6 ms·

Or just anything that is not an equal opportunity killer. Everyone can be killed by a terrorist. Plenty of people believe COVID is no threat to them.

AnHonestComment 6y ago
And they’d be right: Someone over 70 is 270x as likely to die of COVID as someone under 50. For anyone under 50 without co-morbidity, then this is just a yearly flu — and destroying your economic future over the flu doesn’t make sense. Having a blanket policy that ignores those differences is unrealistic. IFR numbers are from the CDC’s best estimate: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
- doctor_eval 6y ago
  So... now we are having a conversation about why one group of 400K people is more worthy of saving than another?
  - throwaway201103 6y ago
    I think, clearly, that there is a debate to be had about the value of lives that are nearly at an end no matter what, and lives that are just hitting their prime.
    - doctor_eval 6y ago
      Someone who is 60 or even 70 is not necessarily “nearly at an end”. Just ask either of your presidents.
  - nradov 6y ago
    That conversation has been going on since long before COVID-19. For example age is one factor in allocating scarce transplant organs. Other countries with socialized healthcare systems sometimes explicitly use Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) in deciding whether to pay for expensive treatments for elderly patients.
    - doctor_eval 6y ago
      We are talking about a whole percent of the US population here, not just the tiny fraction that requires organ transplants.
      - thu2111 6y ago
        So is he. QALY analysis is used to allocate all treatment in places like the UK, realistically in other places too. Basically a very expensive treatment that is only expected to increase your lifespan by a few months if you're already very elderly may not get funded if there are other interventions with better cost/benefit ratios available in the queue. This obviously affects nearly 100% of the population in the sense that most people will make it to old age, and even the non-elderly are affected by getting treatment they otherwise might not have done.
      - AnHonestComment 6y ago
        No — we’re talking about half a percent of the US population (10x flu), with deaths heavily concentrated among the elderly and infirm. That sucks — but shutting down the economy for nine months is going to send huge numbers of the young to early graves, through deconditioning related illness, domestic violence PTSD, and substance abuse. This policy is QALY negative, even if it ostensibly “saves lives”. It’s grotesque Boomers are harming their children and grandchildren like this, but not unexpected given the other betrayals of future generations.
  - matz1 6y ago
    Not saying that those 400K doesn't deserve to be saved, they are absolutely deserve the care but if you are doing it at the huge expense for other people then conversation is unavoidable.
    - maxerickson 6y ago
      doing it at the huge expense for other people Begs the question. You build in the assumption that policy responses to a pandemic will harm the economy, and then don't do any work to establish that policy responses in this pandemic have prioritized lives over the economy, or to demonstrate that policy responses that weren't used would have been similar, etc.
  - AnHonestComment 6y ago
    Hospital ERs don’t steal blood from young patients who could survive a donation to save patients bleeding out. Blood has to be donated because inflicting unwanted harm to innocents — even to save a life — is against medical ethics. How does the COVID response align with those ethics? People in high risk groups should absolutely self isolate, avoid restaurants, etc — but them needing to do so isn’t a reason to deny a 20 year old a cancer screening or a job to afford food, no. I also think it’s telling your response to me posting facts from the CDC is an unsourced emotional appeal.
- maxerickson 6y ago
  Hey, good news. We have pretty strong evidence that our policy choices have been geared towards letting the elderly die. (I'm talking about all the elderly that died if it isn't clear what evidence I'm referring to) Of course, the awful thing is that controlling the virus in May (I mean actually doing it, not just having a pause) would have been better for the economy. But we are too stupid for that.
  - throwaway201103 6y ago
    Elderly people die. That's what happens when you're elderly. For many reasons.
matz1 6y ago
>Plenty of people believe COVID is no threat to them That is true, if you are under 70 and reasonably healthy, the chance of seriously sick from covid is very very low.
- macintux 6y ago
  The personal risk of getting seriously sick is very low. The risk of spreading it to others is very high. And the hospitals are overwhelmed. Sometimes your personal risk is not the end of the story.
  - doctor_eval 6y ago
    And once hospitals are overwhelmed, your risk of dying of any cause increases regardless of your age, location or health.
    - pxeboot 6y ago
      Is that a major concern? Around me, the hospitals are at capacity for covid patients, but have reserved space for accidents, pregnancies, and other expected needs.
      - macintux 6y ago
        At some point you run out of caregivers. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/12/22/948908168/tennessee-hospitals-are-disturbingly-close-to-their-breaking-point https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/12/22/9489081...
        matz1 6y ago
        Probably because they are lying worker/refuse to hire more: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/financial-fallout-from-covid-19-9-hospitals-laying-off-workers.html https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/financial-fall... The cited reason: 'Lower patient volumes, canceled elective procedures and higher expenses tied to the pandemic have created a cash crunch for hospitals' I wonder if the lockdown/stay at home order has something to do with it...
calvinmorrison 6y ago
More like - Everyone can be killed by COVID, everyone can be killed by terrorists. However it is unlikely your dunkin donuts in farmville, North Dakota is going to be the target of the latest ISIS attack. Likewise your likelihood of dying of COVID is not equal to others. If you believe it is - you have been duped.
Barrin92 6y ago
> Plenty of people believe COVID is no threat to them. and believing that this is reason enough to ignore it is precisely what's wrong with Western societies, the US leading the charge, Europe close behind. Individualised and atomised societies getting wrecked by a little strand of RNA because we cannot take responsibility for others and our communities.

