3 ms·

It's kind of tiring after 2 years. The same has been said of Spain, France or Italy, though they rank among the top countries in healthcare. While no country i

by fer 5y ago

It's kind of tiring after 2 years. The same has been said of Spain, France or Italy, though they rank among the top countries in healthcare. While no country is perfect, and many governments made mistakes, you just can't fight an exponential problem (viral epidemic) with linear means (more hospitals). More beds doesn't help, you need the personnel, the training, and upkeep all of that when there's no pandemic. It's unfeasible. Without restrictions in place, and with the current omicron spread we're seeing, doubling hospital capacity magically, with doctors and nurses and ventilators, lasts you for an extra whooping 3 days. 10 times? You'll have around 10 days more before it collapses.

prohobo 5y ago
What are you talking about? In WW2 Germany took over the majority of Europe in like 3 months. They completely transformed their industry towards their goals before anyone even lifted a finger. You're saying they can't mobilize themselves to solve this comparatively tiny problem now? They can't build a few dozen field hospitals for Covid patients with basic therapies, like providing oxygen, which is what the vast majority of those patients need? None of the Western European countries have the capability for this? Is this some kind of joke? This is not an exponential problem: it comes in waves. I'm sure you know what an exponential function looks like, and it's not visible here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/germany/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/germany/ Field hospitals that stick around for a few months would be totally fine in handling this. That's what they're for. Is this tiring you? I don't really know what to say to that, except that it seems there's nothing anyone can say to change your mind.
- fer 5y ago
  The end of each wave aligns neatly with restrictions that lower the exponential. You're being disingenuous. And if we want to be technical it's a sigmoid, but we only see the exponential part of it.
  - effie 5y ago
    It does not matter whether the curve is exponential or not. What matters is whether sick people get adequate care and whether hospital personnel gets adequate rest and pay. With more covid specialized hospitals, both restrictions could be weaker and more people could be saved. Many governments just do not want to put effort and money towards that. Some of them even talk about reducing hospitals and let thousands of doctors and nurses quit (Slovakia). It is disgusting and reveals what kind of people are in charge.
  - prohobo 5y ago
    I know you're insinuating that the restrictions work. That's a very bold claim. Two things I'd like to know about the restrictions: 1) Do they actually work 2) Are they worth it (cost/benefit) You say "the end of each wave aligns neatly with restrictions" - can you prove that it's not just that the restrictions follow the waves? You know, correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation. I haven't seen any real discussion of this by governments, they just claim it works. Obviously each country does restrictions their own way, but I feel like the concept of "lockdowns" is pretty ubiquitous, and if you're going to do something that seems stupid, you should have a lot of supporting evidence for its efficacy. So far I haven't seen much persuasive evidence in support of lockdowns or masking, but people keep throwing it at me like it's gospel. They don't seem to think Sweden or Florida are real, or any of the other places that never did lockdowns. Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence that lockdowns are putting millions of people into starvation. I haven't seen any governments put out cost/benefit analysis, probably because it wouldn't look very good. I wonder honestly whether you, and others like you, are arguing in good faith. The truth is I'm not necessarily against many of the restrictions - if it turned out they were actually appropriate and worth it. The problem is that the way you argue, the incentives involved, and the reality of the outcomes, I don't believe a fucking word you say. You'd have to provide indisputable evidence at this point, and you'd have to really make me want to hear it.
    - fer 5y ago
      > I know you're insinuating that the restrictions work. That's a very bold claim. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0 And that's just the most cited, most exhaustive study on effectiveness of restrictions. Some work, some don't, but certainly most do. Do you have any study at hand that indicates that restrictions generally don't work?

by fer 5y ago

prohobo 5y ago

What are you talking about? In WW2 Germany took over the majority of Europe in like 3 months. They completely transformed their industry towards their goals before anyone even lifted a finger. You're saying they can't mobilize themselves to solve this comparatively tiny problem now? They can't build a few dozen field hospitals for Covid patients with basic therapies, like providing oxygen, which is what the vast majority of those patients need? None of the Western European countries have the capability for this? Is this some kind of joke? This is not an exponential problem: it comes in waves. I'm sure you know what an exponential function looks like, and it's not visible here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/germany/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/germany/ Field hospitals that stick around for a few months would be totally fine in handling this. That's what they're for. Is this tiring you? I don't really know what to say to that, except that it seems there's nothing anyone can say to change your mind.

fer 5y ago
The end of each wave aligns neatly with restrictions that lower the exponential. You're being disingenuous. And if we want to be technical it's a sigmoid, but we only see the exponential part of it.
- effie 5y ago
  It does not matter whether the curve is exponential or not. What matters is whether sick people get adequate care and whether hospital personnel gets adequate rest and pay. With more covid specialized hospitals, both restrictions could be weaker and more people could be saved. Many governments just do not want to put effort and money towards that. Some of them even talk about reducing hospitals and let thousands of doctors and nurses quit (Slovakia). It is disgusting and reveals what kind of people are in charge.
- prohobo 5y ago
  I know you're insinuating that the restrictions work. That's a very bold claim. Two things I'd like to know about the restrictions: 1) Do they actually work 2) Are they worth it (cost/benefit) You say "the end of each wave aligns neatly with restrictions" - can you prove that it's not just that the restrictions follow the waves? You know, correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation. I haven't seen any real discussion of this by governments, they just claim it works. Obviously each country does restrictions their own way, but I feel like the concept of "lockdowns" is pretty ubiquitous, and if you're going to do something that seems stupid, you should have a lot of supporting evidence for its efficacy. So far I haven't seen much persuasive evidence in support of lockdowns or masking, but people keep throwing it at me like it's gospel. They don't seem to think Sweden or Florida are real, or any of the other places that never did lockdowns. Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence that lockdowns are putting millions of people into starvation. I haven't seen any governments put out cost/benefit analysis, probably because it wouldn't look very good. I wonder honestly whether you, and others like you, are arguing in good faith. The truth is I'm not necessarily against many of the restrictions - if it turned out they were actually appropriate and worth it. The problem is that the way you argue, the incentives involved, and the reality of the outcomes, I don't believe a fucking word you say. You'd have to provide indisputable evidence at this point, and you'd have to really make me want to hear it.
  - fer 5y ago
    > I know you're insinuating that the restrictions work. That's a very bold claim. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0 And that's just the most cited, most exhaustive study on effectiveness of restrictions. Some work, some don't, but certainly most do. Do you have any study at hand that indicates that restrictions generally don't work?