• Cyclohexane
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Even if it kills (which it likely will), our track record shows that didn’t care enough about that, and in a decreasing manner. So it’ll only be worse.

    • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pretty sure every virus has killed people, from the cold, to flu, and of course covid. It feels like now the death rate for the latest variants of covid are pretty comparable to the flu, the virus has lost a lot of its killing power over time.

      • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Pretty sure every virus has killed people, from the cold, to flu, and of course covid.

        False equivalency intensifies

        • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          What is false about that statement? Viruses kill, that’s not false at all. Just because covid has killed at higher rates doesn’t change my statement.

          The point is that a virus being deadly is just a fact of all viruses.

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            What is false about that statement? Viruses kill, that’s not false at all. Just because covid has killed at higher rates doesn’t change my statement.

            You’re the living embodiment of this emoji morshupls

            The point is that a virus being deadly is just a fact of all viruses.

            That is a false equivalency, emphasis equivalency. Spare us your liberal sophistry.

            • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency, it is not an apple to orange kind of thing to say all viruses can kill. I’m not denying some kill more than others, but they all kill. If you can’t understand this fact, I don’t know what to tell you.

              • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency

                You’re stating that all viruses kill (which may have some holes in it already) therefore all viruses are technically the same, which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.

                If you can’t understand this fact, I don’t know what to tell you.

                If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn’t see it. You’re just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.

                • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You’re stating that all viruses kill

                  Yes, I am, and I’m pretty sure that’s a fact.

                  therefore all viruses are technically the same

                  That’s not what I’m saying at all, does saying all people die mean all people are the same? Does saying all murders kill mean they are all the same? No, there are obviously differences.

                  which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.

                  The fact I said isn’t about differences in damage, facts don’t have to say everything to be facts. My fact also isn’t saying or implying that they do the same damage.

                  If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn’t see it. You’re just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.

                  Look at the context of who I was responding to. They were basically saying that if it kills we should wear a mask, I pointed out that All viruses kill and we don’t wear masks because of those, so just the fact that it kills isn’t enough.

                  • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Look at the context of who I was responding to. They were basically saying that if it kills we should wear a mask, I pointed out that All viruses kill and we don’t wear masks because of those, so just the fact that it kills isn’t enough.

                    And there’s the false equivalency that you’re trying to banish with sophistry magic.

                    They said “it kills” in a non-precise pedantically-incorrect way about something that is dangerous and you’re doing victory laps congratulating yourself on a reddit-logo tier “technically correct” masturbatory moment.

      • queermunist she/her
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Death rates aren’t a feeling. I want some hard numbers.

        I feel like we just don’t care if we live or die anymore.

        • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fun fact: the CDC readjusted what the ‘normal’ rate of deaths is to include the years of the pandemic so now it’s harder than ever to find hard numbers because “excess deaths” was one of the last ways to get any information at all!

          • interdimensionalmeme
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.

            Anything that doesn’t make an observable, statistically significant difference, has no cause to further impose restriction on how people live their lives

            • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.

              Sharp edges don’t happen from demographic trends. This is pure rationalization.

              Further than what?? What restrictions??

              And what are you implying? Covid has no observable affect on public health? Tell that to the millions of people still getting disabled every year.

        • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know I’ve read reports about the latest variants being much less deadly. I did see one study recently which for patients presenting to hospital covid was a few percentage points more likely to result in death compared to hospitalized flu patients. There were a lot more covid patients though.

          Found it:

          death rates among people hospitalized for COVID-19 were 17% to 21% in 2020 vs 6% in this study, while death rates for those hospitalized for influenza were 3.8% in 2020 vs 3.7% in this study

          https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2803749

          So there is some data backing up the feelings I’ve gotten from everything I’ve been hearing and seeing.

            • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I mean, that’s one way to look at it. I looked at it as only a couple percent higher death rate than the flu. Either way, a little less than 2x is way better than like 5x worse.

              • queermunist she/her
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                Obviously it’s better than before, but it’s also worth keeping in mind these deaths are in addition to the flu.

