How can a disease with a 1% mortality shut down the United States? Glad you asked.

[WillParkinson]

Last edited Mon Nov 30, 2020, 05:47 PM - Edit history (1)

Link to sources added at the request of SunSeeker.


https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux

[Laelth]

1. k&r for visibility. n/t

-Laelth

[Hekate]

2. KnR

[diva77]

3. K&R!!!!

[Girard442]

4. Excellent post, but people who are OK with "1% will die" are already lost to us.

[Rebl2]

26. That's true sometimes

That is until it’s them or someone they care about. I have seen too many of those stories locally where they think it can’t happen to them or a loved one and then it does. Then they FINALLY understand.

[Locrian]

106. then there's people

like my former (rabid trump supporter family) grade school friend who has been in a hospital (covid) for 2 months / ventilator, etc.
His mom (the most rabid) still posts the "trump is a savior" and "it's only a small percentage" bs

[LAS14]

5. Excellent! Thanks! nt

[Shermann]

6. This guy has the right way to look at this complex problem

I do have to question the numbers though, does this "professional writer" really have accurate statistics on heart damage, lung damage, etc?

That's the first I've seen of any of that.

[ProfessorGAC]

13. Is 1% Even The Right Number?

This is from Worldometer, a minute ago:

Coronavirus Cases:
13,730,229
Deaths:
272,982

That's 2%.
I get his point, but he's actually underselling the death count if everyone got infected.
Since, he's making an economic point, the bigger number is more impactful.
I also have not seen the detailed case proportions reported.
I wonder where they came from.
I'd sure like to visit a site with that level of detail.

[Pacifist Patriot]

24. There's a significant problem with the mortality rate.

The testing rate. We've heard far too many stories of people with "presumed cases of COVID" who were never given a test to confirm the diagnosis. Alyssa Milano is a celebrity example, one of my cousins is a "no one anyone will have ever heard of" example.

You also have to factor in the asymptomatic who never had any reason to seek testing.

Statisticians/epidemiologists are having to make educated guesses about the mortality rate because of the monumental federal, state, and county level cock ups regarding testing. We should have had widespread testing and contact tracing at the outset, but, you know, Americans and freedumbs and all that. Oh, and that orange idiot in the White House largely responsible for this fucking mess.

The actual incidence of COVID infection is likely much higher than the confirmed diagnosed cases reflected in our dashboards. Which don't all agree with one another.

So the mortality rate is largely an unknown, but considered to be potentially somewhere around the 1% figure currently being estimated. Because of the lack of testing, history will likely never know the true infection rates, though estimates will become more accurate once the pandemic is over. Anyone trying to come up with definitive numbers before the pandemic is over is on a fool's errand. Those numbers just don't exist.

The COVID pandemic mortality rate will be largely driven by excess death number analysis that can only be calculated in hindsight.

Whether the mortality rate turns out to be .5%, 1%, 5%, or something in between you are absolutely right. The disease's impact won't be limited to the number of dead. I scream into my pillow at least once a week because some of the idiots I work with can't fucking grasp that.

[ProfessorGAC]

53. I Get That

But, that's true of any infectious disease.
There are asymptomatic flu cases every year too.
Either way, the author used 1%. You suggest there's no hard basis yet to adjust the numbers. I agree.
So, the author should not have adjusted the numbers away from known.
Do I believe the death rate per hundred infections is much lower than 2%. Absolutely.
My criticism was how the author treated the numbers, including a fundamental error.
We can deal with the detail when this over and all the data is fully tabulated.
I agree with essentially everything you wrote, but it's a bit beside the point i was making?

[Pacifist Patriot]

75. I'm sorry, I thought it was exactly the point you were making.

How the author is dealing with numbers is a fundamental error. We don't know what the numbers are or how to apply them to other metrics. I was absolutely agreeing with you down the line.

[ProfessorGAC]

76. Reboot!

Yes, you and I are in agreement! You didn't mean, I didn't mean,...
Let's just agree that we agree!
Whew!! I made that harder than it should have been!

[Pacifist Patriot]

108. I may or may not have had a glass of wine in my hand ...

so my reply may not have been the most eloquent I've ever written.

[ProfessorGAC]

115. I Don't Have That Excuse!

I barely drink. Now, it's possible I may have been under the influence of a certain type of smoke.

