matz1

63 ms·

571.
by matz1 6y ago
fatality rate less than 1% is very low. In regards for long term injury, given enough spread any disease could cause long term damage in some of its population. Flu cause long term damage. The damage caused by lockdown is more than covid.
572.
by matz1 6y ago
of course some population of people will have long term damage, any disease could do that.
573.
by matz1 6y ago
> they will be plenty full until someone brings in COVID-19 Someone will bring covid 19, sure, that is fully expected, we know that since the virus spread easily, but we also know majority of them will be not get stick or only have some
574.
by matz1 6y ago
Government need to reasonable, still have the lockdown while we know the virus is not that dangerous ? paying people extra unemployment money to not working ?
575.
by matz1 6y ago
Elon musk recently said China rocks and the US has become more entitled and full of complacement. I kind a have to agree, even my company starting to shift a lot of development work to team in china. Their output and hard work has been amaz
576.
by matz1 6y ago
>It’s insane to me that we don’t just make masks 100% mandatory when you’re outside your own home. We can just reopen reopen right now. Yes covid spread easily but we already know that majority of covid cases its either asymptomatic or o
577.
by matz1 6y ago
>What do you mean by "the risk is low"? Covid may spread very easily but for majority of people its either asymptotic, means they never get sick or they only have mild symptom. As far as long term consequences, of course, covid
578.
by matz1 6y ago
Obviously I was referring to confirmed case, the more testing you have, the more confirmed case you have. >If you're infected but asymptomatic or have mild symptoms you're still sick. Sure for mild symptoms but if you don'
579.
by matz1 6y ago
even death rate can be easy to manipulate. Someone had a car accident while also tested positive for covid -> death by covid.
580.
by matz1 6y ago
>Testing didn't make those people sick; I didn't say testing make people stick. > It just revealed how many people are actually sick Testing doesn't reveal how many people are actually sick. A lot of people tested posit
581.
by matz1 6y ago
Obviously I was referring to confirmed case. Testing more people increase the number of confirmed case. The fact remain, if you get infected at all, majority of the cases are asymptotic or only mild symptom.
582.
by matz1 6y ago
obviously I was referring to confirmed case.
583.
by matz1 6y ago
>Would you go if the restaurant was open right now? Absolutely, I never stop went to the restaurant that are still open. > If so, why? The same reason on why most people go to restaurant: To enjoy the food and the service. >but can
584.
by matz1 6y ago
And how do u get that number that if not because of testing ?
585.
by matz1 6y ago
of course some people will chose to stay at home, but many other will go. At very least it helps. I want to go but I can't if the restaurant is closed.
586.
by matz1 6y ago
How is it uninformed ?
587.
by matz1 6y ago
>Do you think people would be more or less inclined to go to restaurants or order takeout At very least, it would help. >if there's an exponentially-growing out-of-control pandemic sweeping their city? yes case its growing becaus
588.
by matz1 6y ago
That's what happen when you lockdown. The solution is simple: stop the lockdown. At this point the harm is greater than the benefit.
589.
by matz1 6y ago
There is no such thing as absolute truth, its relative and subjective.
590.
by matz1 6y ago
live off investment/retirement account.
591.
by matz1 6y ago
>pointless self-destruction and misery. Maybe its pointless for you, fair enough but it can be meaningfull for other people, i myself think it's interesting.
592.
by matz1 6y ago
What is the issue of figuring just enough NodeJS as long as they can solve the problem at hand ? At the end of the day what we do is to solve problem. Even if you specialized in let say just front end, that itself can be broad enough to mas
593.
by matz1 6y ago
145k death is not a first day number is accumulation after about 4 months. We can also from other country such as sweeden, they don't have lockdown, their death rate is declining and the total death is more or less the same with other
594.
by matz1 6y ago
>As I said before, that's a difference in a million potential deaths in the United States. So? In the larger scale is not a big number and doesn't justify the lockdown https://www.thelancet.com/journals/e
595.
by matz1 6y ago
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
596.
by matz1 6y ago
so in may it was 0.4 and now its 0.65 is worse but still very low. the number is of course evolving but unlikely to widely different than that. >Do you believe this gives you lee-way to diminish and share bad facts to bolster your claim?
597.
by matz1 6y ago
My grandmother will always have high risk of death given of her age, any small diseases could kill her, not just covid. To lock her down, to not let her out the house, to deprive her with activity that she want to do will cause more damage
598.
by matz1 6y ago
ok the current cdc best estimate of ifr 0.65%. Which is low. yes the number are changing but it quickly converging as times goes. Lockdown is not free, its not without harm.
599.
by matz1 6y ago
>Not on the level of local, or even less statewide, hospital systems In 2018 : https://time.com/5107984/hospitals-handling-burden-flu-patie...
600.
by matz1 6y ago
0.04% of the total population 145k out of 340 million. We can also see from Sweeden that the death rate are declining and that without lockdown.

More ›