Health & Self-Care > Health & Well-being

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Dr. Birx, says 2.2 million could die from Corona if we screw this up as a nation, best case scenario is 200K, do these numbers warrant the fear being

Not defending her numbers or arguing her numbers, but 2.2 million is .6% of the population, 200K is 0.06%. It really doesn't match all the hype.

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

OggggO · 36-40, M

2.2 million people is also [b]2.2 million [i]people[/i][/b]

View 1 more replies »

JaggedLittlePill · 46-50, F

@Roadsterrider yes. How many die of gun violence?

Auto accidents are accidents.

Not naturally occurring viruses.

Guns deaths are intentional.

OggggO · 36-40, M

@Roadsterrider Have you seen the amount of effort put into reducing automobile related deaths?

JaggedLittlePill · 46-50, F

@OggggO Good point!

Frank52 · 70-79, M

Yeah, I mean, what's 2.2 million dead as long as I can have my beach party?

View 8 more replies »

Roadsterrider · 56-60, M

@Frank52 Well, at 54, I seem to be in the range with a higher risk. At least for a more serious infection if not fatal. No, I don't want old folks to be sacrificed, but when summer is here and it all goes away for a while, are we going to do the same thing when October rolls around and next spring again? The best we can do is buy a little time over the summer to come up with a vaccine or a treatment.

Frank52 · 70-79, M

@Roadsterrider I think we all wrestle with this conundrum. I believe this 'lockdown' strategy is the bet way anyone has come with to 'buy time'. I hear from most scientists in the media that a mass produced vaccine is unlikely before the middle of 2021. But we also have glimmers of hope over effective treatments, so my prayer is for that as it might be more swiftly available if based on drugs already in production.

Roadsterrider · 56-60, M

@Frank52 I hope so, there are too many older people that would be missing from my life. Myself included. I was just reading an article from statnews.com the WHO found that in China 78% of corona virus victims were between the age of 30 and 69.

bijouxbroussard · F

Unless it’s you or someone you care about...right ?

View 4 more replies »

Roadsterrider · 56-60, M

@JaggedLittlePill Age does matter, as does general health. Over 75% of deaths from covid 19 are 65 and older. There have been a hand full of people below 45 years that have died. Elderly have a much greater chance of death if they contract the virus.

JaggedLittlePill · 46-50, F

@Roadsterrider The point, which you missed and is far more clear now than it was in March, (these comments are months old) is that people of ALL AGES can contract covid. Are at the same risk of contracting covid as anyone else of any age and that people with pre-existing conditions are at higher risk of dying but MANY of ALL ages and WITHOUT other pre-existing conditions have died.

According to what you wrote above only 19 people who are over 65 have died. That makes zero sense.

Here is scientific information
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6939e1.htm

Roadsterrider · 56-60, M

@JaggedLittlePill

I don't doubt that people of all ages can contract the virus, nor do I doubt that it is deadly for anyone. The facts are that it is much more deadly for elderly people. In the chart, 18-29 is the comparison group, older that that means a greater chance of being hospitalized or death. The higher the age group, the more likely that death will occur from the virus. Right now, 75% of deaths are people over the age of 65. I have friends and family members who have had the virus, about 15 people in total. All but 2 were younger, the 2 older were in their early 60s. All have recovered. The CDC came up with the illustration showing a greater chance of death for the elderly.

hlpflwthat · M

At 2.2 million deaths from COVID our hospitals will be overwhelmed beyond imagination. Have you considered the associated deaths of those who cannot be treated for their particular malady? Auto accidents, cancer, coronary issues, pregnancies, kidney failure, people needing a transplant ... lives normally 'saved' by a hospital are not saved when a hospital is not available.

Pretty much everything that is deadly will be deadly by a multiple of who knows how much. It will be equivalent to living in the wilds of a 3rd-world nation.

Maybe more importantly, these deaths in isolation will be the most lonely and un-celebrated deaths ever known(hopefully) to our generations. Imagine never hugging your child again - and then tell me it's 'hype.'

Graylight · 51-55, F

The sun represents a portion of the universe so minute as to not be able to express in numbers.

But it's pretty important to us.

Roadsterrider · 56-60, M

@Graylight The sun is very important to Earth, agreed, but stars burn out, it happens and it doesn't affect us one bit. One 6th of a percent of the planet wouldn't have much impact either.

Graylight · 51-55, F

@Roadsterrider You would be wrong.

Roadsterrider · 56-60, M

@Graylight About a star burning out or about 1% of the population?

Budwick · 70-79, M

If people would behave like adults,
I think they could relax things a bit.
But, in some areas and demographics - they're not, and higher infection rates result.

Personally, I think the threat is over blown - but then I'm one that respects the rights of others not to be near me if I'm sick - with ANY illness.

I'm also fortunate enough to be able to work at home for the duration. There are zillions of others not that lucky.

It's a very difficult situation to manage. I for one am glad that President Trump is 'at the helm'.

SnailTeeth · 36-40

Can it be the 2.2M living in close proximity to me? I wouldn't mind some peace and quiet.

SW-User

Even one person is one too many.

JaggedLittlePill · 46-50, F

So 6% of the population is expendable?

View 2 more replies »

Elandra77

@Roadsterrider Blcked for neing a hateful motherficker!

JaggedLittlePill · 46-50, F

@Roadsterrider Oh, excuse me, I mistyped that number. Either way that number is 2.2 million people

Not 5.

Not 100.

2.2 million. That is New Mexicos population

Roadsterrider · 56-60, M

@JaggedLittlePill And I agree, it is a lot of people and will impact a lot more people, but at less than 1% of the population, it isn't as bad as the media is making it out to be.

Add a comment...