[albacore]

55. Johns Hopkins says 2%.

Actually, Johns Hopkins says the death rate from Covid is 2%, so double these numbers.
Since when has this country meekly accepted the fact that 266,000 Americans have died, with who knows how many to die in the coming months?
2.7 million Americans were in Vietnam during that war, and 47,434 of them were killed in combat. That's a death rate of 0.056 And those deaths in that war were so heavily protested that it tore the country apart and led to the US leaving that war.
But now... a 2% death rate from this virus inspires protests AGAINST wearing masks and taking sensible precautions.
This country has lost its collective mind.

[Crunchy Frog]

73. That's probably the Case Fatality Rate.

The CFR only includes diagnosed cases. Since we don't know the true number of infections we don't know what the Infection Fatality Rate is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_fatality_rate

After the pandemic, they'll be able to come up with more accurate estimates for the real death rate, which is obviously way too high, whatever the number ends up being.

[albacore]

121. Right now... the "excess deaths" tell us a lot. Over 300,000. Those people died of SOMEthing! nt

[Crunchy Frog]

122. Yes, current estimates don't account for either

ALL the covid deaths, or all the infections.

The CFR only only goes by diagnosed infections and documented covid fatalities.

They'll have more accurate estimates in the future after doing detailed demographic studies. Right now this is what they have to go on.

[Shermann]

67. CNN was bandying about an 8X multiplier last week

So the active cases would actually be 8X what is currently reported by testing. I have no idea if that is accurate, but the real multiplier is undoubtedly much larger than 1X.

As I recall there have been attempts to surveil areas via the antibody test, but those tests are unreliable and the antibodies fade after a few months. I haven't seen anything conclusive from that.

[Dagstead Bumwood]

7. It's a harrowing message for those that will hear it.

Unfortunately, after eight seconds the average 'Murican has already lost interest. Meanwhile the orange shitstain crows about a 'paltry' 1% mortality rate, and that message gets through. If you can craft the message to a short sound bite and it will make a definite difference.

[keithbvadu2]

30. 'paltry' - 'almost nothing' acc to the Trump family.

'paltry' - 'almost nothing' acc to the Trump family.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017615941

Pic Of The Moment: Trump Campaign Closing Message: Your Dead Family Members Are "Almost Nothing"

[keithbvadu2]

33. 'paltry' - 'almost nothing' acc to the Trump family.

Duplicate post.... sorry.

[Dagstead Bumwood]

34. Damn, thought I had started a real reply chain, there.

Thanks for spoiling it for me

[Skittles]

8. yup

too many people fail to understand, or DO understand and DO NOT CARE

[DeminPennswoods]

9. Do 100% of people get infected?

So far after 9+ months of covid 19 being in the US, it's 4% or so.

By the same logic, there would be 382k flu deaths (.1% mortality) a year which we know is not true.

[stillcool]

11. there's no way of knowing...

how much of the population has been infected. Throw any number out there, it'll work.

[DeminPennswoods]

12. That is true, it's why

stuff like that tweet doesn't add much to the discussion.

[stillcool]

20. you had to go and remind me...

of my lack of reading comprehension and basic math. Look down the thread and you'll find more than the tweet.

[keithbvadu2]

38. 'any number' - decrease testing and we get better numbers

'any number' - decrease testing and we get better numbers

[thesquanderer]

18. No, but the "herd immunity" folks who want no mitigation efforts...

...are talking about a scenario where most do get infected. The estimate I saw was that, with no mitigation efforts (i.e. living just the way we used to, no masks or distancing, no increase in hand-washing, etc.) they could have seen 2 million deaths.

[DeminPennswoods]

21. Not against mitigation,

but I remain opposed to fear-mongering under unlikely scenarios.

[paleotn]

39. If the facts scare you, sorry.

But the facts is the facts. The OP is representative of what we know right now.

[NickB79]

85. What unlikely scenarios are you citing?

If we compare today's death toll with the most reliable numbers thrown around 6-7 months ago, it's clear we're far PAST their projections. In that case, it's not exactly fear-mongering unlikely scenarios any longer.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-04-08/240-000-covid-19-deaths-putting-trumps-death-projections-in-perspective

Last week, President Trump hosted a somber briefing at the White House where his advisers presented their official COVID-19 death projections. There would likely be between 100,000 and 240,000 Americans dead when the crisis finally abates, said coronavirus task force coordinator Deborah Birx. Without mitigation or social distancing, the fatalities could be much, much higher.

The raw data from the CDC for excess deaths so far this year is over 300,000, and we're still at least 6 months out from a widely distributed and administered vaccine. The next 3-4 months are going to be the hardest 3-4 months of this pandemic in terms of infections and deaths. When this is done, we'll likely be approaching 500,000 dead.

2-5X the early death toll projections

[kcr]

116. Explaining what happens if we do nothing

does not equal fear mongering.

