that America permanently lost its standing as a moral authority gained in WW2. Two million Vietnamese civilians paid the ultimate price for America's geopolitical theorizing, and the disaster was prolonged for an entire decade because the country was too proud to admit it was in over its head. McNamara and then Nixon knew the war was unwinnable, but the US could not appear defeated. And so the atrocities continued. Many in the US realized all of this and became permanently disillusioned with their country. Apologies for the off-topic rant but this comparison has been making its way through a lot of circles that really should know better. If you find yourself wishing you knew more about this topic, I recommend the Ken Burns documentary The Vietnam War or the book Kill Everything that Moves.
- greedo 6y ago
  I don't think the comparison is trying to describe the Vietnam War's impact in terms of body count, but instead to describe the pandemic's impact in terms of an enormous societal issue, which IMHO it is. People have a hard time with large numbers (remember Stalin saying one death is a tragedy, 1 million is a statistic). So having markers to help with comparison is normal.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- peteretep 6y ago
  > Two million Vietnamese civilians paid the ultimate price for America's geopolitical theorizing It was a civil war, initiated by the North, in which mostly Vietnamese killed other Vietnamese. The Americans intervening was absolutely a shit-show (and of course colonial history), but for the central point of your rant to stand, you’d need to show fewer Vietnamese would have died without American intervention, and that’s not a simple given. You should spend some time talking to American Vietnamese with families who were persecuted in the immediate aftermath of the war, or who were lucky enough to escape.
  - ahelwer 6y ago
    The US didn't "intervene" what? Vietnam was colonized by France. Northern Vietnam was fighting for unification and liberation from French colonial power. The US lent their support to France in Vietnam because France was flirting with the Soviet Union in post-WW2 as the cold war took shape. France slowly withdrew as the US took on more and more of a role in the conflict, first as advisors then in active combat roles and finally as a full military force. The Vietnamese were largely supportive of Ho Chi Minh and there was supposed to have been a democratic reunification vote, which didn't happen. That's how the civil war started, and North Vietnam would have easily steamrolled the South (since they managed to steamroll both the South and the USA). Most civilian casualties came from horribly targeted anti-insurgency or massive American bombing raids. It's a pretty easy argument there would have been many, many fewer civilian casualties without US involvement.
copenja 6y ago
It's fair to say that NYC was stretched to the limit, and certainly stretched farther than anyone would want, but it is hard to make a claim that hospitals were overwhelmed anywhere like predicted. New York hospitalizations peaked at 18,825[0], while Cuomo predicted they would need 30,000 additional ventilators. The expanded bed capacity in New York reached 90,000 at Cuomo's command[0]. There is no known case of an american not receiving a ventilator if needed [1][2]. And, remember disease models did not just predict unmitigated spread. They absolutely incorporated percentages of social distancing into their models. The original imperial college study predicted that a high income county with around 50% social contact reduction would still exceed hospital capacity by 700%. Cuomo's New York model that predicted 30,000 additional ventilators absolutely incorporated lockdown measures, if they didn't they have some serious explaining to do. Of course I still agree a lockdown was needed, and agree the lockdown did about as well as it could. But is there any reason to not revisit data and determine if we could do better? [0] https://www.newsweek.com/new-york-coronavirus-hospitalizations-lowest-since-march-after-19-straight-days-decline-1501607 https://www.newsweek.com/new-york-coronavirus-hospitalizatio... [1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/04/13/coronavirus-preparation-states-foresaw-shortages-ppe-equipment-triage-states/2974897001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/04/13/coronavirus-p... [2] https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/14/dfc_ceo_theres_been_no_american_that_has_needed_a_ventilator_that_has_not_received_one.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/14/dfc_ceo_t...
SyneRyder 6y ago
> And if that isn't enough, there is the 10x fatality rate of Sweden vs its neighbors. Not only that, but as a percentage of population, Sweden's fatality rate is far ahead of that of the USA, and still climbing at a faster rate than America: https://boogheta.github.io/coronavirus-countries/#deceased&ratio&places=Sweden,USA&alignTo=deceased&zoom=53,0 https://boogheta.github.io/coronavirus-countries/#deceased&r...
- ric2b 6y ago
  Sweden is about 3x worse in fatalities compared to Portugal, which did lockdown and has both a similar number of confirmed cases and total population. Not sure if that's just Portugal having a weaker healthcare system than Sweden's neighbours or if there's something else at play.
rlt 6y ago
> at least one mass grave You mean Hart Island, which has been used as a mass grave / “potter’s field” for more than a century and already contained over a million deceased? Certainly New York was hit especially hard, but it’s sensationalist to refer to “mass graves” when it’s in fact a routine thing.
wutbrodo 6y ago
> there is at least one mass grave This is inaccurate (at least in implication): this mass grave has been around and in use for 150 years. It's being used more heavily, obviously, but then that's no different than saying "more people than normal are dying in NYC"
joe_the_user 6y ago
Luckily, social distancing worked better than expected: peak daily US death was reduced to approximately 2,700 rather than approximately 3,000. And the curve was flatten more than expected with the death rate remaining at peak longer. -- NYC has maybe peaked but the rest of the country is still rising. NYTimes: "“If you just look at the total number of cases, you’re going to miss what’s underneath it,” said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. “It’s not a leveling-off. It’s a painful handoff.”" https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/05/06/opinion/coronavirus-deaths-statistics.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/05/06/opinion/coron...

