Status
Not open for further replies.

luka

Well-known member
biscuits do you think it is just statistical illiteracy that is prevented Rich & Tea from coming to the same conclusions as you or do you think that it's some emotional incontinency or some other issue that is blinkering them?
 

Leo

Well-known member
even if death numbers are inflated, having post-COVID decreased lung capacity for the rest of your life is no picnic in the woods, so nothing wrong with trying to prevent that.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
even if death numbers are inflated, having post-COVID decreased lung capacity for the rest of your life is no picnic in the woods, so nothing wrong with trying to prevent that.

My contention is not only that some anti-COVID measures are net negative overall but also that some anti-COVID measures are worse for preventing bad outcomes from COVID (eg. the stay-home measure creates worse cases due to proximity and viral load).
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
biscuits do you think it is just statistical illiteracy that is prevented Rich & Tea from coming to the same conclusions as you or do you think that it's some emotional incontinency or some other issue that is blinkering them?

Many are trapped in the structure of mutually reinforcing half-truths that's been built by:

- sensationalist press
- public scared witless by the press and the government
- risk-averse and unprincipled populist government
- scientific advice used as a grab-bag by the government to suit its political/strategic ends (eg. using Ferguson's paper to give lockdown a sheen of credibility)
- broadcasters singing from the same hymn sheet, having been directed to do so by the government
 

Leo

Well-known member
so better if those infected people are out in public spreading it to others, then?

I'm mostly playing devil's advocate, you make some valid points. my point is it was a risk to not overact to some degree because government s didn't have data before the surge, so they had no way of knowing.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
- The universal stay-home measure would make more sense if we could have nipped the thing in the bud, like NZ did (which creates its own problems...what does one do next?)
- If viral load determines the severity of the case, then having everyone out and about as the virus spreads means that they are more likely to catch _just enough_ to become ill and then have a weaker case. So more cases overall, but fewer bad ones (this is assuming that the vulnerable are shielded, which I agree with).

Another consideration is that the moral calculus is being made in a mass-utilitarian way; say, lockdown may result in overall better outcomes but may unfairly consign a subset of individuals to worse outcomes because their management of the situation is restricted...this might apply to people living in multi-occupancy houses prevented from staying out during the day or moving.
 

Leo

Well-known member
I also read in the nytimes, I think, that 47% of COVID deaths in the US happened in nursing homes. unfortunately, it's impossible to move them out of their lifetime lockdown.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
I also read in the nytimes, I think, that 47% of COVID deaths in the US happened in nursing homes. unfortunately, it's impossible to move them out of their lifetime lockdown.

Indeed. I don't know how connected those in nursing homes are but one option might have been for families to take their oldies back under their own roofs, where the virus may be less prevalent.

Now, it's hard to arrange things like that if you're not allowed to leave your house and make things happen.

Lowering the deaths by a significant amount is all about targeted management of the vulnerable: the old and the already ill. It's not about locking up the young and healthy.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Following the reasonable worse case did not serve care home users very well: they were turned away from hospitals in large part to leave capacity for other people, far fewer of whom appeared than was expected.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
it's a scorcher but probably not as good as Luke & Droid.
Well that was good in part because it creates an instant and iconic mental image.

But I bear you no ill will for having spotted this one and in fact I take my hat off.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Does anyone else think the 'love' emoticon we've got now looks like he's coming up on his third strong E and has just been presented with a puppy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top