[Mr.Bill]

35. And there is no proof yet

that having the virus gives you long term immunity. In fact, there have been at least isolated instances of people becoming infected for a second time in just a few months. It also doesn't take into consideration that the virus could mutate and infect someone even though they are immune to original virus.

In short, we know far to little about this virus to proceed with herd immunity as a solution.

[Martin Eden]

32. With no preventive measure, the percent exposed to COVID would likely be very high

The number of deaths would be unacceptably high even if cut in half to 50%.

Large numbers of Americans (myself included) get annual vaccinations against the most prevalent strains of the flu. Without that, the annual deaths would be much higher in the hypothetical comparison.

Nevertheless, my first thought was the same as yours. The numbers in the OP were built on the premise of 100% infection rate of the American populace, which is probably unlikely.

[paleotn]

37. Flu vaccine.

That slows and breaks chains of transmission. Because of that, only 40 to 50M Americans come down with it each year symptomatically. There's no commercially available Covid-19 vaccine, so the bulk of us are on our own this Winter.

Then there's the R0 factor, or roughly how many people an infected person can pass the pathogen on to. Seasonal flu is about 1.4 to 3, meaning one sick person infects between 1 and 3 others depending on the strain and a host of other factors. Covid-19 has an estimated R0 or 3 to 6 without precautions. And that's from Summer data, when people don't congregate indoors nearly as much. Given recent research on droplet transmission, its R0 could be a lot higher. We haven't gone through a Winter with this pathogen, so its real transmission rates with people spending lots of time indoors isn't fully understood. What we do know right now isn't good. 2 maybe 3 times as transmissible as seasonal flu.

And it's not just the mortality rate. This is a nasty bugger when it comes to lung and vascular damage, just to name a few of the long term impacts. We will be living with Covid-19 walking wounded for a long time. Polio had a similar impact, just more easily seen.

In short, comparing this to seasonal flu is like comparing the old Sears Tower to a Mayan temple. They're both large and constructed by humans, but right there the comparison ends.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

45. 40 to 50M Americans getting flu each year

is at the top end in a very, very bad year. The CDC itself estimates 9 to 45M and say that the top number is an estimate based on the 2017-2018 flu season.

[paleotn]

58. True. Hard to tell exactly how many get the flu each year.

But its impact is blunted significantly every year through vaccination. Covid-19 will be the same in coming years. An annual vaccination. Millions still get. Thousands to tens of thousands die. Manageable.

[roamer65]

62. Last estimate I heard was from Angela Merkel.

She was a scientist, so I trust her a LOT more.

Her scientists estimated around a 60 to 70 pct infection rate.

[stillcool]

10. well, if you put it that way

but that requires reading more than one sentence. I've read many, many times, in the United States if you have to explain you've already lost.

[meadowlander]

14. +1. I feel like the "lifelong health complications" aspect can't be stated enough.

There are people who will roll the dice on a 1% chance of death who might pause at a 20% chance of reduced life expectancy and chronic illness.

I haven't had Covid but I had a nasty, nasty flu two years ago that turned into pneumonia that caused permanent heart and lung damage. I'm in my early forties so that's probably 50 more years of my life I'm going to have to be on inhalers. I've been going way, way out of my way to avoid catching Covid. Lesson learned. Don't fuck around with this stuff.

I think the most dangerous time is going to be when we have a vaccine but not everyone has received it and we don't know how long it will last or how effective it will be. People will be complacent and there will be a lot more opportunities to catch it.

I'm staying on red alert until the vaccine is widely distributed and proven to have long-lasting effectiveness and there are effective therapeutics to reduce complications.

[SunSeeker]

54. Yup. There's news reports of people getting lung transplants after Covid-19 destroyed their lungs.

Which means they'll be on anti-rejection immune suppressing drugs for the rest of their life, making them vulnerable to a whole host of other diseases.

[JCMach1]

15. I will give you a list of what I am left with post Covid as I want people to know how serious this

Last edited Mon Nov 30, 2020, 04:46 PM - Edit history (1)

can be apart from the obvious, death... All of these problems are new issues stemming from Covid.

1. Permanent lung damage (currently take supplemental oxygen, and a nebulizer. Feels like two black holes in my lungs. I also feel pain in my lungs, can get short of breath, and sometimes it just wants to stop.
2. High A1C (Type 2), likely caused by the dexamethasone which was one of the meds used to save my life. Now on diabetes meds.
3. Hidradenitis Suppurativa, pain in the butt auto-immune disorder that causes me to to have multiple massive abcesses under my arms.
4. numb tongue, fingers, fingers and nether regions... this affects taste and other things and varies from day to day. Yes I said NETHER REGIONS.
5. Insane RESTING heart rate (120-160). That's what it is if I don't take my beta blocker. This is controlled pretty well with my med.
6. Brain Fog/Dementia: Whatever they are calling it... your memory and brain does not function at the same level. B12, caffeine, gingko and other vitamins help.

