Mortality doesn't work that way. The most vulnerable die of common afflictions, no matter what they are. Just a question of what they succumb to first. But it's a statistical fact that they can only die once per year.
54,265
- Thread starter Anbarandy
- Start date
And so far 60,000 have died in 2 months from coronavirus.
Which is worse, 60,000 a year or 60,000 in 2 months?
Your argument is a lot weaker than you think it is:
1. How many months is flu season? Clue, it's a number at lot less than 12.
2. Who says those who die from Covid would only have died from the flu? The mortality rates for the over 70 demographic are pretty high, and elderly people are vulnerable to a great array of health threats, as I've posted before.
3. 60 in 2 months is exactly as bad as 60 in a year if, in the former circumstance, no further deaths occur during the year. And Frank, this is a an exercise in logic, so please don't respond with "no, 60 in 2 months is like 360 in a year".
Now that governments can relax about the prospect of the hospitals being overwhelmed, the best that can be said about continuing with the current strategy is that a few 70 and 80 year olds may live a few more months this year. But at what cost, including neglecting nearly ever other health need?
The flu is seasonal and it looks like COVID-19 is not.
Which is why its coming back in places where they are relaxing social distancing.
Big, big difference.
The model Trump based his numbers off is also garbage, it basically just fit the Wunan curve onto US numbers assuming that the US would do the same. Its already 5,000 and predicts only 7,000 more deaths over the next month. There were 2,500 or so today.
Better are these projections.
https://reichlab.io/covid19-forecast-hub/
2352 deaths today in America.
Some state's death tolls are rising very substantially.
That is a lot of 70 and 80 years old still dying at an alarming rate.
Still want governments to relax?
Easing restrictions now may well guarantee a new wave of infections and deaths.
Let's check back at the end of the year to compare normal mortality rates for this group to the rates for 2020. My prediction is that the numbers will look very similar. Everyone who died in March and April (while we were all in lock down) can't die again for the rest of the year, and the elderly who haven't died likely survived exposure to Covid, and are also likely those who would have survived (and will survive) other health threats for the balance of the year. There is no support for the idea that healthy individuals are dying in any significant numbers, and the outliers who have usually bear closer examination of their supposed good health.
Not only do I want them to, they're going to have to. They can't afford to keep spending at this pace.
So you think deaths will go down if we ended the lock down and social distancing?
Can you imagine what the mortality figures for the Covid-19 would have been without the lockdown?? Did they have lockdowns for the flu in 2017-2018? Not really.
Anyway the 2017 -2018 flu season was stretched out over months, whereas this Covid-19 deaths were from a month and half!!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-since-1967-as-deaths-top-60000-idUSKBN22B32C
The Covid-19 deaths would have been well over 200,000 without any lockdowns / social distancing!!
NOT!
Im out enjoying myself and shaking hands with anyone that wants to.
Single digit cases today Frank.
What are YOU afraid of????
Boo Hoo Hoo.... sucky baby....Killary lost. Does that hurt??? Momma need to wipe your nose????
TRUMP 2020!!
Eventually, of course they will go down. Every model, even models where we do nothing, predict that!
I think the question you meant to ask was whether I think deaths will go down immediately. My answer to that is no (or if a drop happens, it won't be because lock down was ended - we are already starting to see a reduction in Ontario). There are a number of people who have poor health and are currently infected. Some of those people will continue to die - whether we continue the lock down or not. My own belief is that we missed the window (thanks to China's duplicity) to avoid widespread exposure. That's already happened. I believe that those most likely to succumb to Covid are already infected (or were exposed and did not contract the disease). Even if I didn't believe that, I think we'd be doing as much to protect seniors (largely in LTC homes) by simply continuing quarantine conditions in relation to this group as we would by doing that AND continuing the lockdown. Put another way, I don't think it's the lockdown of the general public that is protecting the most vulnerable group. In fact, I don't think it's accomplishing anything at all at this point.
You must admit that Trump has made a grievous mistake in closing down USA for nothing. How do you explain that?
What are you referring to? The travel restrictions? They came too late (needed to happen in December) because the US relied on bad information from WHO and deceptive information from China. The media were part of the problem, claiming the restrictions were racist when they were first implemented. The US made the the same mistake as everyone else, apart from countries that know Chinese deception all too well, like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.
If you're referring to lockdowns, those were implemented by states.
And yes, locking down the economy AFTER the spread of the virus has been a grievous error.
Wiser, just not wise enough. He did act to restrict travel before anyone else, it just wasn't soon enough. He sure took a lot of flack for being early to do this. It would have taken a lot of political courage to essentially call out the WHO in December as the PRC mouthpieces they have since demonstrated themselves to be.
He hasn't been wise enough to stop states from panicking with ineffective general lock downs (which should have been laser focussed on people who are most vulnerable), but he at least shows the right instincts in pushing the political dialogue towards reopening the economy as soon as possible. Trudeau has yet to say anything to encourage the provinces to start thinking about re-opening.
My only hope is the US will move so fast that Canada will be forced to follow, given the integration of our economies.
So, you admit that he did did no better than anybody else would have done. Mediocre at best.
It is interesting that you claim that the federal government had no influence on the response to the Crisis.
Pardon the interruption, but you are wrong.
1) Trump "the decider" was given multiple briefing from his own intelligence services about the looming pandemic starting in late December, continuing through January and February and decided to ignore and discount these repeated warnings. Somehow I doubt that Trump, The Great Denier of international institutions would rely or any information from the WHO and China.
2) Since when did Trump ever let the Lame Stream Media guide his decisions?
3) So far the analytical models put forth by epidemiological modelers have proven to be uncannily correct. Those models point now point to 75,000+ deaths before the arrival of June. Remember those models also predicted 100,000 - 200,000 total deaths with some form of restrictions in place AND 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 deaths if restrictions are removed.
4) Calling for a whole scale removal of restrictions is morally bankrupt. Calling for removal of restrictions before even a minimum number of testing and contact tracing can be implemented would only guarantee subsequent waves of infections and deaths and a re-lockdown of the economy.
5) You seriously cannot be arguing for restrictions to be removed given the consequences of such decisions.
6) Should seniors be sacrificed at the altar of consumerism and conspicuous consumption? Would you sacrifice your life so that Billy can buy the latest iphone, or Judy can go on spring break, or Madge can attend a concert? Is that worth the sacrifice of your life, or to put in other words, the sacrifice of any life that may have been saved by restricting activities in the short and medium term?
7) Millions of "selfless" individuals volunteered to fight the Kaiser, to stop Hitler, to defeat Al Qaeda and they knowingly put their lives at extreme risk for the greater good of society. Millions, now I assume, are "selfishly" volunteering to put the elderly, the frail and the most vulnerable into coffins before their time for the sake of the hardship that a temporary interruption has had on their vacation plans, their entertainment, their style, their socializing and their consumer driven, egotistic lifestyle.
Do it right and do it once!
I see that you're just being silly in support of a narrative you feel you need to corroborate. I thought we were going to have a useful exchange. I was wrong.
How can one have a useful exchange when you claim the Federal Government has had no influence on the response to Covid-19.
