6 ms·

We're talking about a "flu" that, even with _heavy_ travel restrictions, has a death rate of about 1%, going up to 10% on the over 65. We're talking about a "fl

We're talking about a "flu" that, even with _heavy_ travel restrictions, has a death rate of about 1%, going up to 10% on the over 65. We're talking about a "flu" that is so contagious that, even with orders to stay at home, manages to keep itself alive through new infections easily and we're struggling to get the R0 down. We're talking about a "flu" that has, in a matter of weeks, completely overwhelmed every single health system in the world. Your relativization of your fellow citizens as just a matter of numbers and "how old will they die anyways?" is absolutely heartless. These are actual people, with families, friends and close people. Not just numbers on the John Hopkins charts. But hey, what could happen if you reopened ? After all, New York only had to deal with a shortage of medical equipment, medical personnel being exhausted and overworked, a need to bring cooling trucks just to hold the dead bodies. Combine that with the fact that the moment your health system gets overwhelmed and cannot treat other illnesses, those deaths will go through the roof. It's not a crazy theory. It's something epidemiologists have studied for a while, and we have seen its effect with cases in Europe, where deaths not related to Covid-19 have gone up, because we couldn't treat heart diseases, other pulmonary diseases, etc. Oh, and, an overwhelmed medical system also leads to a shutdown of other parts of your precious economy. People will not go to work because being injured means you cannot be treated. Half of construction gone. Half of any job that involves dangerous conditions gone. And how many other jobs will that destroy ? This lockdown is a necessary evil, and the best option we have. So, yes. The government has every right to protect millions of citizens from dying. You can handle staying home. I know it's hard at times, and I truly hope that you will get better. But it's not complicated. Sit. at. home.

