3 ms·

That is not quite the case as the you're double counting quite a number of people. set A = The set of all people who die from covid set B = The set of people

by whb07 6y ago

That is not quite the case as the you're double counting quite a number of people. set A = The set of all people who die from covid set B = The set of people who were going to die that year from cancer, heart, age etc Nearly all of set A fits inside set B. For evidence see either CDC or even the Italian health ministry data set they even published as far back as April 2020 where the median age of death was 79 and 50% had 3+ other diseases and sub 1% had no other diseases.

learc83 6y ago
1. The median age of death at 79, and 50% of people have 3+ diseases doesn't imply that "Nearly all of the people who die from COVID had a life expectancy of < 1 year" as you say. Those 3+ diseases you mention include diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity etc... Diseases that people commonly live with for decades. The median remaining lifespan of a person who dies of COVID has been estimated to be around 12 years [1,2]. 2. Lets say you are correct and 90% of people who die of COVID would have died within 1 year. And let's assume that you have some magic PR method that will convince 100% of the population that this is true. That means that COVID is still more deadly than the Flu, and some large percentage of people will still choose to remain home, stop traveling, stop eating out etc... These people will continue to damage the economy until an effective vaccine is available. And even in your scenario a vaccine that is 95% effective will still save millions of lives. An effective vaccine will save lives, and it will improve the economy. There is no logical reason to deny that fact. [1] https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75 https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75 [2] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.08.20050559v2 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.08.20050559v...
dqv 6y ago
It would do everyone in this conversation some good if you just directly linked to the data you’re talking about.

by whb07 6y ago

learc83 6y ago

1. The median age of death at 79, and 50% of people have 3+ diseases doesn't imply that "Nearly all of the people who die from COVID had a life expectancy of < 1 year" as you say. Those 3+ diseases you mention include diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity etc... Diseases that people commonly live with for decades. The median remaining lifespan of a person who dies of COVID has been estimated to be around 12 years [1,2]. 2. Lets say you are correct and 90% of people who die of COVID would have died within 1 year. And let's assume that you have some magic PR method that will convince 100% of the population that this is true. That means that COVID is still more deadly than the Flu, and some large percentage of people will still choose to remain home, stop traveling, stop eating out etc... These people will continue to damage the economy until an effective vaccine is available. And even in your scenario a vaccine that is 95% effective will still save millions of lives. An effective vaccine will save lives, and it will improve the economy. There is no logical reason to deny that fact. [1] https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75 https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75 [2] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.08.20050559v2 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.08.20050559v...

dqv 6y ago

It would do everyone in this conversation some good if you just directly linked to the data you’re talking about.