This is most of my menu of problems 90 days from catching Covid.

Yes, please wear your mask!!! Although I know I am preaching to the choir...

[birdographer]

22. I'm so sorry

It's a terrible disease. I'm certain I would not survive it. I already have lung issues. And diabetes. And high BP. Without COVID, my only limitation is walking up hills or anything that makes me huff and puff from diminished lung capacity. I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing that I would at least escape the terrible aftereffects. Again, I'm sorry that you have to go through this now.

[SunSeeker]

57. OMFG. How horrible.

[MustLoveBeagles]

61. How horrible

[roamer65]

65. JCMach1...

I’m sorry.

[JCMach1]

79. I am recovering, but some things will likely be permanent

Covid is horrible, but I am.alive, so it's not all bad.

The alive part is thanks to my virologists and the nurses and therapists who cared for me.

That's the scary part. If you get sick right now,.the hospitals bare overcrowded.

I caught and went in for 12 days between waves in September.

[alfredo]

113. I'd like to copy and post your post, if you are ok with this.

Attribute or no?

[JCMach1]

117. Feel free to copy... You can

Attribute as jcmach1 @grandinboy on Twitter

[alfredo]

120. Thanks

[paleotn]

16. Just focusing on the mortality rate...

1% is the equivalent of nuking Chicago and killing every man, woman and child in the city.

[cayugafalls]

17. Author of this viral post is Franklin Veaux, he has updated and added to his original answer.

As of November 10th, Veaux has updated his answer due to do the viral nature of his original post.

Edited to add:

Wow, this answer has really blown up. Many people are asking about the sources, so here’s the basic rundown:

This model assumes that the question’s hypothetical is correct and the fatality rate is 1%. It also assumes for the sake of argument 100% infection. (In reality, of course, neither of these is a perfect match to reality. The infection rate will never hit 100%, but the fatality rate in a widespread infection is likely to be greater than 1%, because health care services will be overwhelmed.)

The statistics I used in this answer were compiled from a number of different sources. I spent quite a bit of time writing the answer. Unfortunately, I don’t have my search history in front of me, so I’ll attempt to re-compile them.

Some of the sources include:... (Full answer at source link below)

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux

[mahina]

19. It's been updated. Here's a link though I'm sure there are other channels

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux?encoded_access_token=37ef39f21a8447cdaa0ab163d4a07a24&fbclid=IwAR2uqDzpYOG4cd5YdtHL_UL_8_7h3urRm_QOJ8BwsOD_iqv_R6E14EuNzI4

[bucolic_frolic]

23. Economic contraction already forecast by some YouTube gurus

and I don't mean the hyped forecasts, gold pushers, crypto babblers. I mean respectable mainstream financial planners. Usually these types float the ideas and the MSM follows in a few weeks.

Interest rates are 0%. IMF is meeting, calling it an alternative energy conference. Yeah. That's why the IMF is in business, amiright?

Retail holiday sales were dismal, other than online. People are squeezed.

The stupidity of ignoring COVID has sandbagged us, and much of the world, except those who took it, and take it, seriously.
We are at the bottom of the heap on this. Our economy is going down.

[paleotn]

40. Could be the worst year for retail on record.

Certainly in modern times. And at a time when most brick and mortar companies are barely hanging on. I doubt we will even recognize retail in 2 to 3 years. A handful of giant players with resources to weather the storm. Still extensive online. But nothing in between.

[lambchopp59]

25. Wreckless toxic bravado

Has driven the "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" meme for decades, a favorite of the RWNJ bunch.
I've seen the same sort of wreckless toxicity drive alcoholism, drug abuse all under the blanket of "Can't handle his alcohol" being some shameful measure of "macho".
The same sort that end up on my CT table getting diagnosed with severe pancreatitis, erosive digestive ulcers in combination with poor dietary and/or dehydration systemic failures. All the years of drug and ETOH abuse withering away a shell, often covered in idiotic tattoes... the sort that acts like a spoiled, bratty child when it's time to insert an IV.
The cost factors of ignorance will become blindingly obvious, Donald Trump's legacy as a driving force behind the most DEPLORABLE of philosophies will make an ugly few pages of history.