tachyonbeam 6y ago
> has a death rate of about 1% We don't know what the actual death rate is, we need more antibody studies to figure that out. > "how old will they die anyways?" I didn't say that, you did. > These are actual people, with families, friends and close people. Yes, and hundreds of millions of people with families, friends and loved ones are suffering in many ways because of the lockdown. I don't know how many depressions, foreclosures, broken marriages and boarded up small businesses one saved life is worth, but there's a tradeoff being made. FWIW, I am staying home. I get my groceries delivered and leave the house about once or twice a week. I try to distance myself from people on the sidewalk, etc.
- bbarnett 6y ago
  I don't quite understand the narrative I keep seeing lately. To start with, at least in my country (Canada), the narrative has never, ever been to 'stop transmission of the virus'. Ever. EG, the narrative has never been to 'stop people from getting it'. (NOTE: I'm talking about responses from official government officials, not blather in blogs, media, etc) The only point for the lockdown, was/is to slow down the transmission of the virus, so that hospitals would not be overwhelmed. In other words, as everyone, literally everyone catches it, that those which have a worst-outcome, have the best treatment possible. That's it. There's no attempt, or hope, or plan in the lockdown, to stop people from getting the virus. At all. In this context, the lockdown is not to 'save lives', in the sense of 'people won't get it, and be safe'. So, when the hospitals aren't overwhelmed, when it has been shown that the virus isn't quite as deadly as thought to some, it is entirely logical, and sensible, to open up. And to that end, it is entirely logical and sensible to insist people return to work. Because unless people become complete and total hermits for years, they'll get it... One side note here. I've done a bit of research, and two things stand out: - Italy, hit bad - New York, hit bad - Montreal, certain sectors, hit bad After a bit of research, I've concluded that one of the high-risk factors is sickle cell anemia. Something tha is VERY common in blacks from Africa, as it does help protect against malaria. Yet guess what other population group is pre-dispositioned to it? Italians. Due to the Roman Empire's control of Africa. https://www.sicklecellsociety.org/resource/sickle-cell-anemia-s-thalassemia-sicilian-children/ https://www.sicklecellsociety.org/resource/sickle-cell-anemi... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7365760 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7365760 Who has a large Italian, and Black population? New York. The sectors in Montreal hard hit. Also note that the Italian population in New York is self reporting, so I suspect the numbers are higher (eg, grandpa was Italian, etc). Hind sight is a wonderful thing, I would never chastise our governments for locking down, based upon what was happening in Italy. However, combine its aged population AND sickle cell anemia, and ho boy... no wonder! Now transpose that to the average population in North America. Not quite the same. Lastly, Ontario/Quebec... have repeatedly stated that there will be a 'second and third' wave. That even if things ebb and stop, soon as the fall comes? It will likely reappear. I think ... I think it is logical to be concerned for one's safety, but I often look at our ancestors and compared, and I find us wanting. Pre-widespream vaccination (even in the 50s), before many vaccines had been developed, people would think us bananas worrying about all these deaths. They'd put on masks maybe, but.. so many people died due to childhood and adult viruses. Even the idea that falling off a ladder, could kill you simply because at one time antibiotics couldn't help if you had even small amounts of internal infection/bleeding. Sulfa drugs just didn't cut it. Yet... compared to that lifestyle, we're insanely pampered. But beyond all this? Unless we reopen, we'll all starve and die of other, massive issues. Want food? You need 1000 little things, all produced by 1000s of industries. Parts for machines, additives, chemicals, transport, and all of that depending upon more and more of our infrastructure and production. Try to trace, for example, a steel cog for a machine. Or, a chemical used. You'll find dependencies on dozens of industries / other products, which all depend on OTHER products and industries, on and on. It's all interconnected. That's how we operate, and there's on way around it.. because no matter what? PEOPLE CURRENTLY HAVE TO WORK TO MAKE FOOD. Medicine. Houses. Governments are opening up, because THEY HAVE NO CHOICE.
guygurari 6y ago
You are making several false claims, most notably: > We're talking about a "flu" that has, in a matter of weeks, completely overwhelmed every single health system in the world. Many health care systems have been well below capacity throughout this. This includes most of the US (e.g. California), it includes places that have not shut down (Sweden), and it includes places that have reopened weeks ago (Georgia). Despite these easily verifiable facts, many people believe as you do that health care systems are being overwhelmed everywhere. Maybe because the media is painting this picture by only focusing on the few places where this is actually happening. This is hysteria. It is blinding people from seeing the real, measurable damage wrought by the policies being enacted.
- ohgodplsno 6y ago
  >Many health care systems have been well below capacity throughout this. This includes most of the US (e.g. California), it includes places that have not shut down (Sweden), and it includes places that have reopened weeks ago (Georgia). Sweden has been heavily criticized for its handling of the situation, and Europe is extremely wary of them right now. With good reason. The US does have the chance to be an extremely large country, so transmission is slightly less likely. California has not been overwhelmed through a mix of luck and, would you guess it, self quarantine. >This is hysteria. Pretending that doing nothing could not have catastrophic consequences is dangerous. Even with self quarantine (or imposed quarantine), this disease is the number one source of illness related deaths in the year in western countries. And this is only May.
  - guygurari 6y ago
    None of what you said here takes away from the fact that your original claim is false. Again, you wrote: “ completely overwhelmed every single health system in the world.” That is not true, not even close. Now, you write: > Sweden has been heavily criticized for its handling of the situation Yes, people have differing opinions. The fact is that Sweden is not an outlier in number of deaths despite keeping its economy essentially open. Perhaps this is what happens when you inform your citizens and then trust them to do the right thing? > Pretending that doing nothing could not have catastrophic consequences is dangerous. I agree, and I did not suggest that we should do nothing. But what are the optimal policies? Are the policies we have now optimal or can we do better? We need open and honest discussion to make progress on these questions.
greendesk 6y ago
>> completely overwhelmed every single health system in the world. Please review the data in conjunction with this statement. In ALL of Eastern Europe, the hospitals are essentially empty. Note that in ALL Scandinavian countries, there has always been additional allocated spare beds. I am not to downplay the risk. I note that there were shortages in London, Spain, Italy. But please review the absolute value of calling *every single health system in the world”.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

tachyonbeam 6y ago

> has a death rate of about 1% We don't know what the actual death rate is, we need more antibody studies to figure that out. > "how old will they die anyways?" I didn't say that, you did. > These are actual people, with families, friends and close people. Yes, and hundreds of millions of people with families, friends and loved ones are suffering in many ways because of the lockdown. I don't know how many depressions, foreclosures, broken marriages and boarded up small businesses one saved life is worth, but there's a tradeoff being made. FWIW, I am staying home. I get my groceries delivered and leave the house about once or twice a week. I try to distance myself from people on the sidewalk, etc.

