5 ms·

So by that calculation 1.32 million people (2% of 66 million) would die and we're supposed to NOT react strongly to people who hold that opinion?

by smcl 6y ago

matz1 6y ago
As supposed of advocating lockdown ? How many million of people would suffer from lockdown?
- smcl 6y ago
  Really not sure how to perform that comparison. How do we equate one death vs one "suffer", and how do we count the "suffers" of people who take ill of covid in the free-for-all scenario? I think the ball is in your court on this one but, frankly, good luck
  - matz1 6y ago
    So not sure then do lockdown anyway?
    - smcl 6y ago
      Well we actually have a very good idea of how many people would die of Covid if the entire population of the UK got Covid. We don't know how many people have ... whatever you are proposing we compare that against. So faced with the options of "prevent the deaths of over a million people" and "matz1 doesn't like lockdown but doesn't want to talk about or quantify it" I think the choice is pretty clear. Unless you want to elaborate further?
      - matz1 6y ago
        whats the evidence that lockdown can 'prevent the deaths of over a million people' ? Keep in mind Lockdown can cause death as well.
        smcl 6y ago
        This is coming from the figures the other anti-lockdown guy gave for the number of deaths they expect - 2% deaths of the UK population is ~1.32 million people. If you don’t get covid, you don’t die of covid. If you lockdown, you don’t get covid. It’s a simplification but it’s a start. What you have said is that people will suffer under lockdown - but you haven’t really tried to quantify that. You’ve decided that’s a lost cause and have moved onto “lockdown causes death” ! Amazing.
        matz1 6y ago
        >If you don’t get covid, you don’t die of covid Likewise If you get covid, doesn't mean you will die from covid. vast majority of people will be fine. >If you lockdown, you don’t get covid. It’s a simplification but it’s a start Maybe you don't get covid but if you lockdown, you may suffer/die from starving/mental health issue instead. >What you have said is that people will suffer under lockdown - but you haven’t really tried to quantify that Is it really hard to think that lockdown would cause at least some unemployment, some bankruptcy, some mental health issue ? >“lockdown causes death” Unemployment has long been associated with a significantly increased risk of death. I don't have the precise number but how are you sure that the damage from virus is greater than damage from lockdown ?
frereubu 6y ago
To add to that, there would also be a large number of people suffering from long-term complications who may not be able to work and will need ongoing medical care.
- smcl 6y ago
  Indeed there would. The naive estimate of deaths is bad enough, the knock on impact is a bit harder to wrap our heads around in terms of magnitude, but would still be severe. Basically - this is not nothing, it’s being treated like a Big Deal because it legitimately is. There’s a lot of talk from the “treatment is worse than the disease” crowd, scant few of whom are experts. And like climate change and evolution deniers many of the arguments seem to boil down to conspiracy theories or the It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia argument - “science is a liar ... sometimes”: https://youtu.be/Zgk8UdV7GQ0 https://youtu.be/Zgk8UdV7GQ0

So by that calculation 1.32 million people (2% of 66 million) would die and we're supposed to NOT react strongly to people who hold that opinion?

by smcl 6y ago

So by that calculation 1.32 million people (2% of 66 million) would die and we're supposed to NOT react strongly to people who hold that opinion?

matz1 6y ago

As supposed of advocating lockdown ? How many million of people would suffer from lockdown?

smcl 6y ago
Really not sure how to perform that comparison. How do we equate one death vs one "suffer", and how do we count the "suffers" of people who take ill of covid in the free-for-all scenario? I think the ball is in your court on this one but, frankly, good luck
- matz1 6y ago
  So not sure then do lockdown anyway?
  - smcl 6y ago
    Well we actually have a very good idea of how many people would die of Covid if the entire population of the UK got Covid. We don't know how many people have ... whatever you are proposing we compare that against. So faced with the options of "prevent the deaths of over a million people" and "matz1 doesn't like lockdown but doesn't want to talk about or quantify it" I think the choice is pretty clear. Unless you want to elaborate further?
    - matz1 6y ago
      whats the evidence that lockdown can 'prevent the deaths of over a million people' ? Keep in mind Lockdown can cause death as well.
      - smcl 6y ago
        This is coming from the figures the other anti-lockdown guy gave for the number of deaths they expect - 2% deaths of the UK population is ~1.32 million people. If you don’t get covid, you don’t die of covid. If you lockdown, you don’t get covid. It’s a simplification but it’s a start. What you have said is that people will suffer under lockdown - but you haven’t really tried to quantify that. You’ve decided that’s a lost cause and have moved onto “lockdown causes death” ! Amazing.
        matz1 6y ago
        >If you don’t get covid, you don’t die of covid Likewise If you get covid, doesn't mean you will die from covid. vast majority of people will be fine. >If you lockdown, you don’t get covid. It’s a simplification but it’s a start Maybe you don't get covid but if you lockdown, you may suffer/die from starving/mental health issue instead. >What you have said is that people will suffer under lockdown - but you haven’t really tried to quantify that Is it really hard to think that lockdown would cause at least some unemployment, some bankruptcy, some mental health issue ? >“lockdown causes death” Unemployment has long been associated with a significantly increased risk of death. I don't have the precise number but how are you sure that the damage from virus is greater than damage from lockdown ?

frereubu 6y ago

To add to that, there would also be a large number of people suffering from long-term complications who may not be able to work and will need ongoing medical care.

smcl 6y ago
Indeed there would. The naive estimate of deaths is bad enough, the knock on impact is a bit harder to wrap our heads around in terms of magnitude, but would still be severe. Basically - this is not nothing, it’s being treated like a Big Deal because it legitimately is. There’s a lot of talk from the “treatment is worse than the disease” crowd, scant few of whom are experts. And like climate change and evolution deniers many of the arguments seem to boil down to conspiracy theories or the It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia argument - “science is a liar ... sometimes”: https://youtu.be/Zgk8UdV7GQ0 https://youtu.be/Zgk8UdV7GQ0