                Also, there are good and bad flu seasons. I see no reason for COVID to not be the same.

                • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Even if we pedantically accept that ‘almost double’ is really ‘just a few percent higher’ while we’re looking at a single digit likelihood, ‘just a few percent more’ than for the flu is a lot more people in overall numbers with something that spreads far quicker than the flu. We could get the death rate of Covid down to ½ the rate for the flu but if infections are more than double (this is just an example, I don’t know the actual stats on this one), it still means Covid would be more deadly. Unless I’m missing something obvious.

                  • holland
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    COVID is basically a year round disease where flu is seasonal. So yeah it’s gonna produce about an order of magnitude more death with just a few percent higher death rate.

          • glingorfel [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not sure how severe an effect this would have on the numbers, but the death rate would non-negligibly go down after millions of the most vulnerable people died in the first wave. As well, the newer variants get more contagious and bypass immune responses more easily, and we’re taking way fewer precautions as a society. so 6% is a lower percent but still an incredibly high number

            • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I saw it as an evolutionary benefit to be less deadly. The way I’m seeing this, the virus’s purpose in life is to spread, so a higher infection and contagious rate with less death rate is ideal from an evolution standpoint.

              • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Ideal for it, not ideal for anyone who enjoys the full function of their mind and circulatory system.

                The mind thing isn’t a dig at you btw, it’s a reference to the brain fog

          • Mbourgon everywhere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s one crucial thing you overlooked in this: in 2020, most people hadn’t been infected, and hadn’t gotten the vaccine (because there was no vaccine until December,and even then it was in extremely short supply). Now, most people have some sort of immunity, be it from vaccine or from a prior infection. That definitely skews the hospitalization numbers downward. You can’t compare then and now, unfortunately, since there’s no real community that hasn’t been vaccinated and hasn’t caught it - and so you can’t compare their numbers.

            • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s fair, but I think you can still compare it to the flu, which is not that far off from covid percentage wise. At this point both the flu and covid should be at an equal level of people having vaccines and natural antibodies, right? Even if you go with covid being about twice as deadly as the flu, twice as deadly as almost nothing is still almost nothing.

                • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m sorry, but people die of lots of different things all the time, it sucks but it’s a part of life

              • holland
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hundreds of thousands of Americans will die this year from COVID. Sure, almost nothing. Just a 9/11 every two weeks or so.

      • SkepticElliptic@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s the same shit that businesses were pushing last time because they didn’t want to close for a few months, ended up making everything worse.

        • Piers@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup. More effective action faster would have had a higher same-day-you-make-the-decision cost but would have been tremendously less harmful economically to all the entities blocking it for fear of the economic impact to them. They were digging a mass grave and then leaping into it.

        • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know I am a bit biased here because I didn’t get sick and didn’t really try that hard to avoid it either. I only wore a mask when I had to, I went to bars with friends, really didn’t take any extra precautions, and I washed my hands normally. If I got covid I didn’t notice it.

          Personally I would hate if we went into lockdown again, but again, I didn’t get sick, the worst I felt was when I got the vaccine.

      • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s important to note that every state I’m aware of has long ended their testing and reporting, literally doing the Trump thing. So we actually have no idea what the numbers are.

        • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The numbers I’ve seen are from hospitalized patients, which should still be tracked, and tracked in a similar way to the flu. It doesn’t give us the full story for sure, but it gives us something to compare.

      • Mbourgon everywhere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve you’ve been vaxxed, or had a previous infection, or get some paxlovid… yes. If not, no, not really any better. It hasn’t gotten weaker.

    • Piers@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The issue is that it happens out of sight out of mind so it’s just an abstract statistic that it’s easy to ignore or pretend away. If Covid-19 killed you by making your head spontaneously fall off we’d have eliminated it or reduced it to a few tiny isolated pockets simply by the change in the public’s attitude to it. But because it kills you “quietly” out of sight in a hospital bed or at home, people were able to just convince themselves everything is basically normal.