bbarnett 6y ago
I don't quite understand the narrative I keep seeing lately. To start with, at least in my country (Canada), the narrative has never, ever been to 'stop transmission of the virus'. Ever. EG, the narrative has never been to 'stop people from getting it'. (NOTE: I'm talking about responses from official government officials, not blather in blogs, media, etc) The only point for the lockdown, was/is to slow down the transmission of the virus, so that hospitals would not be overwhelmed. In other words, as everyone, literally everyone catches it, that those which have a worst-outcome, have the best treatment possible. That's it. There's no attempt, or hope, or plan in the lockdown, to stop people from getting the virus. At all. In this context, the lockdown is not to 'save lives', in the sense of 'people won't get it, and be safe'. So, when the hospitals aren't overwhelmed, when it has been shown that the virus isn't quite as deadly as thought to some, it is entirely logical, and sensible, to open up. And to that end, it is entirely logical and sensible to insist people return to work. Because unless people become complete and total hermits for years, they'll get it... One side note here. I've done a bit of research, and two things stand out: - Italy, hit bad - New York, hit bad - Montreal, certain sectors, hit bad After a bit of research, I've concluded that one of the high-risk factors is sickle cell anemia. Something tha is VERY common in blacks from Africa, as it does help protect against malaria. Yet guess what other population group is pre-dispositioned to it? Italians. Due to the Roman Empire's control of Africa. https://www.sicklecellsociety.org/resource/sickle-cell-anemia-s-thalassemia-sicilian-children/ https://www.sicklecellsociety.org/resource/sickle-cell-anemi... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7365760 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7365760 Who has a large Italian, and Black population? New York. The sectors in Montreal hard hit. Also note that the Italian population in New York is self reporting, so I suspect the numbers are higher (eg, grandpa was Italian, etc). Hind sight is a wonderful thing, I would never chastise our governments for locking down, based upon what was happening in Italy. However, combine its aged population AND sickle cell anemia, and ho boy... no wonder! Now transpose that to the average population in North America. Not quite the same. Lastly, Ontario/Quebec... have repeatedly stated that there will be a 'second and third' wave. That even if things ebb and stop, soon as the fall comes? It will likely reappear. I think ... I think it is logical to be concerned for one's safety, but I often look at our ancestors and compared, and I find us wanting. Pre-widespream vaccination (even in the 50s), before many vaccines had been developed, people would think us bananas worrying about all these deaths. They'd put on masks maybe, but.. so many people died due to childhood and adult viruses. Even the idea that falling off a ladder, could kill you simply because at one time antibiotics couldn't help if you had even small amounts of internal infection/bleeding. Sulfa drugs just didn't cut it. Yet... compared to that lifestyle, we're insanely pampered. But beyond all this? Unless we reopen, we'll all starve and die of other, massive issues. Want food? You need 1000 little things, all produced by 1000s of industries. Parts for machines, additives, chemicals, transport, and all of that depending upon more and more of our infrastructure and production. Try to trace, for example, a steel cog for a machine. Or, a chemical used. You'll find dependencies on dozens of industries / other products, which all depend on OTHER products and industries, on and on. It's all interconnected. That's how we operate, and there's on way around it.. because no matter what? PEOPLE CURRENTLY HAVE TO WORK TO MAKE FOOD. Medicine. Houses. Governments are opening up, because THEY HAVE NO CHOICE.

guygurari 6y ago

You are making several false claims, most notably: > We're talking about a "flu" that has, in a matter of weeks, completely overwhelmed every single health system in the world. Many health care systems have been well below capacity throughout this. This includes most of the US (e.g. California), it includes places that have not shut down (Sweden), and it includes places that have reopened weeks ago (Georgia). Despite these easily verifiable facts, many people believe as you do that health care systems are being overwhelmed everywhere. Maybe because the media is painting this picture by only focusing on the few places where this is actually happening. This is hysteria. It is blinding people from seeing the real, measurable damage wrought by the policies being enacted.

ohgodplsno 6y ago
>Many health care systems have been well below capacity throughout this. This includes most of the US (e.g. California), it includes places that have not shut down (Sweden), and it includes places that have reopened weeks ago (Georgia). Sweden has been heavily criticized for its handling of the situation, and Europe is extremely wary of them right now. With good reason. The US does have the chance to be an extremely large country, so transmission is slightly less likely. California has not been overwhelmed through a mix of luck and, would you guess it, self quarantine. >This is hysteria. Pretending that doing nothing could not have catastrophic consequences is dangerous. Even with self quarantine (or imposed quarantine), this disease is the number one source of illness related deaths in the year in western countries. And this is only May.
- guygurari 6y ago
  None of what you said here takes away from the fact that your original claim is false. Again, you wrote: “ completely overwhelmed every single health system in the world.” That is not true, not even close. Now, you write: > Sweden has been heavily criticized for its handling of the situation Yes, people have differing opinions. The fact is that Sweden is not an outlier in number of deaths despite keeping its economy essentially open. Perhaps this is what happens when you inform your citizens and then trust them to do the right thing? > Pretending that doing nothing could not have catastrophic consequences is dangerous. I agree, and I did not suggest that we should do nothing. But what are the optimal policies? Are the policies we have now optimal or can we do better? We need open and honest discussion to make progress on these questions.

greendesk 6y ago

>> completely overwhelmed every single health system in the world. Please review the data in conjunction with this statement. In ALL of Eastern Europe, the hospitals are essentially empty. Note that in ALL Scandinavian countries, there has always been additional allocated spare beds. I am not to downplay the risk. I note that there were shortages in London, Spain, Italy. But please review the absolute value of calling *every single health system in the world”.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]