In my first post, I outlined what I thought would be the worst case if there was 100% exposure and it followed the rules of normal distribution (the easiest distribution rules). 8.234 million people could theoretically die in the US in that situation - yes that is massively overstated. I seriously doubt 1 million unless this becomes annualized/seasonalized like the flu. The last several paragraphs of this post are more interesting to me.
Sunday, March 29, 2020
Saturday, March 14, 2020
US COVID 19: My Constroversial Opinion
Reminder: my post is not necessarily reflect the views of anyone - not Goolge, not my ISP, not even humanity. Also remember I am not a virologist, statistician, psychic or human (I really, really hope). I kind of suck at grammar now, so paragraph structure may be off and some breaks are for emphasis.
So what is my ultra-controversial opinion:
The US should have done absolutely NOTHING to stop the spread of the COVID-19 Corona Virus.
What, you say to yourself (semi incensed). Yes, I did just say the US should have done nothing. I view the response by the government and especially dangerous overhype by the media (to me bordering of domestic terrorism - using fear for political purposes) as worse than the disease.
I am not just talking about the massive overreaction in the stock market (though the world is far too dependent on China's supply chains). I am talking about the government cancelling everything and generally trying to control everyone's life - but for what real benefit? The government (especially at the state level) calling for martial law is inevitable.
First off is the COVID really as much of a threat as people are claiming? No, if you believe the media this will be worse than the Spanish Flu of 1918. Let's assume a normal distribution...
at 81.5% of the people would suffer mild to no symptoms. 2.5% of the people would die. 13.5% of the population would become hospitalized.
So why those numbers? 81.5% - 1 standard deviation on both sides plus 13.5% on the light tale. 2.5% either die or don't get it at all. This is probably a little unrealistic as it is doubtful even 75% of the population would even get it. 13.5% hospitailized would be (50-34)-2.5. Now for my real, probably overstated (especially deaths and hospitalization) estimate for the US - truncated.
* Deaths - 8.234 million
* Hospitalizations - 44.468 million
* Not hospitalized/minor - 268.456 million
* Not get at all - 8.234 million
Are 8 million deaths (and change) reason enough for all of the hype and the billions (if not trillions of dollars that this is costing)? In my opinion, no. The more daunting is the 44.468 million potential hospitalizations. Of course, in my view, human life is not worth a whole lot.
The current technique they are pretending to employ - flatten the curve, seems off to me. Wouldn't that just prolong the suffering and cost, not to mention a loss of freedom? It might also be susceptible to more waves of an illness. There is something to be said of developing immunities for future similar outbreaks too. Of course I err on the side of let's get the crap over with as soon as possible.
So what is my ultra-controversial opinion:
The US should have done absolutely NOTHING to stop the spread of the COVID-19 Corona Virus.
What, you say to yourself (semi incensed). Yes, I did just say the US should have done nothing. I view the response by the government and especially dangerous overhype by the media (to me bordering of domestic terrorism - using fear for political purposes) as worse than the disease.
I am not just talking about the massive overreaction in the stock market (though the world is far too dependent on China's supply chains). I am talking about the government cancelling everything and generally trying to control everyone's life - but for what real benefit? The government (especially at the state level) calling for martial law is inevitable.
First off is the COVID really as much of a threat as people are claiming? No, if you believe the media this will be worse than the Spanish Flu of 1918. Let's assume a normal distribution...
at 81.5% of the people would suffer mild to no symptoms. 2.5% of the people would die. 13.5% of the population would become hospitalized.
So why those numbers? 81.5% - 1 standard deviation on both sides plus 13.5% on the light tale. 2.5% either die or don't get it at all. This is probably a little unrealistic as it is doubtful even 75% of the population would even get it. 13.5% hospitailized would be (50-34)-2.5. Now for my real, probably overstated (especially deaths and hospitalization) estimate for the US - truncated.
* Deaths - 8.234 million
* Hospitalizations - 44.468 million
* Not hospitalized/minor - 268.456 million
* Not get at all - 8.234 million
Are 8 million deaths (and change) reason enough for all of the hype and the billions (if not trillions of dollars that this is costing)? In my opinion, no. The more daunting is the 44.468 million potential hospitalizations. Of course, in my view, human life is not worth a whole lot.
The current technique they are pretending to employ - flatten the curve, seems off to me. Wouldn't that just prolong the suffering and cost, not to mention a loss of freedom? It might also be susceptible to more waves of an illness. There is something to be said of developing immunities for future similar outbreaks too. Of course I err on the side of let's get the crap over with as soon as possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)