3 ms·

I'll bite. That percentage represents a million people in the US. It also doesn't represent the number of people who may experience shortened lifespans due to

I'll bite. That percentage represents a million people in the US. It also doesn't represent the number of people who may experience shortened lifespans due to damage to their lungs or other organs. Also, the comment suggests that we do nothing for the flu, which is patently false. We organize massive vaccination efforts every year to combat the flu, we have readily available tests, and we have a well understood model for how it spreads and how to treat it (including antivirals if caught early.) Comparing it to the flu seems to be arguing in bad faith along political lines rather than deeply examining the issue.

username90 6y ago
> Comparing it to the flu seems to be arguing in bad faith along political lines rather than deeply examining the issue. No it isn't. Before vaccine a normal flu season killed 0.1% of the population in a year. Not 0.1% of infected, 0.1% of everyone. Those kinds of numbers are not good, but they are not a catastrophe either, especially if it is just a single year. And to me it looks like Corona is roughly that dangerous, meaning it is like an Influenza we don't have a vaccine against. We should work hard to create a vaccine for this disease, just like we did for influenza, but I haven't seen anyone who did the math on if it is worth locking things down to prevent loss of life. People in the early 1900's didn't think it was worth it, and when I do the math with current mortality in Sweden which barely locked down then the numbers clearly show that a lockdown wasn't worth it. Influenza mortality by year, vaccine was created in the 1940's: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2374803/bin/Doshi_F2_rev3.jpg https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2374803/bin/Dos...
- xigency 6y ago
  Doing the math is an input but it isn’t the solution itself. The question of what to do is a policy decision which doesn’t have an objective right answer.
  - username90 6y ago
    The moral thing to do is to ask whether someone in their 20's would choose to lock down for a few months in order to slightly reduce the risk of dying in their 80's. I think we all know the answer to that. It is only a dilemma of the person would choose to do it for themselves but not others, the current measures would not be done by almost anyone for themselves.

username90 6y ago

> Comparing it to the flu seems to be arguing in bad faith along political lines rather than deeply examining the issue. No it isn't. Before vaccine a normal flu season killed 0.1% of the population in a year. Not 0.1% of infected, 0.1% of everyone. Those kinds of numbers are not good, but they are not a catastrophe either, especially if it is just a single year. And to me it looks like Corona is roughly that dangerous, meaning it is like an Influenza we don't have a vaccine against. We should work hard to create a vaccine for this disease, just like we did for influenza, but I haven't seen anyone who did the math on if it is worth locking things down to prevent loss of life. People in the early 1900's didn't think it was worth it, and when I do the math with current mortality in Sweden which barely locked down then the numbers clearly show that a lockdown wasn't worth it. Influenza mortality by year, vaccine was created in the 1940's: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2374803/bin/Doshi_F2_rev3.jpg https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2374803/bin/Dos...

xigency 6y ago
Doing the math is an input but it isn’t the solution itself. The question of what to do is a policy decision which doesn’t have an objective right answer.
- username90 6y ago
  The moral thing to do is to ask whether someone in their 20's would choose to lock down for a few months in order to slightly reduce the risk of dying in their 80's. I think we all know the answer to that. It is only a dilemma of the person would choose to do it for themselves but not others, the current measures would not be done by almost anyone for themselves.