4 ms·

A lot of people in our democracy might not agree with your assessment of this pandemic. A lot of people feel that 1 in 750 people dying, mostly older with comor

A lot of people in our democracy might not agree with your assessment of this pandemic. A lot of people feel that 1 in 750 people dying, mostly older with comorbidities, is not the disaster for society that some seem to think it is. A lot of people think that giving up a year or two of their social and economic lives is not worth trying to avoid a 1 in 750, or 0.13%, chance of dying. Especially those, like the young, who have less than 1 in 100,000 chance of dying. Trying to tell them this is a catastrophe based on the numbers isn't going to work.

maxerickson 6y ago
More people die the less you control the spread of the virus, the overall death rate at this point in time is not a good gauge of the potential impact of the pandemic.
- mikem170 6y ago
  But we live in democracies, and there are a lot of people who feel differently than you might. Not just Trump. They look at the same numbers and dangers and don't agree. Besides, the authority and responsibility to respond to a pandemic (issue health orders, closings, quarantines, and lock downs) rests with the states and not the president or congress. EDIT: removed a remark about Fauci and herd immunity, I thought I read this but couldn't find a reference. My apologies.
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    He didn't say that. He has made comments that we can likely get there sometime this year if we have widespread administration of vaccines. Which widespread vaccination is a lot cheaper than other measures, but it's not doing nothing either.
    - Throwawayaerlei 6y ago
      Fauci said we were getting close to herd immunity. He didn't say that. Not sure it matters when he recently admitted he was lying in stages about the percentages to encourage people to get vaccinated. After that and his self-admitted lying in the masking debacle, I'm not sure why anyone still listens to him. Credibility is one of the most precious resources in public health, and our public health authorities including him have burned through a great deal of it.
      - maxerickson 6y ago
        They've since edited their comment to remove what they had said when I replied, which was How much worse do you think it could have been? Fauci said we were getting close to herd immunity. Do you think as many people would have dies again next year? 1 in 250 when finished? I don't understand why Fauci has made those choices and still find him plenty credible. And then, his credibility isn't really an issue when the supposed statement is a complete misunderstanding of the actual situation (we are nowhere near herd immunity via infection or vaccination).
        Throwawayaerlei 6y ago
        I don't understand why Fauci has made those choices and still find him plenty credible. So you don't understand why Fauci has chosen to lie twice about very important COVID-19 issues, later admitted to these lies, and still find him "plenty credible." How do you know if the next thing you hear out of his mouth is true or a conscious lie???
      - mikem170 6y ago
        I apologize, I edited that out when I looked for a reference and couldn't find one. I thought I remembered reading something to that effect, but couldn't be sure.
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    But we live in democracies, and there are a lot of people who feel differently than you might. Not just Trump. They look at the same numbers and dangers and don't agree. Besides, the authority and responsibility to respond to a pandemic (issue health orders, closings, quarantines, and lock downs) rests with the states and not the president or congress. This is the comment you've rewritten 1/2 hour after I replied. Anyway, the federal government has lots of powers that apply, they even have a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, intended to apply federal resources to controlling and preventing diseases.
    - mikem170 6y ago
      But don't the states make some pretty immediately impactful decisions, like mask mandates enforced by health inspectors and sheriffs, school and work closings, curfews, etc. The feds have things they can do. I guess a lot of that is splashing money around. But it seems that the states have more directly and immediately applicable legal powers.
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    You completely rewrote your comment and inserted the "EDIT:" comment after I wrote my second reply (this is my third reply). Here's the text you inserted after reply 2: EDIT: removed a remark about Fauci and herd immunity, I thought I read this but couldn't find a reference. My apologies. It's fine to edit comments. It's ridiculous to substantially edit them in an attempt to rehabilitate them or re-contextualize replies.
    - mikem170 6y ago
      Ok, then I'm ridiculous, I should have flagged that I removed that statement when I couldn't find a reference, didn't catch that there was followup already. Let's get past that and continue the discussion.
      - maxerickson 6y ago
        You edited your comment like 6 times there master blaster, I don't believe your characterization of that activity is in good faith and am checking out of this thread.
        mikem170 6y ago
        My bad. You are right that my edits made a mess, I didn't even do a good job of fixing it on my last edit. I didn't know at the time that I removed the Fauci remark that you had already (correctly) pointed out that it was wrong. If anything I should had added an edit to that statement pointing out that it had been correctly discredited. I was fiddling with the edit/update button because I typed too quick, then felt the urge to clarify and remove extraneous material so as not to sidetrack things. I shouldn't have used the edit as a preview feature. I am well reminded that this does a disservice to anyone in the middle of a reply.
khuey 6y ago
Where did we come up with 0.13%? Approximately 0.3% of everybody in NYC died of COVID-19 so that's the lower bound assuming everyone in NYC was infected (and they weren't, of course).
- mikem170 6y ago
  I took 1347 deaths per million people in the U.S. [0] and did the division. [0] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

maxerickson 6y ago

More people die the less you control the spread of the virus, the overall death rate at this point in time is not a good gauge of the potential impact of the pandemic.

