And now you're just making up stories. I can do that, too.
You hear about Bill? He's Bob's twin brother. Bill would have gotten into a car accident today, but because of the lockdown, he's at home eating beans on toast and having a grand time of it. Hurray, another life saved by the lockdown; add it to the list!
See, the point is that while some trends like heart attacks and suicides might go up, they're not going to double, or triple, or any other ridiculous number you want to pretend just to make up the 15k excess deaths not reported as COVID-19 deaths in the UK right now. Especially when you weigh those against all the other positive knock-on effects of the lockdown.
Excess death is, by definition, an anomaly. The single biggest cause of death right now is COVID-19, and the single most impactful change from previous years is this pandemic. Simple logic and Occam's razor would tell us that the unaccounted-for excess deaths were most likely caused by said disease.
What evidence do you have that these deaths are not COVID-19 deaths? Despite many articles about how car accidents are lower, violent crime is lower, etc., you have little to nothing to back up your claim.
"The difference between stupidity
and genius is that genius has its limits."
--Alexandre Dumas-fils
That's the biggest problem with a lot of these people. It's possible that even our partial, half assed and late lockdown saved tens to hundreds of thousands of lives and because of this mitigation, these people will just now argue that it was all a waste of time because we didn't lose the estimated millions of people. Now if we go through a second wave of it in the fall and winter, they'll rail against it even harder saying we didn't need it last time and won't need it this time and we'll likely be in an even worse position.
There's no such thing as complete isolation lockdown. That 1% relies on outside assistance: grocery stores, pharmacies, etc. What good does it do for only the 1% to go into lockdown if the remaining 99% are all getting sick at the same time and there's no way to get food, etc. without an almost certain chance of getting infected? We're seeing that happen in Sweden, where they were convinced that they could just protect the elderly. It's not working out well, so far.
Also, hospitalizations are much, much higher than just the "obvious" 1%. Hospitals would still be overwhelmed, even if the "obvious" 1% could achieve perfect lockdown.
Thinking that you deserve something at someone else's expense. Yes, those are definitely relatable. I've far too often heard the phrase "I'm looking out for number 1" used to justify taking something away from someone else just because you can, without consideration for whether or not you should.
Yes, but the difference is that in one situation, you're evaluating the tradeoff for civilization as a whole and for people other than yourself in particular. In the other situation, you're "willing" to trade someone else's safety for your benefit.
Well, some suggestions are just ridiculous.
This is just wild exaggeration. There are plenty of people talking about a rational easing of the lockdown measures. But they're not talking about doing them yet. And plenty of parks are still open, as long as people keep their distance. It's not like people are shot upon leaving the house, you know.
A few people losing their business is unfortunately not justification for forcing many others to lose their lives. If a company can't weather a few months, then it was in danger of the recession that was looming before any of this happened, regardless. At least in this case, they'll have some assistance they wouldn't, otherwise.
It's not just one life, though. And hospitals haven't been overwhelmed precisely because the lockdowns were in place.
"The difference between stupidity
and genius is that genius has its limits."
--Alexandre Dumas-fils
This is what happens when you diminish things over the years, or numbers don't look as bad as they seem. We had vaccinations decades ago which virtually wiped out various diseases for good, only for them to slowly start resurfacing because retarded people looked at statistics and asked themselves "Why should I vaccinate myself or my kids, when this disease is barely a threat". These same people likely look at numbers thrown out early on in the pandemic where millions upon millions would die, but fail to understand that these numbers are what would likely happen if we took absolutely zero measures. They then compare that number to the infection/death rate currently and make the leap that this was completely overblown and just a bid for government to control the common man.
California county to defy statewide stay-at-home order, allow businesses to reopen
Modoc County, Calif. — sparsely populated and located in the northeast corner of the state — is planning on reopening schools, hair salons, churches, restaurants and its lone movie theater on Friday, in direct defiance of Gov. Gavin Newsom's (D) statewide stay-at-home order.