[Wednesdays]

111. Reckless, for sure. nt

[JI7]

27. I hate the greedy selfish simplistic bs from the right wing

and I wish the media would focus more on this .

[Aussie105]

42. They don't believe it themselves, I'd think. NT

[JI7]

28. The stress on hospitals affects people with other medical conditions

and accidents also.

[Chellee]

77. Exactly.

This does not get mentioned enough. If your hospital is filled with Covid patients, there's no room for your heart attack. If all the staff is helping in the Covid unit, and there's a skeleton crew covering the ED, maybe your traumatic injuries from your car accident wait longer than they really should have. People are going to start dying from 'no room at the inn.'

[liberalla]

29. Very good information! Thank you!

[markpkessinger]

31. Not to mention . . .

. . . those who need treatment for some non-COVID 19 condition, and can't get it, or get it too late and die, because hospitals are overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients!

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

36. Since I grew up in Alabama, I tried using U of A football stadium capacity...

I believe it's around 102,000...

I asked on Facebook, if you KNEW 1020 would die sometime during the game...
would you chance attending?

[Aussie105]

41. Shut down the Unites States?

Even if that was possible, the numbers would still go up over the next month.

And the US isn't shut down. Too many people out and about, not wearing masks, not social distancing.
'Yes, we are on lockdown. Think I will go shopping. Don't need a mask, I'm tough!'
The virus has plenty of opportunity to spread.

Let's be honest, it's a pandemic that is out of control. Through the inaction of the federal government, local government and those in total denial.
Any firm action now is way too late.

Protect yourself, because it looks like no one else will.

[Wednesdays]

112. "Every man for himself!" nt

[SunSeeker]

43. It's not 1%. Per Johns Hopkins, the US mortality rate has been at 1.7% since July.

Epidemiologists: Coronavirus survival rates in the United States haven't improved since the summer

It’s true that better treatments are now available, but their impact isn’t nearly big enough to avoid an impending surge of deaths, expected to soon exceed 2,000 a day in the United States. And while the case fatality rate declined early in the pandemic, it hasn’t budged since the summer.

“It’s been rock solid stable since July, around 1.7 percent,” said David Dowdy, an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “If anything, I think there is a concern it will go up again because we’re seeing hospitals reaching their capacity.”

Trevor Bedform, a genomic epidemiologist at the Fred Hutchsinson Cancer Research Center, found there have been no improvements in the death rates since August. Since then, the death rate among those diagnosed with covid-19 has averaged 1.8 percent, he told The Atlantic.“This rate is a major improvement, down more than tenfold from the earliest days of the pandemic, when deaths were high and the extreme limits on coronavirus testing held down the number of diagnosed cases,” The Atlantic's Alexis C. Madrigal and Whet Moser write. “But in this new phase of the pandemic, when testing is more widely available and a much higher proportion of cases are diagnosed to begin with, it is also terrible, terrible news.”

The antibody treatments from Eli Lilly and Regeneron are the most promising treatments so far. But they’re in short supply and difficult to administer, so they’re not going to be a magic bullet for saving the nation from a massive death toll this winter.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/24/health-202-coronavirus-survival-rates-united-states-havent-improved-since-summer/

[bronxiteforever]

89. +100 & I agree long term effects are disastrous for some!

[Evolve Dammit]

44. But, but herd immunity is the way to go. Let's all get it and let God sort it out. Banging my head

[Beartracks]

114. God gave us brains, and using brains is indeed both science, and critical thinking.

We're supposed to use the gifts God gave us. Don't hide your light under a bushel.

============

[smirkymonkey]

46. Kicked and bookmarked!

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

47. Those numbers assume that every single person in the country

gets this disease. Which isn't likely to happen. I doubt even half will get it before vaccines start getting things under control.

Although the larger point that lot of people who actually get sick with it will have lasting damage is very important.

I wonder what kind of long term effects are being experienced in other countries? Like Spain, Italy, Belgium. Because if their numbers are comparable, the entire world is going to be very affected. And then there are the countries that don't have much of a medical infrastructure.

[niyad]

48. KNR

[former9thward]

49. Your numbers have no link except to a "professional writer"

Whoever or whatever that is. This disease is way, way too new for us to know any of the numbers you have placed in the OP. Especially the long term numbers. No one knows that at this point. That is why this is coming from a "professional writer" instead of someone qualified.

[SunSeeker]

52. Here's the link and his sources:

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux

Covid-19 has been around for a year now. That's long enough to realize a lot of people aren't getting better. Numerous studies, cited at that link, show that.