ahelwer 6y ago

I wish people would stop comparing US coronavirus deaths to the Vietnam war. The comparison is intended to increase the perceived gravity of coronavirus pandemic - "Remember that war 50 years ago which had massive cultural & social impact? This is just as big!" - but implying the Vietnam war's impact was based on American bodycount is just wrong at best and appalling at worst. The Vietnam war had such an impact because the US military went on such an insane spree of war crimes and civilian massacres that America permanently lost its standing as a moral authority gained in WW2. Two million Vietnamese civilians paid the ultimate price for America's geopolitical theorizing, and the disaster was prolonged for an entire decade because the country was too proud to admit it was in over its head. McNamara and then Nixon knew the war was unwinnable, but the US could not appear defeated. And so the atrocities continued. Many in the US realized all of this and became permanently disillusioned with their country. Apologies for the off-topic rant but this comparison has been making its way through a lot of circles that really should know better. If you find yourself wishing you knew more about this topic, I recommend the Ken Burns documentary The Vietnam War or the book Kill Everything that Moves.

greedo 6y ago
I don't think the comparison is trying to describe the Vietnam War's impact in terms of body count, but instead to describe the pandemic's impact in terms of an enormous societal issue, which IMHO it is. People have a hard time with large numbers (remember Stalin saying one death is a tragedy, 1 million is a statistic). So having markers to help with comparison is normal.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
peteretep 6y ago
> Two million Vietnamese civilians paid the ultimate price for America's geopolitical theorizing It was a civil war, initiated by the North, in which mostly Vietnamese killed other Vietnamese. The Americans intervening was absolutely a shit-show (and of course colonial history), but for the central point of your rant to stand, you’d need to show fewer Vietnamese would have died without American intervention, and that’s not a simple given. You should spend some time talking to American Vietnamese with families who were persecuted in the immediate aftermath of the war, or who were lucky enough to escape.
- ahelwer 6y ago
  The US didn't "intervene" what? Vietnam was colonized by France. Northern Vietnam was fighting for unification and liberation from French colonial power. The US lent their support to France in Vietnam because France was flirting with the Soviet Union in post-WW2 as the cold war took shape. France slowly withdrew as the US took on more and more of a role in the conflict, first as advisors then in active combat roles and finally as a full military force. The Vietnamese were largely supportive of Ho Chi Minh and there was supposed to have been a democratic reunification vote, which didn't happen. That's how the civil war started, and North Vietnam would have easily steamrolled the South (since they managed to steamroll both the South and the USA). Most civilian casualties came from horribly targeted anti-insurgency or massive American bombing raids. It's a pretty easy argument there would have been many, many fewer civilian casualties without US involvement.

copenja 6y ago

It's fair to say that NYC was stretched to the limit, and certainly stretched farther than anyone would want, but it is hard to make a claim that hospitals were overwhelmed anywhere like predicted. New York hospitalizations peaked at 18,825[0], while Cuomo predicted they would need 30,000 additional ventilators. The expanded bed capacity in New York reached 90,000 at Cuomo's command[0]. There is no known case of an american not receiving a ventilator if needed [1][2]. And, remember disease models did not just predict unmitigated spread. They absolutely incorporated percentages of social distancing into their models. The original imperial college study predicted that a high income county with around 50% social contact reduction would still exceed hospital capacity by 700%. Cuomo's New York model that predicted 30,000 additional ventilators absolutely incorporated lockdown measures, if they didn't they have some serious explaining to do. Of course I still agree a lockdown was needed, and agree the lockdown did about as well as it could. But is there any reason to not revisit data and determine if we could do better? [0] https://www.newsweek.com/new-york-coronavirus-hospitalizations-lowest-since-march-after-19-straight-days-decline-1501607 https://www.newsweek.com/new-york-coronavirus-hospitalizatio... [1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/04/13/coronavirus-preparation-states-foresaw-shortages-ppe-equipment-triage-states/2974897001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/04/13/coronavirus-p... [2] https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/14/dfc_ceo_theres_been_no_american_that_has_needed_a_ventilator_that_has_not_received_one.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/14/dfc_ceo_t...

SyneRyder 6y ago

> And if that isn't enough, there is the 10x fatality rate of Sweden vs its neighbors. Not only that, but as a percentage of population, Sweden's fatality rate is far ahead of that of the USA, and still climbing at a faster rate than America: https://boogheta.github.io/coronavirus-countries/#deceased&ratio&places=Sweden,USA&alignTo=deceased&zoom=53,0 https://boogheta.github.io/coronavirus-countries/#deceased&r...

ric2b 6y ago
Sweden is about 3x worse in fatalities compared to Portugal, which did lockdown and has both a similar number of confirmed cases and total population. Not sure if that's just Portugal having a weaker healthcare system than Sweden's neighbours or if there's something else at play.

rlt 6y ago

> at least one mass grave You mean Hart Island, which has been used as a mass grave / “potter’s field” for more than a century and already contained over a million deceased? Certainly New York was hit especially hard, but it’s sensationalist to refer to “mass graves” when it’s in fact a routine thing.

wutbrodo 6y ago

> there is at least one mass grave This is inaccurate (at least in implication): this mass grave has been around and in use for 150 years. It's being used more heavily, obviously, but then that's no different than saying "more people than normal are dying in NYC"

joe_the_user 6y ago

Luckily, social distancing worked better than expected: peak daily US death was reduced to approximately 2,700 rather than approximately 3,000. And the curve was flatten more than expected with the death rate remaining at peak longer. -- NYC has maybe peaked but the rest of the country is still rising. NYTimes: "“If you just look at the total number of cases, you’re going to miss what’s underneath it,” said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. “It’s not a leveling-off. It’s a painful handoff.”" https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/05/06/opinion/coronavirus-deaths-statistics.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/05/06/opinion/coron...