10 ms·
> If the legislature resists, or the court doesn't grant the stay, that sucks, the bars and restaurants will open, people will get sick and die. Or maybe the Re
by asabjorn 6y ago
> If the legislature resists, or the court doesn't grant the stay, that sucks, the bars and restaurants will open, people will get sick and die. Or maybe the Republicans will turn out correct and everything is fine.
This assertion needs a citation. If this should be true either hospitalization must be so high that it overwhelms the health system, which was the original justification for the lockdown, or death rate must be high.
The 1.5 week old CDC report [1] shows same hospitalization rate as the flu for the vulnerable 65+ population, and less for the vulnerable <18 year population.
Stanford study [2] shows same death rate as flu.
At this point most states have partially reopened [3] and we are not seeing a surge in COVID cases.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/pdf/covidview-05-01-2020.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/pdf/cov...
[2] https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/04/24/study-challenges-reports-of-low-fatality-rate-for-covid-19/ https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/04/24/study-challenges-report...
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/states-reopen-map-coronavirus.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/states-reopen-ma...
- belltaco 6y ago>The 1.5 week old CDC report [1] shows same hospitalization rate as the flu for the vulnerable 65+ population, and less for the vulnerable <18 year population. Is the hospitalization rate based on how many got the disease or among the general population?
- asabjorn 6y agoIt’s across the whole population over the preceding week. The CDC report key takeaways section is recommended reading
- belltaco 6y agoSo why would the rate of hospitalizations be comparable if we are having lockdowns that reduce cases of covid a lot? In fact, the fact that the rate of hospitalizations is similar even with broad lockdowns is proof that covid is much more dangerous than the flu. Imagine the rate if there were no lockdowns.
- apostacy 6y agoMeanwhile, Sweden never had shelter in place orders, and they did not fare worse than France or Ireland.
- jeffbee 6y agoAccording to EuroMOMO, Sweden's excess mortality rate this year is "high", France's is "low" and Ireland's is "no excess". https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/
- asabjorn 6y agoSweden is doing better than NYC without the catastrophic economic consequences NYC is experiencing https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/swedens-doing-better-than-new-york-state-11589221909 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/sweden...
- rayiner 6y agoSweden benefits from being very moderate in density compared to NYC. Stockholm is comparable in size and density to Washington, DC. The death rate in Stockholm is about 5 times higher than DC.
- asabjorn 6y ago3,3k has so far died in Sweden and the population is 10 million. I believe 22k has died out of 8.3m in NYC, so NYC seems clearly worse. The strategy was to face more infections short term in favor of quick herd immunity so it’s actually a very positive sign for the strategy that the death rate is not higher than NYC. Considering that the curve has flattened and herd immunity is projected in a couple of weeks, it is not clear the total deaths in virus lifecycle will be bad.
- rayiner 6y agoNYC is clearly worse, but NYC is also vastly worse than any other place in the US. In terms of density and scale of international travel (or the lack of both), Sweden is more comparable to Maryland or Virginia. Virginia, with 8.5 million people, has had less than 900 deaths. DC, which is only a bit smaller than Stockholm and similar in density, has had just 328 deaths, compared to over 1,200 in Stockholm
- djannzjkzxn 6y ago1 in 400 New Yorkers have died from this in the past 2 months. The flu doesn’t do that.
- jb775 6y agoThat argument loses steam when you find out the 1 in 400 got hit by a bus and the hospital flagged it as a covid death because that person tested positive on a previous covid test. Listen to the Joe Rogan podcast from last week w/ Elon Musk, he agrees with my statement. EDIT: Is it just me or is HN becoming more and more of an echo chamber where people downvote anything that goes against their own politics and yet they have no rebuttal or critical response. Lost a lot of respect for HN over the past few months. And for what it's worth, my original comment here is literally what's happening right now. Take your heads out of the fucking sand.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tfehring 6y agoThe baseline mortality rate for an 80 year old is about 0.5% per month. The mortality rate for an 80 year old with coronavirus is about 15%, with nearly all deaths occurring within a month. So treating all deaths in coronavirus patients as being caused by coronavirus would only overstate the true case fatality rate by 3% or so. The ratio is similar for younger ages. Not sure why Joe Rogan or Elon Musk’s opinion would be relevant here.
- jb775 6y agoThe glaring omission here is that this 80 year old with coronavirus could have had stage IV cancer, and pneumonia, and the Bubonic plague, but the official cause of death is being considered "Covid". And considering the 80 year old is probably broke at this point of their medical journey, the hospitals have the option to either get paid nothing, or can claim yet another Covid death so they get the $13k-$39k per-patient payment. Lump this death into the Covid death tally, the media goes crazy (to attract eyes and sell ads, among other nefarious reasons), we are all a little worse off, and the loop continues. And Elon Musk's opinion always matters.
- raverbashing 6y ago> Stanford study [2] shows same death rate as flu. Oh you mean the article whose title is "Study challenges reports of low fatality rate for COVID-19" and adds that " data scientists estimate that the fatality rate in New York City and Santa Clara County in California can be no less than 0.5%, or one of every 200 people infected." (contrasting a previous study)