3 ms·

There have been 23 deaths so far this month, a death rate of 2.3/day. Which aligns CFR of 10%. And I'm sure the families of the dying consider all of this "negl

by greedo 6y ago

There have been 23 deaths so far this month, a death rate of 2.3/day. Which aligns CFR of 10%. And I'm sure the families of the dying consider all of this "negligible." I'm sure you'll come back with more "stats" that you misinterpret or perform bad maths on. Normally I don't engage in ad-hominem, but your entire comment history on COVID has been one of denial/dismissal/diminishment that one can't help to assume you're commenting in bad faith. https://studylib.net/coronavirus#country-se https://studylib.net/coronavirus#country-se

arcticbull 6y ago
We disagree on a few key points. 1. I don’t believe CFR is at all a useful metric. It’s not comparable across countries or across time. What is it capturing? If Sweden isn’t testing anyone who isn’t deathly ill of course it has a 10% CFR. If Singapore tests everyone of course it has a 0.05% CFR (both numbers from your link). Same disease, equally fatal in both places, yet you’re looking at a metric with a range of 3 orders of magnitude. If at this point those numbers haven’t started converging worldwide it’s a bad metric. 2. Of course how the disease affects families matters. The conversation isn’t about that, though. Public health decisions impact people one way or the other. People die one way or the other. The goal is to minimize deaths and suffering. This is the kind of thinking that prevents prison reform: “but what if we let someone out and they hurt someone else! Let’s just lock them up forever instead, problem solved.” 3. 1-2 deaths per day in a country of 10,000,000 is not a lot. By any measure. It will never be zero. 1-2 deaths per day is similar to their road fatalities (200-400 per year). It’s in line with their flu fatalities (500 per year). If 1-2 daily flu and 1-2 daily road fatalities don’t represent a catastrophe, why does this? 4. 200 cases per day in a country of 10,000,000 is not a lot when they’re not trying to contain it. Like CFR though it’s not a useful metric for comparison across countries because it doesn’t factor in testing methodology. I cite this metric at all because of it’s pronounced exponential downtrend. Factual inaccuracies in my posts preceding are my having looked at a graph wrong, or a poor graph, not bad faith. Yes, I think it's a serious disease. Yes, I wear a mask whenever I'm outside. Yes, I think masking should be mandatory. Yes, I'll take the vaccine when it's available. I do also think there's been an awful lot of sensationalism at play.

by greedo 6y ago

arcticbull 6y ago

We disagree on a few key points. 1. I don’t believe CFR is at all a useful metric. It’s not comparable across countries or across time. What is it capturing? If Sweden isn’t testing anyone who isn’t deathly ill of course it has a 10% CFR. If Singapore tests everyone of course it has a 0.05% CFR (both numbers from your link). Same disease, equally fatal in both places, yet you’re looking at a metric with a range of 3 orders of magnitude. If at this point those numbers haven’t started converging worldwide it’s a bad metric. 2. Of course how the disease affects families matters. The conversation isn’t about that, though. Public health decisions impact people one way or the other. People die one way or the other. The goal is to minimize deaths and suffering. This is the kind of thinking that prevents prison reform: “but what if we let someone out and they hurt someone else! Let’s just lock them up forever instead, problem solved.” 3. 1-2 deaths per day in a country of 10,000,000 is not a lot. By any measure. It will never be zero. 1-2 deaths per day is similar to their road fatalities (200-400 per year). It’s in line with their flu fatalities (500 per year). If 1-2 daily flu and 1-2 daily road fatalities don’t represent a catastrophe, why does this? 4. 200 cases per day in a country of 10,000,000 is not a lot when they’re not trying to contain it. Like CFR though it’s not a useful metric for comparison across countries because it doesn’t factor in testing methodology. I cite this metric at all because of it’s pronounced exponential downtrend. Factual inaccuracies in my posts preceding are my having looked at a graph wrong, or a poor graph, not bad faith. Yes, I think it's a serious disease. Yes, I wear a mask whenever I'm outside. Yes, I think masking should be mandatory. Yes, I'll take the vaccine when it's available. I do also think there's been an awful lot of sensationalism at play.