3 ms·

The tl;dr: > So now all of a sudden, that “but it’s only 1% fatal!” becomes: > 3,282,000 people dead. > 62,358,000 hospitalized. > 59,076,000 people with pe

The tl;dr: > So now all of a sudden, that “but it’s only 1% fatal!” becomes: > 3,282,000 people dead. > 62,358,000 hospitalized. > 59,076,000 people with permanent heart damage. > 32,820,000 people with permanent lung damage. > 9,846,000 people with strokes. > 6,564,000 people with muscle weakness. > 6,564,000 people with loss of cognitive function.

ceejayoz 6y ago
It becomes far worse than that, as our medical system can't handle 62M hospitalizations. (Nor 60-70% of that, which is more realistic, as it's unlikely to hit 100% of the population.) NYC's hospitals came close to the breaking point; Italy's exceeded it in spots.
- jlg23 6y ago
  The author addresses that: > This model assumes that the question’s hypothetical is correct and the fatality rate is 1%. It also assumes for the sake of argument 100% infection. (In reality, of course, neither of these is a perfect match to reality. The infection rate will never hit 100%, but the fatality rate in a widespread infection is likely to be greater than 1%, because health care services will be overwhelmed.)
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    Yes; I felt it important enough to warrant inclusion in the TL;DR version.
pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
Even those things wouldn’t shut down the country if it were, for example, sexually transmitted. The problem that you can contract it just by breathing in the wrong place at the wrong time is the real desaster. You wouldn’t want to take those odds even if it were 1% drop dead/99% completely fine.
TheGrim-888 6y ago
Where are these rates coming from? They seem absolutely absurd. Are you suggesting that 17% of the US population is going to have permanent heart damage, and that 3% of the population is going to have a stroke, from contracting covid? That seems completely disconnected from reality. 3.5MM people in the US (at least) have already tested positive. Are you trying to imply that over 100,000 of these people have had a stroke? More related to the article - isn't the latest IFR estimate from the CDC even less than 1%?
- 6nf 6y ago
  The author got his math wrong.
senectus1 6y ago
Not that I agree with the article, but a most of those numbers are the same people... but yeah. US population, approx 330M, 59M of which are likely to be permanently fucked up by this virus and 3M permanently dead. not to mention the amount of people that died or got permanently damaged due to the fact that the hospitals were overloaded. They may not have been Covid patients but bleeding out from a undiscovered brain hemorrhage because the hospital was packed and the dr's overworked is still just as dead as 1% of covid sufferers...

ceejayoz 6y ago

It becomes far worse than that, as our medical system can't handle 62M hospitalizations. (Nor 60-70% of that, which is more realistic, as it's unlikely to hit 100% of the population.) NYC's hospitals came close to the breaking point; Italy's exceeded it in spots.

jlg23 6y ago
The author addresses that: > This model assumes that the question’s hypothetical is correct and the fatality rate is 1%. It also assumes for the sake of argument 100% infection. (In reality, of course, neither of these is a perfect match to reality. The infection rate will never hit 100%, but the fatality rate in a widespread infection is likely to be greater than 1%, because health care services will be overwhelmed.)
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  Yes; I felt it important enough to warrant inclusion in the TL;DR version.

pwdisswordfish2 6y ago

Even those things wouldn’t shut down the country if it were, for example, sexually transmitted. The problem that you can contract it just by breathing in the wrong place at the wrong time is the real desaster. You wouldn’t want to take those odds even if it were 1% drop dead/99% completely fine.

TheGrim-888 6y ago

Where are these rates coming from? They seem absolutely absurd. Are you suggesting that 17% of the US population is going to have permanent heart damage, and that 3% of the population is going to have a stroke, from contracting covid? That seems completely disconnected from reality. 3.5MM people in the US (at least) have already tested positive. Are you trying to imply that over 100,000 of these people have had a stroke? More related to the article - isn't the latest IFR estimate from the CDC even less than 1%?

6nf 6y ago
The author got his math wrong.

senectus1 6y ago

Not that I agree with the article, but a most of those numbers are the same people... but yeah. US population, approx 330M, 59M of which are likely to be permanently fucked up by this virus and 3M permanently dead. not to mention the amount of people that died or got permanently damaged due to the fact that the hospitals were overloaded. They may not have been Covid patients but bleeding out from a undiscovered brain hemorrhage because the hospital was packed and the dr's overworked is still just as dead as 1% of covid sufferers...