3 ms·

> If it's not a big deal for people over 80 to die because "quite a few [of them] would have died this year anyway" This is miles from what he says. He is argu

> If it's not a big deal for people over 80 to die because "quite a few [of them] would have died this year anyway" This is miles from what he says. He is arguing for the adjustment of a statistic. He is arguing that Covid has had a minimal affect on the death rate and even smaller when you adjust for how many of the dead would already have been included in the much larger baseline number of expected annual deaths because they are over 80 and X% of those over 80 die each year even with no Covid. I’m not even sure I agree with him on this or other arguments but it’s clear he values the life of the elderly. As an ER doctor he probably treats many (and many with Covid) each day. I think he’s earned the benefit of the doubt on valuing life, more than most of us here who treat and save no one.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
His statement: >> “Considering that 70% of those who have died of covid are over 80 years old, quite a few of those 6,000 would have died this year anyway. That makes covid a mere blip in terms of its effect on mortality My comment: >> If it's not a big deal for people over 80 to die because "quite a few [of them] would have died this year anyway". Though I should perhaps not have paraphrased, I believe my comment captures the feeling of the doctor's statement well. Yes, he is making a point about mortality rates. Also, he's making the point that 6,000 people dead is a mere blip on mortality because most of them would be dying anyway. His entire post is a declaration that Covid-19 and the deaths from it are not a big deal because most were very old and on their way out anyway.