Are you really doubting these numbers? Where's YOUR sources, former9thward?

[former9thward]

60. The link has nothing but anecdotal reports.

That is why it is not coming from a medical report or journal. If someone wants their medical info that way fine. not me. It is impossible to determine long term effects from a disease not even a year old and our treatments are about 6 months old at best.

[SunSeeker]

63. OFFS, they're not just anecdotal reports. He cited studies, with links to those studies.

For example, he lists this medical journal:

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/what-we-know-about-the-long-term-effects-of-covid-19#COVID-19-might-affect-the-brain-stem

That link states:

“... one study that was just published in JAMA Neurology showed that 36.4 percent of patients had neurologic issues,” said Dr. Sheri Dewan, neurosurgeon at Northwestern Medicine Central DuPage Hospital in Winfield, Illinois. “

And what is wrong with anecdotal reports anyway? Are they not real? The author doesn't even mention that people have had to have lung transplants because of the permanent damage done to their lungs. https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/medical-advances/covid-19-advances-in-care/double-lung-transplant-saves-patient-after-covid-19

Are you claiming this is not happening?

[former9thward]

66. Here is a guy who had to have a double lung transplant from the flu.

https://www.today.com/health/man-needs-life-saving-double-lung-transplant-after-getting-flu-t169952

Are you claiming that did not happen? Should we now say that lung transplants can come from the flu? That would be irresponsible. And that is why science rejects anecdotal reports.

[SunSeeker]

68. Your article says he developed ARDS. Your flu analogy is dead wrong.

Again, the author cited medical studies. Those are real numbers. You have yet to dispute any of them.

 36.4 percent of flu patients don't develop neurologic issues. 

[former9thward]

71. Ask me in five or ten years about long term effects.

That is what an actual scientist would tell you.

[SunSeeker]

74. What a ludicrous thing to say.

Actual scientists, doctors and epidemiologists are finding Covid-19 causes permanent damage. You don't have to wait 10 years to determine that damage to an organ that has essentially died and stopped functioning is permanent.

[SunSeeker]

50. BTW - Here's the link, with his sources. It would be great if you added it to the OP for folks.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux

[Shermann]

82. I'd take his compilation as one possibility

There are a range of possibilities we are facing, and all are disturbing. Some of the OP numbers seem high to me but many seem plausible. This isn't a published scientific paper and the rigor employed here might be suspect. But there is still a valid point here.

Some of the conservatives I have interacted with try to boil the whole thing down to just a mortality rate. This is problematic for all the reasons given.

[WillParkinson]

119. Consider it done

Thank you!

[FailureToCommunicate]

51. Hard to argue with those kind of numbers.

[634-5789]

56. Years from now people will still be blaming the orange moron. And they'll be 100% correct.

That asshole is killing the citizens that he promised to protect by putting his hand on that Bible and telling God that he would do just that. He's killing his own people through lies, coercion, spreading conspiracy and above all else, ignoring science. Enjoy judgement day, asshole.

[Delphinus]

59. Bookmarking.

Great analysis.

[roamer65]

64. This virus still has a good chance of spreading even after vaccines are administered.

Just because you are vaccinated, does not mean you are completely impervious to the virus. It will still take a run at vaccinated individuals and you can have a sub clinical infection until your antibodies effectively fight it off. In around 5 percent, we know that attempt to fight it off will fail.

Also, sub clinical infections can mimic asymptomatic carriers. Thus the need for masks and PPE will be here longer than we think.

This is why the vaccines need to be administered to nearly everyone. We need to shrink the pool of hosts down to as low as possible.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

69. Actions by the GOP have killed and maimed people.

[jb5150]

70. Does this model include other deaths that occur ..

because hospitals are overwhelmed with Covid patients/lack of available medical staff?

[GoneOffShore]

99. Excellent question - I'll ask Franklin Veaux on Quora. If there's a response I'll post it.

[Ford_Prefect]

72. I think someone once did economic analysis of the effect of WWI deaths on Britain.

The source had similar analysis of the same effect related to those returning from France with war-caused disabilities. The results were stunning in terms of how many households were affected and how local economies and Britain as a whole suffered for years as a result.

We are looking at the beginnings of the effects of this event. I think in terms of the population of Vietnam era veterans and how long a term of effects and how widely those have been distributed among us now.

COVID-19 will cut an even wider, deeper and more persistent swath among those who survive it and in our families, in our relative cultures, in our towns and ALL of our futures.

Those who live in denial of COVID-19 will no doubt find ways to blame the dead and the survivors for falling victim due to some moral flaw.

