Live data from Hacker News

Excess Deaths in 2020

kieranhealy.org

211–220 of 220 posts

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the point is that if lockdowns are ineffective, you are going to reach the overload point regardless. The fact that it did not happen means that I would not have happened anyway.

That's quite a bit of stretch to say. There are thousands scenarios where medical system would collapse completely and people would either make it on their own or die. With secondary effect of everybody else with life-threatening condition dying too. Would it be end of humankind? Nope, but I sure as hell don't want to be part of such selfish civilization just that cashflow is maintained

> but I sure as hell don't want to be part of such selfish civilization just that cashflow is maintained

so where does pharma with no liability, running their own trials and effectively being handed blank checks during the pandemic fit into this?

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#212
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain Melbourne, Australia.

It stands to reason that actually locking people up in their homes for several weeks would have a significant effect on viral spread, especially if done early, in a wealthy country where people have a lot of individual living space. Most lockdowns are not like that, for practical reasons. They are a random basket of restrictions that go into effect when the virus has already spread enough to cause great concern. At t…

So you are saying ineffective lockdowns are ineffective.

I gave a specific example of Melbourne and I was implying a specific timeframe when their lockdown went into effect. They went from having uncontrolled community spread, with tens of thousands of infections, to actually zero. They did it by having a very detailed plan, strict enforcement, high compliance, and an excellent testing regime. They also had clear goals and thresholds for lifting restrictions and communicated them to the public.

I generally agree that ineffective lockdowns mostly just slow down the spread. The spread picks up again exactly in proportion to restrictions being lifted. However, effective lockdowns have actually been able to eradicate the virus completely from whole areas: from Melbourne, from Victoria, from all of Australia, New Zealand, and several Asian countries. You need to be able to quarantine international travel and have high compliance. The places where the virus have been eradicated have to remain on high alert and remain extremely vigilant until they can roll out mass vaccination. I spent 10 months in Australia during the pandemic, 99% of the time stuck in the ACT. The extreme vigilance was contact tracing, social distancing, and some restrictions. There wasn't a mask wearing mandate, ever, because they never allowed uncontrolled community spread.

The US and European countries cannot meet those criteria, so they have the virus simmering until they can roll out massive vaccination. The US and Europe were too slow to take the pandemic seriously because their political leaders rolled in BS and denial for months and seeded their idiot followers with denialism. It's too late for them, and the only way out is vaccination. And yet, some idiots are still rolling out conspiracy theories about vaccination and want to f** that up, too. It's so disappointing.

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#213
post #93
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, 33-50% of the population apparently had antibodies pre-vaccination, and we apparently did a terrible job keeping it out of nursing homes (so the percentage that caught it that died was higher than it would have been across the whole population). So, it would have killed 2-3x more people, max. There were strategies that were developed after the 1918 pandemic that probably would have saved more people than t…

>In the US, 33-50% of the population apparently had antibodies pre-vaccination Where did that number come from? I have read more like 8% ( https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(20)32009-2/full... ) So - 2 to 3x... Nope. 8 - 10x. What I want to know is why you have constructed this belief and want to propagate it when it is refuted by a google search in 10 seconds flat?

Your article is from last September, using data from last July. It only takes ten seconds to google, but I guess it takes a few more to check timestamps or think critically about the results.

Using more current antibody data, the CDC released updated estimates yesterday [0] that there have been ~115 million actual COVID infections in the US. That makes the 2x-3x number pretty reasonable (especially since herd immunity is supposed to kick in around 70%).

[0] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an extremely presumptuous statement to make. You know nothing of their background, upbringing, path to where they are today. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish in this thread anymore, but it certainly is not constructive.

> That is an extremely presumptuous statement to make. No, especially in the context of the pandemic, it's easy to start talking about pandemic policy as though "everyone should just do X" where X is something extremely convenient, profitable, even pleasant for tech workers and other white collar jobs.

You say that yet his statements directly line up with what a friend working in a grocery store said. I don’t know if you’ve ever actually talked with anyone working in Amazon’s warehouse, but I can tell you it’s a very hard job that’s better paying than most people working there can get elsewhere. Some felt it was important, many of others actually quit over COVID.

On the other hand pointlessly attacking people just makes you seem foolish.

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with what I or the other poster said. I'll reiterate that many people who were forced to work were not happy about that fact. You're somewhere between pretending those people don't exist and claiming that those lower class people who didn't want to work but had to are also morally bankrupt. It's neither coherent nor respectful of those you claim to be defending.

Per your bio, you work at Google. You're divorced from the experience of struggling people.

