I think the Corona-panic is overblown and I'm unable to see it any other way.

Don't you dare use facts to make your argument. We are going to throw up the worst-case projections come up with by a drunken dr on CNN and expect you to follow them blindly.

Every the time someone suggests this disease is not as bad as we say it is the Cuomo brothers will kill a puppy. You don't want to see more puppies die do you???????

THANK YOU!!!

Cuomo Presidential Campaign Manager wrote:

Don't you dare use facts to make your argument. We are going to throw up the worst-case projections come up with by a drunken dr on CNN and expect you to follow them blindly.

Every the time someone suggests this disease is not as bad as we say it is the Cuomo brothers will kill a puppy. You don't want to see more puppies die do you???????

Hahaha, that's a brilliant way to sum up the thoughts of a lot of us I think. This made me chuckle, thanks!

Horrible Person wrote:

Cuomo Presidential Campaign Manager wrote:

Don't you dare use facts to make your argument. We are going to throw up the worst-case projections come up with by a drunken dr on CNN and expect you to follow them blindly.

Every the time someone suggests this disease is not as bad as we say it is the Cuomo brothers will kill a puppy. You don't want to see more puppies die do you???????

Hahaha, that's a brilliant way to sum up the thoughts of a lot of us I think. This made me chuckle, thanks!

+1

Cuomo Presidential Campaign Manager wrote:

Don't you dare use facts to make your argument. We are going to throw up the worst-case projections come up with by a drunken dr on CNN and expect you to follow them blindly.

Every the time someone suggests this disease is not as bad as we say it is the Cuomo brothers will kill a puppy. You don't want to see more puppies die do you???????

It is much, much better blindly repost arguments from the offguardian website...

lease wrote:

One of my former students, a man in his 40s and a really good guy, died from COVID-19 yesterday.

Please don't try to tell me that this shi!t's not real.

Nobody said that it wasn't real. Did you even read OP's post?!

Sorry about your friend :/

Horrible Person wrote:

If this 'pandemic' has taught me anything it's that I must be a horrible person because I can't see it as anything but overblown.

*****

I think this is a very unpleasant time for people who work in ICU as they are much busier and more at risk of infection than they normally would have been in a pre-COVID shift at work. I sympathise for those people, however you do have to consider that nobody is forced to work in ICU. They CHOSE to work there. Despite that, I do think it must be very unpleasant for them and wish them all the best. But for at least 99% of us this really is not anywhere near as much of a crisis as is being made out. Perhaps the saddest reality is going to be the mental health problems and domestic abuse caused by the lockdowns.

Peace out.

Yes, they chose their profession. But you will be really glad they chose that career when you get into a car accident and require ICU level of care.

If they have too many people that require the level of care that covid requires, they you just might not get the care that you deserve.

The lockdown isn't about death. It's about being able to provide care for everyone.

Actually, 41% of deaths are under 64. That isn't old.

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-daily-data-summary-deaths-04092020-1.pdf

not in NY wrote:

My best friend runs a large hospital. He tells me that.

If I had a nickel for every time someone referenced a random friend's knowledge....

I think I got 90 texts like this from people about 4th connection friend in NYPD who says they're shutting down tunnels. Or a nurse who says NSAIDs are killing people. Or a friend who works at the avocado farm who says there's going to be a shortage.

If you think your friend's insight is helpful, it's not. It's useless. Do a literature review and capture the whole distribution or don't share your arbitrary observation point.

That is the view point of like 80% of the people. At the extremes are the 10% who think this just a flu and it is no big deal if 50 million people who die because we don't want to shut down for a couple months and the other 10% who think this is the black death and you are likely to die if you go outside and the world will never go back to normal for years. Few people are at either extreme but you tend to listen to vocal minorities and not the majorities in the middle

Horrible Person wrote:

David S wrote:

That's something like 200 million deaths. You're underestimating it by a factor of 100.

200 Million will die when less than 90,000 have died in 3 months? Sure buddy, will we escort them to the hospital on our flying pigs?!