mikem170 6y ago
But we live in democracies, and there are a lot of people who feel differently than you might. Not just Trump. They look at the same numbers and dangers and don't agree. Besides, the authority and responsibility to respond to a pandemic (issue health orders, closings, quarantines, and lock downs) rests with the states and not the president or congress. EDIT: removed a remark about Fauci and herd immunity, I thought I read this but couldn't find a reference. My apologies.
- maxerickson 6y ago
  He didn't say that. He has made comments that we can likely get there sometime this year if we have widespread administration of vaccines. Which widespread vaccination is a lot cheaper than other measures, but it's not doing nothing either.
  - Throwawayaerlei 6y ago
    Fauci said we were getting close to herd immunity. He didn't say that. Not sure it matters when he recently admitted he was lying in stages about the percentages to encourage people to get vaccinated. After that and his self-admitted lying in the masking debacle, I'm not sure why anyone still listens to him. Credibility is one of the most precious resources in public health, and our public health authorities including him have burned through a great deal of it.
    - maxerickson 6y ago
      They've since edited their comment to remove what they had said when I replied, which was How much worse do you think it could have been? Fauci said we were getting close to herd immunity. Do you think as many people would have dies again next year? 1 in 250 when finished? I don't understand why Fauci has made those choices and still find him plenty credible. And then, his credibility isn't really an issue when the supposed statement is a complete misunderstanding of the actual situation (we are nowhere near herd immunity via infection or vaccination).
      - Throwawayaerlei 6y ago
        I don't understand why Fauci has made those choices and still find him plenty credible. So you don't understand why Fauci has chosen to lie twice about very important COVID-19 issues, later admitted to these lies, and still find him "plenty credible." How do you know if the next thing you hear out of his mouth is true or a conscious lie???
    - mikem170 6y ago
      I apologize, I edited that out when I looked for a reference and couldn't find one. I thought I remembered reading something to that effect, but couldn't be sure.
- maxerickson 6y ago
  But we live in democracies, and there are a lot of people who feel differently than you might. Not just Trump. They look at the same numbers and dangers and don't agree. Besides, the authority and responsibility to respond to a pandemic (issue health orders, closings, quarantines, and lock downs) rests with the states and not the president or congress. This is the comment you've rewritten 1/2 hour after I replied. Anyway, the federal government has lots of powers that apply, they even have a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, intended to apply federal resources to controlling and preventing diseases.
  - mikem170 6y ago
    But don't the states make some pretty immediately impactful decisions, like mask mandates enforced by health inspectors and sheriffs, school and work closings, curfews, etc. The feds have things they can do. I guess a lot of that is splashing money around. But it seems that the states have more directly and immediately applicable legal powers.
- maxerickson 6y ago
  You completely rewrote your comment and inserted the "EDIT:" comment after I wrote my second reply (this is my third reply). Here's the text you inserted after reply 2: EDIT: removed a remark about Fauci and herd immunity, I thought I read this but couldn't find a reference. My apologies. It's fine to edit comments. It's ridiculous to substantially edit them in an attempt to rehabilitate them or re-contextualize replies.
  - mikem170 6y ago
    Ok, then I'm ridiculous, I should have flagged that I removed that statement when I couldn't find a reference, didn't catch that there was followup already. Let's get past that and continue the discussion.
    - maxerickson 6y ago
      You edited your comment like 6 times there master blaster, I don't believe your characterization of that activity is in good faith and am checking out of this thread.
      - mikem170 6y ago
        My bad. You are right that my edits made a mess, I didn't even do a good job of fixing it on my last edit. I didn't know at the time that I removed the Fauci remark that you had already (correctly) pointed out that it was wrong. If anything I should had added an edit to that statement pointing out that it had been correctly discredited. I was fiddling with the edit/update button because I typed too quick, then felt the urge to clarify and remove extraneous material so as not to sidetrack things. I shouldn't have used the edit as a preview feature. I am well reminded that this does a disservice to anyone in the middle of a reply.

khuey 6y ago

Where did we come up with 0.13%? Approximately 0.3% of everybody in NYC died of COVID-19 so that's the lower bound assuming everyone in NYC was infected (and they weren't, of course).

mikem170 6y ago
I took 1347 deaths per million people in the U.S. [0] and did the division. [0] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/