AnHonestComment 6y ago

And they’d be right: Someone over 70 is 270x as likely to die of COVID as someone under 50. For anyone under 50 without co-morbidity, then this is just a yearly flu — and destroying your economic future over the flu doesn’t make sense. Having a blanket policy that ignores those differences is unrealistic. IFR numbers are from the CDC’s best estimate: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...

doctor_eval 6y ago
So... now we are having a conversation about why one group of 400K people is more worthy of saving than another?
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  I think, clearly, that there is a debate to be had about the value of lives that are nearly at an end no matter what, and lives that are just hitting their prime.
  - doctor_eval 6y ago
    Someone who is 60 or even 70 is not necessarily “nearly at an end”. Just ask either of your presidents.
- nradov 6y ago
  That conversation has been going on since long before COVID-19. For example age is one factor in allocating scarce transplant organs. Other countries with socialized healthcare systems sometimes explicitly use Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) in deciding whether to pay for expensive treatments for elderly patients.
  - doctor_eval 6y ago
    We are talking about a whole percent of the US population here, not just the tiny fraction that requires organ transplants.
    - thu2111 6y ago
      So is he. QALY analysis is used to allocate all treatment in places like the UK, realistically in other places too. Basically a very expensive treatment that is only expected to increase your lifespan by a few months if you're already very elderly may not get funded if there are other interventions with better cost/benefit ratios available in the queue. This obviously affects nearly 100% of the population in the sense that most people will make it to old age, and even the non-elderly are affected by getting treatment they otherwise might not have done.
    - AnHonestComment 6y ago
      No — we’re talking about half a percent of the US population (10x flu), with deaths heavily concentrated among the elderly and infirm. That sucks — but shutting down the economy for nine months is going to send huge numbers of the young to early graves, through deconditioning related illness, domestic violence PTSD, and substance abuse. This policy is QALY negative, even if it ostensibly “saves lives”. It’s grotesque Boomers are harming their children and grandchildren like this, but not unexpected given the other betrayals of future generations.
- matz1 6y ago
  Not saying that those 400K doesn't deserve to be saved, they are absolutely deserve the care but if you are doing it at the huge expense for other people then conversation is unavoidable.
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    doing it at the huge expense for other people Begs the question. You build in the assumption that policy responses to a pandemic will harm the economy, and then don't do any work to establish that policy responses in this pandemic have prioritized lives over the economy, or to demonstrate that policy responses that weren't used would have been similar, etc.
- AnHonestComment 6y ago
  Hospital ERs don’t steal blood from young patients who could survive a donation to save patients bleeding out. Blood has to be donated because inflicting unwanted harm to innocents — even to save a life — is against medical ethics. How does the COVID response align with those ethics? People in high risk groups should absolutely self isolate, avoid restaurants, etc — but them needing to do so isn’t a reason to deny a 20 year old a cancer screening or a job to afford food, no. I also think it’s telling your response to me posting facts from the CDC is an unsourced emotional appeal.
maxerickson 6y ago
Hey, good news. We have pretty strong evidence that our policy choices have been geared towards letting the elderly die. (I'm talking about all the elderly that died if it isn't clear what evidence I'm referring to) Of course, the awful thing is that controlling the virus in May (I mean actually doing it, not just having a pause) would have been better for the economy. But we are too stupid for that.
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  Elderly people die. That's what happens when you're elderly. For many reasons.

matz1 6y ago

>Plenty of people believe COVID is no threat to them That is true, if you are under 70 and reasonably healthy, the chance of seriously sick from covid is very very low.

macintux 6y ago
The personal risk of getting seriously sick is very low. The risk of spreading it to others is very high. And the hospitals are overwhelmed. Sometimes your personal risk is not the end of the story.
- doctor_eval 6y ago
  And once hospitals are overwhelmed, your risk of dying of any cause increases regardless of your age, location or health.
  - pxeboot 6y ago
    Is that a major concern? Around me, the hospitals are at capacity for covid patients, but have reserved space for accidents, pregnancies, and other expected needs.
    - macintux 6y ago
      At some point you run out of caregivers. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/12/22/948908168/tennessee-hospitals-are-disturbingly-close-to-their-breaking-point https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/12/22/9489081...
      - matz1 6y ago
        Probably because they are lying worker/refuse to hire more: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/financial-fallout-from-covid-19-9-hospitals-laying-off-workers.html https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/financial-fall... The cited reason: 'Lower patient volumes, canceled elective procedures and higher expenses tied to the pandemic have created a cash crunch for hospitals' I wonder if the lockdown/stay at home order has something to do with it...

calvinmorrison 6y ago

More like - Everyone can be killed by COVID, everyone can be killed by terrorists. However it is unlikely your dunkin donuts in farmville, North Dakota is going to be the target of the latest ISIS attack. Likewise your likelihood of dying of COVID is not equal to others. If you believe it is - you have been duped.

Barrin92 6y ago

> Plenty of people believe COVID is no threat to them. and believing that this is reason enough to ignore it is precisely what's wrong with Western societies, the US leading the charge, Europe close behind. Individualised and atomised societies getting wrecked by a little strand of RNA because we cannot take responsibility for others and our communities.