Peetem wrote:
And the graph is a typical propaganda device.
60,000 deaths is the prediction of the number of deaths by the models. But let’s say those continue over a year and all deaths from Covid-19 add up to 80,000.
That equates to around 220 per day.
Hardly a “blip” on a graph with a max Y-Axis of 2,000 and a X-Axis of 365. No matter how large you zoom it.
Peteem, I can pinpoint the mistake you are making. This is your mistake:
Peetem wrote:
But let’s say those continue over a year and all deaths from Covid-19 add up to 80,000.
That equates to around 220 per day.
And you've made the same mistake here:
Peetem wrote:
Without mitigation the number of dead from the virus would roughly equal the number of dead and severely disabled due to car accidents.
Peteem, you are averaging out the number of Coronavirus deaths over the space of a year, but that's not the reality. That's the problem. If only the numbers could be evenly spaced out over a year, there would be no crisis. But that's not the reality. This is the reality:
In the USA:
On 22 March there were 430 Coronavirus deaths.
On 26 March there were 1,295 Coronavirus deaths.
On 30 March there were 3,156 Coronavirus deaths.
On 3 April there were 7,404 Coronavirus deaths.
On 8 April there were 14,788 Coronavirus deaths.
So, as you can see, the number of deaths has more than doubled every 4 or 5 days in the last few weeks.
If the number of Coronavirus deaths continues to double every 5 days, then
by 13 April there will be 28,000 Coronavirus deaths,
by 18 April there will be 56,000 Coronavirus deaths,
by 23 April there will be 112,000 Coronavirus deaths.
Hopefully the numbers will have peaked and begun to decline by the end of this month, but nobody know for sure, and a decline is much less likely if nothing is done to slow the spread of the virus.
So when you say "let’s say those continue over a year and all deaths from Covid-19 add up to 80,000" – it’s NOT 80,000 over a year, it could be 80,000 within a few weeks. Whatever it will be in the next few weeks, it could very likely be more than the hospitals can cope with, especially if too little is done to slow the spread of the virus. That’s the mistake you are making.
The hospitals could cope if the number of patients needing Intensive Care doctors, nurses and equipment was spaced out over a year, but not that many in the space of a few weeks.
So for the sake of those patients, and those doctors and nurses, we need to stay at home as much as possible and adhere to social distancing measures to minimise the spread of the Coronavirus, so that hospitals will be able to cope and lives will be saved.
The number of Coronavirus deaths in the USA is NOT "around 220 per day". Yesterday it was almost 2,000 in one day, and increasing exponentially, and the hopitals are in very real imminent danger of being overwhelmed by the numbers.
Hopefully, with the necessary social distancing measures, the number of Coronavirus deaths will not continue to double every 5 days, and the peak and subsequent decline will come sooner rather than later, but without these measures, which you have said are "totally unnecessary", what would you do to reduce the numbers to a level the hospitals can cope with? Would you just hope and pray that the virus will disappear, like a miracle! Would you just let the hospitals be overwhelmed?