4 ms·

Haven't read the piece but I have read a few things by this guy that made me panic. I don't know if he was right or wrong but he has a tendency to be overly ble

Haven't read the piece but I have read a few things by this guy that made me panic. I don't know if he was right or wrong but he has a tendency to be overly bleak. Yes Covid kills, a lot. Also car accidents and air pollution kill a lot. I haven't gained anything from reading this guy despite all the good info, it hasn't given me any action items and I suspect a politician reading him won't gain anything either.

TaupeRanger 5y ago
Why would anyone ever compare an exponentially spreading infectious disease with car accidents? They aren't even in the same realm of concern for public health.
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  I am saying I am not sure the amount of panic was proportional to the amount of actual deaths. > At least 30.7% of deaths in India can be attributed to air pollution from fossil fuels--that means about 2.5 million people die every year after breathing toxic air.9 I mean who cares, all I know is how many Covid deaths they are having, probably Indian people themselves are much more aware of Covid than Air pollution. Why? Mostly because Covid is still new and pollution is old and boring.
  - cloverich 5y ago
    Because your parents aren't dying from air pollution tomorrow, but they might from COVID. And the vaccine can stop it, and there's a race between DELTA and the vaccine for your parents lives. The story is a bit different in the US, where its more about people not wanting to take it, and an often cited reason is that the virus is going way whether or not that get vaccinated (because other people are). If that story changes, then their reasoning is no longer valid.
  - kube-system 5y ago
    Immediacy and individual actionability are also important factors in the difference between people's reaction to those two situations. COVID can kill you within days and you can wear a mask today to do something about it. Pollution might take 20 years and if you don't emit any pollution there's a billion other people around you that will. "There's nothing I can do about it" is what many might say.
- littlestymaar 5y ago
  And it's not like we've been passive about car accidents either. Billions have been spent worldwide on car equipment (seat belts, air bags, crush zones, …), road safety campaigns, traffic signs and road junctions. And it came with strict laws enforcement: there are thousands of people in jail right now for road-related felonies and crimes. Why should we do nothing about Covid given that so much was done in car accidents?
- rajin444 5y ago
  Calling disease spread exponential is dishonest. It’s exponential for a time, but there is an upper limit (which is dictated by a ton of complex variables).
  - TaupeRanger 5y ago
    It's not dishonest if it's literally true, as you already admitted. This is like saying "it's dishonest to say drinking water is essential for health when obviously you'll die if someone sticks a hose down your throat and forces you to drink until you die".
    - rajin444 5y ago
      It's not literally true. Exponential goes forever. A vrius will not. Where it stops is incredibly complex. It's exponential to a point, and where that point is is extremely important.
      - TaupeRanger 5y ago
        Exponential spread does not mean "spreads forever"...good grief, stop playing pedantic games.
        rajin444 5y ago
        I'm not being pedantic. You have no idea what kind of spread any given strain of covid (or any virus) is going to have. You're trying to over simplify an extremely complex interaction. It could stop at 1 or it could stop at 1,000,000,000. Back to your original post: > They aren't even in the same realm of concern for public health. They are depending how much a virus spreads. You're relying on an implied "exponential = huge and scary" to give your argument weight. Can you say how pervasive the spread of the delta variant will be?
garyfirestorm 5y ago
‘Haven’t read the piece’
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  I have read two long articles by him, each around 1 hour read. So I have a good sense of what his writing is about.

TaupeRanger 5y ago

Why would anyone ever compare an exponentially spreading infectious disease with car accidents? They aren't even in the same realm of concern for public health.

joelbluminator 5y ago
I am saying I am not sure the amount of panic was proportional to the amount of actual deaths. > At least 30.7% of deaths in India can be attributed to air pollution from fossil fuels--that means about 2.5 million people die every year after breathing toxic air.9 I mean who cares, all I know is how many Covid deaths they are having, probably Indian people themselves are much more aware of Covid than Air pollution. Why? Mostly because Covid is still new and pollution is old and boring.
- cloverich 5y ago
  Because your parents aren't dying from air pollution tomorrow, but they might from COVID. And the vaccine can stop it, and there's a race between DELTA and the vaccine for your parents lives. The story is a bit different in the US, where its more about people not wanting to take it, and an often cited reason is that the virus is going way whether or not that get vaccinated (because other people are). If that story changes, then their reasoning is no longer valid.
- kube-system 5y ago
  Immediacy and individual actionability are also important factors in the difference between people's reaction to those two situations. COVID can kill you within days and you can wear a mask today to do something about it. Pollution might take 20 years and if you don't emit any pollution there's a billion other people around you that will. "There's nothing I can do about it" is what many might say.
littlestymaar 5y ago
And it's not like we've been passive about car accidents either. Billions have been spent worldwide on car equipment (seat belts, air bags, crush zones, …), road safety campaigns, traffic signs and road junctions. And it came with strict laws enforcement: there are thousands of people in jail right now for road-related felonies and crimes. Why should we do nothing about Covid given that so much was done in car accidents?
rajin444 5y ago
Calling disease spread exponential is dishonest. It’s exponential for a time, but there is an upper limit (which is dictated by a ton of complex variables).
- TaupeRanger 5y ago
  It's not dishonest if it's literally true, as you already admitted. This is like saying "it's dishonest to say drinking water is essential for health when obviously you'll die if someone sticks a hose down your throat and forces you to drink until you die".
  - rajin444 5y ago
    It's not literally true. Exponential goes forever. A vrius will not. Where it stops is incredibly complex. It's exponential to a point, and where that point is is extremely important.
    - TaupeRanger 5y ago
      Exponential spread does not mean "spreads forever"...good grief, stop playing pedantic games.
      - rajin444 5y ago
        I'm not being pedantic. You have no idea what kind of spread any given strain of covid (or any virus) is going to have. You're trying to over simplify an extremely complex interaction. It could stop at 1 or it could stop at 1,000,000,000. Back to your original post: > They aren't even in the same realm of concern for public health. They are depending how much a virus spreads. You're relying on an implied "exponential = huge and scary" to give your argument weight. Can you say how pervasive the spread of the delta variant will be?

garyfirestorm 5y ago

‘Haven’t read the piece’

joelbluminator 5y ago
I have read two long articles by him, each around 1 hour read. So I have a good sense of what his writing is about.