90,000 died in 3 months , yes but all countries are under lockdown, we keep this social distance bullshit, etc. Who knows what would have happened if there were no measures like these. You cannot really use this argument because it is just stupid.

NY Responder wrote:

Actually, 41% of deaths are under 64. That isn't old.

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-daily-data-summary-deaths-04092020-1.pdf

New York has some good stats. 98% of the known deaths had an underlying condition. The average coronavirus victim is 65 years old and has 1.75 underlying health conditions (many of which are preventable with lifestyle choices). The US has 16,114 coronavirus deaths. It also has 12.1 million unemployment filings in the past two weeks. Some of those are furloughs. However, a lot of those are likely facing prolonged unemployment. Unemployment filings outnumber deaths by a ratio of 750:1. How many of those 750 will turn to alcoholism and drugs, lose homes, commit suicide, commit a murder, etc.? There is a human toll that goes far beyond the primarily sick and old individuals that are dying from this virus.

Collapsing Wavefunctions... wrote:

not in NY wrote:

My best friend runs a large hospital. He tells me that.

If I had a nickel for every time someone referenced a random friend's knowledge....

His friend Jim doesn't even like going to Paris any more.

A herd of deer doesn't go and jump off a cliff just because a sick, old member of the herd gets taken out by a wolf, and neither should we. We should push forward knowing that the wolf is out there, but we should not be so cautious as to allow ourselves to die of starvation.

joedirt wrote:

New York has some good stats. 98% of the known deaths had an underlying condition. The average coronavirus victim is 65 years old and has 1.75 underlying health conditions (many of which are preventable with lifestyle choices). The US has 16,114 coronavirus deaths. It also has 12.1 million unemployment filings in the past two weeks. Some of those are furloughs. However, a lot of those are likely facing prolonged unemployment. Unemployment filings outnumber deaths by a ratio of 750:1. How many of those 750 will turn to alcoholism and drugs, lose homes, commit suicide, commit a murder, etc.? There is a human toll that goes far beyond the primarily sick and old individuals that are dying from this virus.

Filled with rank speculation. How many of them will? How do you know the toll will go far beyond? You don't have any numbers to base that on.

I think I'm going to trust the epidemiologists and public health officials.

It is as though you think public health officials are totally unaware of social determinants of health.

Projected American deaths now at 60,000 ..and falling it would seem if you look at the trend.

Then add in that many of these deaths being counted as "linked" or "related" to COVID19 are occurring in folks with one or more deathly health issues and who likely would have died without COVID19 being present, then I think it is fair to say that COVID19 this spring will prove less harmful than a bad flu season.

Now one can argue that the social distancing brought the number way down...but who really knows that?

And this does not mean something worse could come back in the Fall.

But as of right now, we were the victim of unsubstantiated fear mongering.

Uncle B wrote:

But as of right now, we were the victim of unsubstantiated fear mongering.

Unsubstantiated? We've already seen what happens in China, Italy, Spain, NYC, etc., etc. How many more mass casualty events do you need before you think that concerns about a global pandemic might be substantiated?

Who really knows? The people who have been fighting Ebola for a decade know. They're called epidemiologists. You should listen to them.

From your chart and census data:

<64 = 84% of population and only 29% of deaths

<44 - 58% of population (5% of deaths)

45-64 - 27% of population (24% of deaths)

65-74 - 9% of population (25% of deaths)

>75 - 7% of population (46% of deaths)

Among Victims with Known Conditions:

98% of deaths are from victims with underlying conditions

2% of deaths are from victims with no underlying conditions

Are you talking about the same public health officials and epidemiologists that told us that flu was of greater concern early on, or the ones who told us it would go away in the warm weather, or the ones who told us not to wear masks because masks don't make a difference, or the ones who told us that we need to wear masks to slow community transmission or the ones that told us hospitals would be overrun like two weeks ago? Additionally, how many epidemiologists have economics degrees and care at all about the economic consequences of the shutdown?