I'm reiterating the experiences of my friends who work in the service industry and whom in some cases have been unable to pay rent reliably the past year.

Having to make the choice between going to work at a job where you have health concerns and losing your home is not a fun situation. You're correct that this is not a choice I've personally had to face, but it is a choice that many people have had to deal with. The issue, that you keep ignoring, is that people who "kept working" did so in many cases not by choice, but by necessity. Yes, the privilege that some (including myself!) had to continue working safely is nice. But you shouldn't use that to discount the opinions of people who had to continue working unsafely, but did not want to.

And you are continuing to ignore those people. Anecdotally, those people make up the majority of those in service industries that I know. They weren't happy to have to continue working. They were scared. Were it economically feasible, most of them would have preferred to stay home and not work. But that option wasn't available to them, because not working would mean losing their homes too.

And it is ridiculous for you to try and weaponize my privilege to ignore those people's opinions.

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that the purpose of lockdown (in the UK at least) was to prevent health care from being overwhelmed, at which point deaths would drastically increase. So we don't really know how many people would have died without lockdown to make a comparison, but it would have been a lot higher. If the health service is completely overloaded it means people would start dying from all sorts of other things too. Am I missi…

I guess the point is that if lockdowns are ineffective, you are going to reach the overload point regardless. The fact that it did not happen means that I would not have happened anyway.

In the UK at least, you can see really clearly where lockdowns start and cases & hospital admissions drop dramatically from their peak to really low. Deaths went from >1000 to <50 per day. And when lockdowns ended they went right back up again.

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government has an incentive to report deaths as covid deaths. I'm simply stating it is not 100% clear what causes the deaths. The reason I suspect a higher suicide rate than otherwise estimated is that the number of people with suicidal ideation has doubled. NOTE, I was also considering unintentional suicide (overdoses), which were dramatically up (38%). https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p1218-overdose-deat…

> The government has an incentive to report deaths as covid deaths. What is this incentive? How did governments benefit from more covid deaths?

It makes their policies appear sensible.

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#218
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isnt that true during many major world events that are bad? I cant remember the study but I recall reading that during WW1 and WW2 suicides declined greatly even though it was a terrible time for many.

This is going to depend which place and group of people you talk about. Suicides of Jews in Germany went up by the start of WW2 - source is Richard J Evans; Third Reich Trilogy. He had no stats about non-jews. But, being oppressed and humiliated definitely made some Jewish Germans to kill themselves. (Convolute phrase, but plenty of them considered themselves Germans, so.) And it was much easier to commit suicide by…

> being oppressed and humiliated definitely made some Jewish Germans to kill themselves. (Convolute phrase, but plenty of them considered themselves Germans, so.) They — like my grandparents —considered themselves German because they were German.

The othering of Jews, that they are not really English/Spanish/German/Russian (to name a few examples), has been used to justify the persecution of Jews for the last 2000 years.

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he/she stated it as a personal opinion while the other person said it as a matter of fact that couldn't be questioned. I'll go a step further and actually suggest that authoritarian lockdown measure haven't done as much as they've been touted as doing. This is pretty easy to see by comparing states with less lockdown measures vs. ones that went full economy shutdown. Most of the "open" states aren't any worse…

> Most of the "open" states aren't any worse off than the ones who went lockdown crazy and in some cases they're actually better off when you look at spread and death. This could also indicate that states where Covid-19 had a bigger impact responded by enacting stronger mitigations. What makes you prefer your interpretation?

>This could also indicate that states where Covid-19 had a bigger impact responded by enacting stronger mitigations. What makes you prefer your interpretation?

You can say that but there's no data that supports this at all.

Re: Excess Deaths in 2020

#220
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he/she stated it as a personal opinion while the other person said it as a matter of fact that couldn't be questioned. I'll go a step further and actually suggest that authoritarian lockdown measure haven't done as much as they've been touted as doing. This is pretty easy to see by comparing states with less lockdown measures vs. ones that went full economy shutdown. Most of the "open" states aren't any worse…

What states are you comparing? Massachusetts and NYC locked down pretty hard and their post-April numbers look pretty good compared to, say, Texas, Florida, and South Dakota.

All of them, and since the start of this. I don't know where you're getting your data and why you've decided April numbers are a good measure of how states have done overall. Infection rate is less relevant than deaths anyway. If people are getting infected and recovering it's not really an issue.

NYC(not state) tops the charts for deaths per 100k. Notice how low FL is?

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#cases_deathsper100...

What you can easily notice is that strict lockdown measures don't seem to make any difference at all.

Post reply on HN