The county has no confirmed COVID-19 cases, and after consulting with health officials, the county's board of supervisors voted to reopen Friday.
“Just as our physical health is vital for our citizens, so is the mental health and the economic health of our citizens,” Ned Coe, a county supervisor, told Sacramento's NBC affiliate.
Coe said that the county wrote to Newsom last week, explaining how its plan follows the guidelines to reopening that Newsom previously released, but that the governor had yet to respond.
He noted: “The governor himself has indicated that it is time to start opening in a staged and safe manner, and that will be different for different areas of the state."
----------------
Just a matter of time...
Fucking hell. Michigan can't even trust the federal government to properly handle tests and data. I knew stuff was going unreported but I didn't think it was this bad.
Resident Cosplay Progressive
Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi
That's actually fine if the people who live there keep others from coming in and out. That's how you slowly open areas up.
That's not how it would actually unfold though. We wouldn't be under lockdowns now if that's how the situation was handled.
People don't wear masks. People refuse to wait until their area is cleared. People from cleared areas refuse to avoid risky areas.
Resident Cosplay Progressive
Swedish results vary, some thing they're doing great, some don't. They do have more infections/ deaths, but judging how out of line it is with the alternative is sort of a toss up. We can never know what WOULD have happened if some areas of the US had not locked down as quickly, especially since the virus was drifting around for months before the lockdowns. We can assume things would have been worse, but since things aren't the same in places that are pretty similar, it's not an absolute.
If you focused testing more on things like staff at nursing homes and isolated, it's not unfathomable to isolate them. Certainly food and supplies must arrive, but that's the case now too, so there's not a large increase in risk. In return you don't ruin the rest of the world.
Hell, test everyone on a cruise ship to make sure there's no virus, then send a bunch of them on a nice cruise for a few weeks. Perfect isolation vacation.
The point we're at in most of the USA is that we've throttled it so much lower than the threshold that the time frame will be too long. You can't protect everyone, but you can't drag things out with no end in sight.Also, hospitalizations are much, much higher than just the "obvious" 1%. Hospitals would still be overwhelmed, even if the "obvious" 1% could achieve perfect lockdown.
Because you're assigning blame to someone that is not to blame. You can reduce risk, you can't eliminate it, hence why the lockdown of a MONTH AND A HALF hasn't eliminated risk for a 2-3 week disease. As I said, it's a false dichotomy to present it as "we open up and people die", because people will die either way and it's a matter of the risks involved.Thinking that you deserve something at someone else's expense. Yes, those are definitely relatable. I've far too often heard the phrase "I'm looking out for number 1" used to justify taking something away from someone else just because you can, without consideration for whether or not you should.
Part of it is the dismissing of values other than a fatality rate for covid. Does unemployment lead to deaths? Sure. Does missing a "non-essential" procedure lead to death? Possibly. So no matter what you do, you're comparing risks and you need to look at these risks honestly. Will more people get infected and thus die sooner if we open sooner? Probably, but will the overall total change much? It may be dispassionate to measure lives lost to various things, but that's the only way to judge the long term and the politicians are just pandering to their base at this point.Yes, but the difference is that in one situation, you're evaluating the tradeoff for civilization as a whole and for people other than yourself in particular. In the other situation, you're "willing" to trade someone else's safety for your benefit.
I'm sure from their perspective it makes sense, but yeah. Obviously the answer is somewhere in the middle, you'd hope.Well, some suggestions are just ridiculous.
It varies by location, obviously, but we're seeing the results in a lot of places where they're opening a park or beach with very selective hours, rather than opening things more widely which would spread people out more. As for the discussion, I've yet to see real discussion on this or other boards and certainly not on tv. Question the lock downs and you're someone that wants to kill old people to get a hair cut, because one person one time had a sign about hair cuts or something.This is just wild exaggeration. There are plenty of people talking about a rational easing of the lockdown measures. But they're not talking about doing them yet. And plenty of parks are still open, as long as people keep their distance. It's not like people are shot upon leaving the house, you know.
