4 ms·

what if the measures you take because of COVID kill more than 0.024% of the population should you still take those measures?

gerdesj 6y ago
What deadly measures would those be?
- glofish 6y ago
  all hospital visits are way down. No general health checkups, no doctor visits are allowed No screening for cancer, no screening for TB No "elective" surgeries may be performed (note how everything other what would kill you tomorrow is called "elective") Depression, Food security, Reduced exercise, reduced stimuli Tens of millions of kids not vaccinated, shall I continue?
  - gerdesj 6y ago
    Those are not measures they are some of the awful, additional side effects we see due to COVID-19. I'm sure we all try to reduce them as best we can. Here, the NHS repeatedly asks people with problems that would normally require a visit to A&E (ER) to do so. They really do have capacity to deal with cancer, heart attacks, stroke, etc in a safe way. There are entire wards and buildings that are segregated and "clean" of COVID-19 for this purpose. Elective is a funny old word and is a bit more nuanced than you imply. Some elective surgeries here are still going ahead. The list you provide is a starter for 10 of things that are and will go wrong for a long, long time but it is what seems to happen when a massive world wide pandemic strikes. This is a world war where everyone is near enough on the same side.
    - glofish 6y ago
      These are not side effects of the disease. These are side effects of the "safety" measures such as "shelter in place" and lockdowns. I feel that you are side tracking the discussion. The original topic here is that a disease that causes 0.024% IFR should not be addressed with measures that cause higher deaths in a different way.
      - tylerjwilk00 6y ago
        I would up vote you more if I could. There is a weird group think happening on HN where you can't even question the quarantine measures. It's knee jerk virtue signalling and not data driven.
      - DanBC 6y ago
        > The original topic here is that a disease that causes 0.024% IFR You misread the report because it puts the ifr at 0.63% (and that's going to be higher because they omit some deaths).
        glofish 6y ago
        The 0.024% was for the age group under 50, that includes perhaps two thirds of the population.
  - kmlx 6y ago
    no dentist btw. which reduces life expectancy.
tylerjwilk00 6y ago
This has has always been my concern. How many people have died because they couldn't get life saving elective procedures? How many deaths will be attributed to the economic slow down? As a counterpoint though I must also ask: How many people have NOT died because of reduce automobile travel? Or from COVID19?
- jonny_eh 6y ago
  How many people will not die due to the cleaner air?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - xref 6y ago
    You got downvoted probably because it sounds flip and you didn’t provide any data...but you’re right. Some of the air quality improvements have been astounding, such as seeing the Himalayas from New Delhi 125mi away possibly for the first time in decades https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-52313972 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-52313972

gerdesj 6y ago

What deadly measures would those be?

glofish 6y ago
all hospital visits are way down. No general health checkups, no doctor visits are allowed No screening for cancer, no screening for TB No "elective" surgeries may be performed (note how everything other what would kill you tomorrow is called "elective") Depression, Food security, Reduced exercise, reduced stimuli Tens of millions of kids not vaccinated, shall I continue?
- gerdesj 6y ago
  Those are not measures they are some of the awful, additional side effects we see due to COVID-19. I'm sure we all try to reduce them as best we can. Here, the NHS repeatedly asks people with problems that would normally require a visit to A&E (ER) to do so. They really do have capacity to deal with cancer, heart attacks, stroke, etc in a safe way. There are entire wards and buildings that are segregated and "clean" of COVID-19 for this purpose. Elective is a funny old word and is a bit more nuanced than you imply. Some elective surgeries here are still going ahead. The list you provide is a starter for 10 of things that are and will go wrong for a long, long time but it is what seems to happen when a massive world wide pandemic strikes. This is a world war where everyone is near enough on the same side.
  - glofish 6y ago
    These are not side effects of the disease. These are side effects of the "safety" measures such as "shelter in place" and lockdowns. I feel that you are side tracking the discussion. The original topic here is that a disease that causes 0.024% IFR should not be addressed with measures that cause higher deaths in a different way.
    - tylerjwilk00 6y ago
      I would up vote you more if I could. There is a weird group think happening on HN where you can't even question the quarantine measures. It's knee jerk virtue signalling and not data driven.
    - DanBC 6y ago
      > The original topic here is that a disease that causes 0.024% IFR You misread the report because it puts the ifr at 0.63% (and that's going to be higher because they omit some deaths).
      - glofish 6y ago
        The 0.024% was for the age group under 50, that includes perhaps two thirds of the population.
- kmlx 6y ago
  no dentist btw. which reduces life expectancy.

tylerjwilk00 6y ago

This has has always been my concern. How many people have died because they couldn't get life saving elective procedures? How many deaths will be attributed to the economic slow down? As a counterpoint though I must also ask: How many people have NOT died because of reduce automobile travel? Or from COVID19?

jonny_eh 6y ago
How many people will not die due to the cleaner air?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- xref 6y ago
  You got downvoted probably because it sounds flip and you didn’t provide any data...but you’re right. Some of the air quality improvements have been astounding, such as seeing the Himalayas from New Delhi 125mi away possibly for the first time in decades https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-52313972 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-52313972