Quote:
Originally Posted by spino1i
You misunderstand me, I am not merely concerned about this because of my potential "poker experience". The implications of the quarantine order are much more far reaching than that. It has shut down most businesses and any major social activities. It has made finding a job impossible and put a decent percentage of people out of work. It is a sign of gross government overreach and a violation of freedom.
Once people started to die at a high clip and hospitals emergency rooms and ICU's were overrun people started to make the decision to not go out or when they went out to do so cautiously.
This started happening about a week before the first state issued a "shutdown" order.
The federal government has only issued guidance. Each state government has taken their own initiative based on how the onslaught hit their state.
Quote:
People are dying in record numbers? Really? 2.5 million people die every year in the United States. Most of them are old and die because of disease. Coronavirus added 100,000 to that number. Most of those people that die from it are old too. Maybe by the end of the year it will be at 250,000. So its a 10% increase in death for one year, and in return we sacrifice the quality of life for virtually everyone and permanently destroy the economy.
lol.
If we had done nothing it is likely that about 70% of our population would have been infected. Probably more.
With a death rate unknown at present but likely at 0.5% to 0.8% (currently the death rate seems much higher in the US but that is because we have a limited idea of how many people actually have the disease).
So with no action taken to mitigate the damage, Covid-19 related deaths would have been between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 in the US this year assuming that we could have treated everyone who got sick.
However, because hospitals would have been overrun as they were in Italy, many more would have died due to lack of treatment (ventilators save about 20% to 30% of patients).
The other problem is that people with other deadly ailments would be less likely to get treatment in a hospital and some would die at home afraid of going to the hospital and getting infected.
Quote:
And how many of those people that you "save" with social distancing would end up dying later on down the line from coronavirus anyway? Probably most of them.
No.
What we are doing is giving the government time to set up proper testing and tracing.
The tracing is starting now in many states. But the testing is still screwed up because of the way the government (including the CDC) has handled it to date.
If you look at countries that have ramped up testing effectively and do contact tracing, like South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and even Germany, you see that not a lot of people are dying of Covid-19 per capita.
Quote:
What about people who are dying of other medical conditions that cant use medical services now? Screw them, coronavirus is more important. Yes, seems like quite a good idea doesn't it?
This is actually a powerful argument for shutting down economically until hospitals are able to handle the flow of emergency patients.
Which ironically is what has happened in virtually every state.
I just went to the Emergency Room in NY because my bladder shut down. They were prepared to see me with every doctor, nurse, and administrator wearing proper medical gear (masks and even shields). I received treatment immediately and have recovered.
At 64 if I catch covid-19 I would have probably a 2% to 3% chance of dying. So I am very fortunate that in NY the steps the state government have taken (albeit a few weeks too late) have reduced the hospitalizations due to Covid-19 substantially.
Quote:
If you're so worried about death from disease, how much money have you contributed to medical research over your life? A significant amount I hope given how much value you place on stopping it..
Not sure what this has to do with anything.
As a member of US society we all contribute to medical research. Ironically a vaccine for prior coronavirus strains was not able to be produced, though they tried. Probably in part because they were easily contained otherwise.
Now we all hope for an early vaccine.
But short of that if we pretend that it is worth having people die with no efforts at mitigation, then the people will shut down voluntarily. You will see this in states that open up religious gatherings.
In NY the first case spread profusely in New Rochelle (close to where I live) primarily because the infected man attended a Bar Mitzvah and a Synagogue. His children also spread it at school and other social events.
Even if you opened all economic activity, people wouldn't comply. The death rate for 10 to 20 year olds right now who get Covid is about 0.1% to 0.2%. What parent in their right mind would send their kid to a summer camp knowing that on average one or two kids there is likely to die from Covid-19?
Similarly, young people who work in congested areas (like meat packing plants or office buildings) will be thinking twice about going to work knowing that about 5 people per thousand at work will die without proper social distancing measures and protective gear.
I am all for re-opening society. But it must be done in a way that the entire population is willing to participate. To pretend that nobody cares about older people in their lives or that older people will be willing to risk their lives so that you can prosper is not real.
Estimates show now that if we went back to normal, lifting all protective measures it would take between 3 weeks and two months before individual states would be swamped with Covid-19 patients in their emergency rooms and the total US estimates would be back to 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 or possibly more.
Check out this website if you are curious