I always use a trimmer myself, so it's not a big deal to me.
The city blocks off one of the lanes of traffic by the sidewalk at the beach, so walkers can walk with more space, while cops watch to make sure no one goes on the beach. Rather than just opening the beach and letting people walk on it...
I do tend to hate that dismissive attitude that a company that can't do without income for 3 months is not worthy of surviving. I'm not sure what small businesses you think can survive such things, and even many larger businesses will be having severe issues.A few people losing their business is unfortunately not justification for forcing many others to lose their lives. If a company can't weather a few months, then it was in danger of the recession that was looming before any of this happened, regardless. At least in this case, they'll have some assistance they wouldn't, otherwise.
We don't know how overwhelmed they would have been. Certainly they would have been busier, but overwhelmed? Maybe in a few places, sure, and plenty of places should have locked down and sooner. Mostly NYC, I'd think. But few hospitals had their capacity stretched, and as I said before it probably would make more sense to play things closer to the line rather than flattening it too much and stretching things out beyond the ability of people to accept. At some point, folks will simply stop complying, and pretending that it's just one side tired of it is a bit short sighted. (Not you, but in general the folks just deciding to ignore what's going on.)It's not just one life, though. And hospitals haven't been overwhelmed precisely because the lockdowns were in place.
"I only feel two things Gary, nothing, and nothingness."
Fucking Modoc County... why am I not surprised.
Modoc is the laughingstock of California. Always has been. I remember being amused by its inclusion into Fallout 2, as a "dwindling collection of hillbillies", "surrounded by vast fields of dead or dying crops".
It was in the news a few years back for attempting to secede from California. It should be noted that the counties that made up the proposed Jefferson state voted pretty overwhelmingly for Trump.
"The difference between stupidity
and genius is that genius has its limits."
--Alexandre Dumas-fils
Because people keep responding to it and allowing it to do so.
And as for its source: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/
Australia seems to be bouncing around between 10 and 20 new cases a day. It is almost like whack-a-mole, trying to eradicate new hotspots as they emerge. The good news is that there are more people recovering than catching it now and the total know number of active cases is now below 1000.
Some states and territories haven't seen new cases in a while and in the case of the Australian Capital Territory, there are no known active cases. Which just proves what most Australians already know - nobody, not even viruses, actually wants to live there. Restrictions are now easing off, schools are reopening, even sport will be recommencing soon.
All is looking rather positive here, except for the fact China is looming ahead.
Right now Australia is having problems with China. It all started when Australia suggested that there needs to be an international inquiry into the origins and handling of the virus. China was never mentioned. China, as usual, took it as a personal affront, threatened economic retaliation against Australia, likened Australia to 'gum on the shoe' that would be scrapped off and even threw aside diplomatic protocols by publishing details of a private conversation between a member of the Australian diplomatic staff and the Chinese ambassador, which is something that is just not done in diplomatic circles.
Australia's response was that it 'regretted' that the embassy had breached protocols but it, at least would 'maintain the highest levels of professionalism.'
And then we went ahead and announced that we were backing Taiwain's push to be given observer status on the WHO.
It is rather weird. China is acting like a school year bully and for once Australia is showing a bit of spine and standing up rather than backing down.
The strength resistance to an inquiry makes me want one more. I get that China isn't a normal country, any country might have some resistance, but to respond in that way makes me want to see what they are hiding, but with China it might not be anything to juicy, just regular old stomping out anything that might make them look in the slightest way bad, whilst being oblivious to how bad that makes them look. That they can't fathom why people might want to better understand what happened and how this got started, and react so angrily, one way to put it is suspicious.
Eeh actually the daily cases peaked at 7K, were down to 1.2K and are now back up to down to 1.4K.
That's a ratio of 6, not 3. Did you even look at the numbers before posting?
And yes, we're currently at about 1-2% of infected not 5. So the time needed to reach herd immunity is even longer than I originally calculated.