3 ms·

Any back of the envelope calculations showing how you reach the conclusion that this is worse than the harm the COVID control measures are doing?

actually_a_dog 5y ago
How much harm do you think operating with 20% fewer healthcare personnel would cause? Put me down for that much. Keep in mind, this isn't just 20% fewer people to deal with COVID, it's 20% fewer people to deal with, well, everything, for years to come. I'm sure someone's done the calculations on what the consequences of a decimated healthcare system are, if you want to go look for them.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  I don't know, how much harm do you estimate that causes? Obviously it's harmful, but what we need to do is compare it to the enormous harm of lockdowns and other COVID control postures, some of which I've documented.
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    I don't see where you've documented anything any more thoroughly than I have. This is a web forum, not a policy paper. You gave your 2 links, and I gave you mine. How much worse do you think everything you've listed would be if we had started with 20% fewer healthcare personnel? Well, guess what. That's how bad it will be from now on, because we couldn't all cooperate to take measures to ensure the healthcare system didn't get overwhelmed in the first place, and doesn't continue to get overwhelmed.
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      On the face of it, your example is dwarfed by mine. Healthcare workers make up only 0.5 percent of the population. That means the direct mental health effects of limitatons on civil/economic liberties via lockdowns are going to impact 200X more people than the direct mental health effects of more COVID ICU cases on healthcare workers. That's why I asked how you could arrive at the converse conclusion that lockdowns are net beneficial for mental health.

3 ms·

Any back of the envelope calculations showing how you reach the conclusion that this is worse than the harm the COVID control measures are doing?

by CryptoPunk 5y ago

actually_a_dog 5y ago
How much harm do you think operating with 20% fewer healthcare personnel would cause? Put me down for that much. Keep in mind, this isn't just 20% fewer people to deal with COVID, it's 20% fewer people to deal with, well, everything, for years to come. I'm sure someone's done the calculations on what the consequences of a decimated healthcare system are, if you want to go look for them.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  I don't know, how much harm do you estimate that causes? Obviously it's harmful, but what we need to do is compare it to the enormous harm of lockdowns and other COVID control postures, some of which I've documented.
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    I don't see where you've documented anything any more thoroughly than I have. This is a web forum, not a policy paper. You gave your 2 links, and I gave you mine. How much worse do you think everything you've listed would be if we had started with 20% fewer healthcare personnel? Well, guess what. That's how bad it will be from now on, because we couldn't all cooperate to take measures to ensure the healthcare system didn't get overwhelmed in the first place, and doesn't continue to get overwhelmed.
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      On the face of it, your example is dwarfed by mine. Healthcare workers make up only 0.5 percent of the population. That means the direct mental health effects of limitatons on civil/economic liberties via lockdowns are going to impact 200X more people than the direct mental health effects of more COVID ICU cases on healthcare workers. That's why I asked how you could arrive at the converse conclusion that lockdowns are net beneficial for mental health.