[DBoon]

80. A 1% death rate is huge!

If you had a 1% chance of dying in a commercial airplane crash, the aviation industry would shut down.

A workplace that had a 1% fatal accident rate would be shut down immediately.

If you are bit by a rattlesnake, you have much less than a 1% chance of dying.

If you served in combat in the Vietnam War, you had a less than 1% chance of dying due to combat.

A 1% chance of death is actually a very large number. Many activities considered risky and possibly lethal have a much lower fatality rate.

[BarbD]

91. Especially appreciate the Vietnam combat statistic.

Putting numbers into words that explain things. Thanks.

[DonCoquixote]

78. does anyoen have a link to this

there are people on facebook I need to spam

[SunSeeker]

83. Here:

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux

[crickets]

81. K&R for the post and the discussion.

[Yavin4]

84. And, it's not written in stone that the death rate will stay at 1%. This is a new virus.

It's only been around for one year. We don't know for sure what it's capable of or what it can mutate into. It's not entirely certain that the death rate will stay at 1%.

[WSHazel]

86. 74 million Americans disagree with Democrats' approach to handling the virus

That is how many voted for Trump, despite Republicans' catastrophically terrible handling of the pandemic. Many of this 74 million are idiots, but many of them did not think that Democrats had a realistic plan for dealing with the pandemic. I think Trump was going to lose even if there was no covid, so in all likelihood Biden picked up few or no votes since February. Republicans won most of the contested Senate seats, picked up seats in the House, and didn't lose a single state legislature chamber. Defeating the worst President in American history by 4 points and razor sharp margins in 5 states is nothing to brag about. I think the Democrats' approach to the pandemic was a big part of the problem, and likely a net negative for Democrats.

Democrats have to come up with a better pitch on the pandemic, and convince some of these voters that they have a plan for dealing with the virus, or we are going to lose in 2022 and 2024. Saying the other guy sucks is not enough.

[Progressive dog]

87. So, the author is assuming that Trump and his

enablers care about anyone other than themselves. They don't.

[The Mouth]

88. I' ve seen this several times

No one not on DU believes it.

[bronxiteforever]

90. Kick and recommend for visibility

[chwaliszewski]

92. +1

[wnylib]

93. I can't see anything in the OP

except the title. But from the posts, it looks like it must be something informative about the effects of covid 19.

[SunSeeker]

94. Here's the link to the Franklin Veaux post that is pictured in the OP:

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux

[wnylib]

95. Thanks. It says what I've been

thinking, in general terms, without the numbers research.

The death rate in numbers is more alarming than when expressed as a percentage.

The damage is far more than death vs survival.

The economic effects would be devastating if allowed to run rampant without shutdowns or precautions. You can't run a business or suststain goods delivery when a large number of your employees are out sick for weeks at a time. Society would break down when trucks don't deliver food, medicine, and daily necessities because the drivers and manufacturers are too sick to function. Police and firefighters can't respond from sick beds.

You can't get emergency services for a car accident or your kid who fell out of a tree when the ER and entire hospial space and staff are taken up by people sick from a pandemic. People who do not catch the virus but have other medical needs, like cancer treatments or bypass surgery, will die because hospitals are overwhelmed. When health care workers get sick or die from exposure, the hospital situation gets worse.

Complain about kids out of school? They'll be out anyway when they get sick or too many teachers are sick to keep the schools open. I saw it happen during a flu pandemic in 1958. That led to a recession that had my father working only 2 days a week and taking odd jobs to keep us going, while raising food in our yard for my mother to can and freeze to save money. And that pandemic was not as contagious or deadly as covid.

[SunSeeker]

97. Yes, we've already more than doubled the 116k US death total of the 1958 flu pandemic.

And none of those prior flu pandemics had the long term multi-organ debilitating after-effects of Covid-19. Hundreds of thousands of Covid-19 survivors will be so disabled they will never be able to back to work like they were able to previously. This will have devastating effects on our econony, and cause immeasurable human misery.

[wnylib]

100. I think there were some long term

effects from the 1918 pandemic. I recently heard a radio discussion of it. They described people bleeding from ears and mouths, dying within days, and having neural damage that affected cognitive function. It sounds almost like it was not the flu, but another type of virus. The death toll was higher, too, than other pandemics. The government imposed a block on publishing or discussing info about it in the name of national defense due to the war. In effect, they said, "Flu? What flu?"

European nations treated it similarly. Except Spain which was neutral in the war and open with their people about it. That's how it came to be called the Spanish flu. They were the only country to admit that it was real, so they got tagged with it, according to the NPR program.

