Posted by Bill, please stop making stupid and dangerous COVID comparisons to car crashes, heart disease and the flu. Your basic argument (delivered with your signature pouty bottom lip, shoulder shrug and incredulous stare) seems to be: because other causes of death “kill more people,” then economic lockdown over COVID is, well, overkill.
You seem to believe that COVID isn’t worth being over-zealous about. You’re completely wrong in many respects, but more than that, your dumb comparisons are dangerous because they could lead people to take risks not just with their own health… but with yours and mine and the lives of healthcare workers who would have to care for the thick-headed crackpots, and just about everyone else.
PROBLEM ONE = Backwards Logic
You argue that we only expect about 30,000 deaths from COVID so why are kneecapping the economy?
That logic is completely backwards: The entire reason we expect only about 30,000 deaths from COVID is because of economic lockdowns and social distancing. If we didn’t have those mitigation efforts in place we could easily have 30 to 40 times that number of deaths.
If America saw that kind of gruesome catastrophe you’d likely be shouting at the camera: “Why didn’t we do more?!”
PROBLEM TWO: Comparing Zero Mitigation Flu to Full Mitigation COVID
Yes we lose between 20,000 and 60,000 people every year to the flu… but that’s with zero mitigation!
You can’t compare this “zero mitigation” flu statistic with a “full mitigation” COVID statistic! That’s just dishonest. (The flu vaccine isn’t really mitigation as only about a third of people get the vaccine in a given year, and in many years it’s only about 30% to 40% effective).
So compare apples to apples please! If you want to compare flu death risk with COVID death risk you should be comparing zero-mitigation flu deaths to zero-mitigation COVID deaths – if you have any interest in being honest!
At our peak, America hit a rate of 5,000 COVID deaths in a single day. Right now, on lockdown (as full as we’re likely to get) we’re still at 2,000 deaths a day. With zero mitigation we’d likely be at the 5,000 number, or perhaps even higher… and that’s a real-life death toll, not an academic projection.
Over a year would be 1.8 million deaths or more…compared to an annual death toll of 20K to 60K for the flu (with zero mitigation). Now can you see where the original Imperial College model gets its weight?
Yes we should be hyper-vigilant about COVID. We have every good reason to be. And now can you see how stupid it is to compare unmitigated flu deaths with fully mitigated COVID deaths?
It’s not a fair comparison. When you look at “zero mitigation” death tolls for flu versus COVID they’re not even in the same universe. COVID is infinitely worse.
PROBLEM THREE = Velocity of COVID is Way Higher Than Your Other Favored Mortalities
You want to always compare a year’s worth of mortality (car wrecks, heart disease, diabetes, flu, etc.) to the total expected COVID death toll. That’s a disingenuous comparison and you’re smart enough to know better, so why do you do it?
Look at these charts, from some very smart writers at The New Atlantis, in an article aptly titled “Not Like the Flu, Not Like Car Crashes, Not Like… ”
They show that even when in full lockdown (USA top chart; and UK bottom chart) the contagion is so bad, and builds such momentum, so fast, that other causes of death are left in its dust. The steepness of its spread is exactly why we need to “overreact” to get it under control.
The red curve of COVID gets so bad so fast that it could easily exceed total annual mortalities from ALL other causes within a matter of WEEKS.
Cases spread so far, so fast, that it would be totally irresponsible to maintain business as usual.
Think of it this way: If you suddenly heard about a communicable disease that caused erratic driving, and you saw an epidemic rise in car crashes, to the point that you started seeing an entire year’s worth of car crashes every few weeks, with no end in sight… 40,000 dead in a month… over and over… month after month with no end in sight… wouldn’t you take drastic action?
As COVID took off, we were seeing (and could still see) a year’s worth of flu deaths in a just few weeks… repeated month after month… and actually getting worse every month… with no end in sight.
Comparing that rocket ship of contagion to heart disease and car wrecks and diabetes (and even the flu) is just plain stupid.
PROBLEM FOUR : Lockdown Doesn’t Mitigate Chronic Disease (Duh)
Why do you insist that a lockdown for chronic diseases like heart disease and diabetes could in any way be comparable to COVID contagion? Why do you keep invoking deaths from chronic disease to deflate the threat from COVID? Are you serious?
Again, you’re not a dumb person so why do you insist on doing this?
There’s a simple reason we don’t lock up the economy to prevent chronic disease: because those are not communicable health problems (not in the same way as coronavirus). An economic lockdown would have zero impact on chronic diseases like heart disease, diabetes and obesity. The comparison is ludicrous. Dare I say… stupid.
One has nothing to do with the other.
There Are Other Issues But You Get The Picture
Please Bill, for goodness sake stop with the stupid comparisons and disingenuous kvetching. Extreme measures to fight COVID are not an overreaction. This disease, by any measure we currently have, warrants an extreme response to save potentially millions of lives.
You’re a glass-half-full kind of guy. We get it. You want to see the silver lining. We get it. You want to preserve a sense of normalcy and rational perspective. We get it.
But don’t let that push you toward such a deep sense of denial and cynicism that you make false and emotionally biased claims. You’re a hardcore rationalist. You criticize people all the time for making emotional instead of rational decisions, particularly in the area of public policy.
But right now, you’re looking like your ingrained contrarian smuggery is getting the better of you. You’re looking emotional, not rational.
An extreme response in hopes of controlling the contagion IS the rational and reasonable response. When you underplay the seriousness of this disease – using stupid and baseless (non)equivalencies – you do your own intellect a disservice, not to mention your audience.