[SunSeeker]

101. It should never have been called the Spanish flu.

The 1918 pandemic originated on a hog farm in the American midwest.

[wnylib]

102. True. But it sounds like the Spanish flu

designation was originally a tongue in cheek reaction to the fact that other nations refused to acknowledge it.

It became too obvious to ignore and people did talk about it and tried to take ptecautions. But by then it was so widespread that containment was nearly impossible. Like calling covid the flu today and refusing to take action has made the infection and death rates worse today.

[a la izquierda]

96. Someone posted this awhile ago.

And it's just crap. It assumes that 100% of 300+ million (ie 100% of the total population) will get Covid. But they won't.

Fuck I wish people wouldn't post things like this.
Also, the guy is NOT a scientist. Can we just not do this? Listen to experts, not to "professional" writers on the web.

[SunSeeker]

98. Here's the link to Franklin Veaux's post, which he edited on 11/10/20 to add his sources.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shut-down-the-United-States/answer/Franklin-Veaux

It's not "just crap." He cites medical studies and epidemiologists/doctors who are studying this. He doesn't pretend to be an expert himself.

As he explains, he uses 100% infection because that is what people assume when they talk about worst case scenario death totals with a 1% death rate. He is just trying to make the point that the death total is not the only effect, and actually is only a fraction of the impact, considering the long term debilitating after-effects of Covid-19 on so many of its survivors. As Veaux states:

This model assumes that the question’s hypothetical is correct and the fatality rate is 1%. It also assumes for the sake of argument 100% infection. (In reality, of course, neither of these is a perfect match to reality. The infection rate will never hit 100%, but the fatality rate in a widespread infection is likely to be greater than 1%, because health care services will be overwhelmed.)

People need to know that Covid-19 doesn't just kill, it also maims. Please explain why you "wish people wouldn't post things like this" that show the massive number of survivors who will have long-term debilitating effects from Covid-19.

[a la izquierda]

103. Well aware that COVID doesn't just kill.

Nor am I denying that this is a deadly disease that can permanently impact those who get it and survive. Social distancing, mask wearing, restrictions work (I'm in the UK, where they're estimating the month-long lockdown we've been in has drastically reduced infection rates).

My point is that beginning with an assumption of 100% infection rate is a problem. When this was initially posted on DU back in July (or whenever it was initially posted), numerous fellow DUers had the same issue. 100% of the population won't get COVID, because the disease will have flamed out by about 60-70% infection rates. This is in part why effectiveness of vaccines is important as well.


"Finally, if we assume that Veaux made his calculations based on the Lancet study and if we leave aside all these caveats, the number of deaths (six) among the study cohort to the number of cases of heart damage (five) means that for every one person who dies, approximately one person suffers from heart damage, rather than 18 as he stated in his post. At any rate, given the limitations of the Lancet study, it would not be good practice to attempt to use its numbers to extrapolate to a hypothetical situation for the general population in the U.S., or indeed, anywhere else.

Overall, Veaux’s post is correct in stating that COVID-19 infections do not simply result in either death or full recovery. Many patients who survive the initial infection continue to suffer from potentially lifelong health problems, such as heart and lung problems, due to damage caused by the virus. However, there is not enough information available yet to calculate with certainty the risks of developing different sequelae after infection. Hence, the statistics stated in Veaux’s post are not currently supported by scientific evidence. Much more research is needed before such risks can be determined with accuracy. Given the rate of spread of COVID-19 and the fact that outcomes cannot yet be controlled, it is important to minimize one’s risk of infection by donning a face mask and maintaining physical distancing."
https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/a-proportion-of-covid-19-survivors-are-likely-to-suffer-from-long-term-health-problems-but-the-actual-risks-are-still-unknown/

[Brainfodder]

104. Add all the deaths due to hospital over-crowding and all the family suffering!

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

105. KnR...nt.

[PCIntern]

107. Yes exactly

I’ve been saying this since Day 1. This is very well done. Thanks for posting.

[gibraltar72]

109. then consider the rate is 2%.

[BobTheSubgenius]

110. I want to say that, first of all, Mr. Veaux is a great thinker and a sort of hero.

I've never heard ANYONE talk of this, especially in such detail. My question is...where did he come up with those "for every Covid death there are..." numbers?

They are certainly not easy to find, and I, for one, think they should be. And, if true, (not that I have any reason to doubt that) should be shouted from the rooftops, not rising to the surface sporadically and then slipping back into obscurity, which seems to be the case.

[SayItLoud]

118. Way too complicated for Cult45 ers. nt.