Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,136 posts)
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 01:35 PM Apr 2020

Commentary: What a lower death toll than first expected means

By Sandra McCoy and Pia MacDonald / The Washington Post

Covid-19 has killed more than 40,000 people in the United States so far; fewer than the 100,000 deaths originally projected. Hospital systems outside New York, New Jersey and Louisiana have mostly avoided being overwhelmed with coronavirus patients. Some states such as California may have managed to “flatten the curve” and slow the number of infections.

Now some people believe this suggests that the U.S. control strategy, with its disastrous economic consequences, was an extreme overreaction. Small but vocal protests have been organized in some states, calling for restrictions to be lifted immediately. President Trump has called to “liberate” states with businesses closed by social distancing orders. Seeking to ease economic strain, governors in Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina and other places are considering easing restrictions and opening some, if not all, businesses in the coming days.

But public health professionals like us see the current mitigation strategy as proportionate and warranted. The lower-than-expected death tolls don’t demonstrate that the U.S. response to the coronavirus pandemic was a mistake; they show that it’s working.

Of course we should rigorously interrogate the rationale of an epidemic-control strategy that exacerbates societal inequity and has resulted in more than 95 percent of Americans being told to stay at home and 22 million newly unemployed workers since March 14. And it’s smart to consider alternative explanations for epidemic trends we observe and ask whether the control strategies are really responsible for those trends; this sort of question is, in fact, key to the scientific process.

https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/commentary-what-a-lower-death-toll-than-first-expected-means/?utm_source=DAILY+HERALD&utm_campaign=4f4cbe973c-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d81d073bb4-4f4cbe973c-228635337

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Commentary: What a lower death toll than first expected means (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2020 OP
Was the projection 100K mzmolly Apr 2020 #1
It wasn't by the 23rd. It was by the end of the pandemic. The article's premise... brush Apr 2020 #4
Exactly. mzmolly Apr 2020 #5
Aug. 4. Igel Apr 2020 #9
Didn't Fauci predict 100k-240k deaths at one point? brush Apr 2020 #12
I think you are spot on. . . BigDemVoter Apr 2020 #10
I've been wondering that too Rorey Apr 2020 #6
100k deaths will turn out to be a tragic underestimate. lagomorph777 Apr 2020 #16
We don't need this parachute... AleksS Apr 2020 #2
It occured to me... Newest Reality Apr 2020 #3
It's a mystery, to be honest. Igel Apr 2020 #11
That is exactly where our household is at... EarthFirst Apr 2020 #15
"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic." - Josef Stalin. sop Apr 2020 #7
Sandra and Pia appear to be imbeciles. The whole premise for this "opinion" is Squinch Apr 2020 #8
What a crock of crap! n/t blitzen Apr 2020 #13
We are not yet to the end of phase 1. Such arbitrary judgement has no bearing on the disease, Ford_Prefect Apr 2020 #14

brush

(53,815 posts)
4. It wasn't by the 23rd. It was by the end of the pandemic. The article's premise...
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 01:53 PM
Apr 2020

seems flawed. And the toll keeps rising daily.

Igel

(35,337 posts)
9. Aug. 4.
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 02:49 PM
Apr 2020

Neither the end nor 4/23.

That's the IMHE date, but it's about when most models strongly suggest the first wave will have reached a low number, possibly zero, deaths per day.

brush

(53,815 posts)
12. Didn't Fauci predict 100k-240k deaths at one point?
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 03:00 PM
Apr 2020

Zero deaths per day by Aug. 4 seems highly unlikely.

BigDemVoter

(4,154 posts)
10. I think you are spot on. . .
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 02:54 PM
Apr 2020

I keep hearing people say, "Well, we haven't had 100,000." I think that remains to be seen, and I personally think it will be much, much higher.

Rorey

(8,445 posts)
6. I've been wondering that too
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 01:54 PM
Apr 2020

I don't recall anyone ever saying anything about a time period in which the death toll would reach 100,000.

It's kinda like when Dubya got on that aircraft carrier with the big ass "Mission Accomplished" banner behind him. Nope. The mission was definitely NOT accomplished.

We're barely into this hellish thing, and idiots are already thinking it's done.

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)
16. 100k deaths will turn out to be a tragic underestimate.
Fri Apr 24, 2020, 10:12 AM
Apr 2020

So we think the body count is about to suddenly stop? WTF? How can people live with themselves, writing such obvious crap?

Newest Reality

(12,712 posts)
3. It occured to me...
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 01:46 PM
Apr 2020

Not only are we seeing numbers be tossed around, rather than empathy and compassion for others in regards to so many people dying and losing loved ones, but there is a crucial point being missed about the reopening hubbub.

How many people have already been financially decimated to some degree by this? I think that factor increases with each week. I am also of the opinion that we have a long way to go before we have this pandemic corralled at all.

Despite the risk of going back to work for the crucial wages slaves of America, what is being expected here? Oh, a mass of flat broke folks will go out and do what? If anything, they will be trying to desperately catch up on rent, car payments and bills and, since food prices are due to skyrocket, keeping food on the table.

What is being expected here? Sure, I'll bet everyone is going to go out first thing and spend lavishly on what is going to be seen as non-essential luxuries. Dinner out. A movie. Bowling. Hair salons, manicures and pedicures. Trips. Vacations. Flying. Yeah, right. Really now?

They want to give an economy that few can afford to attend at this point. Opening up will only make that more obvious and increase the number who contract the disease and die. It does not seem like it will turn out to be the grand gala mega sales event that may be expected or suggested. We have many results brewing even now that assure it won't. Hard times ahead.

Igel

(35,337 posts)
11. It's a mystery, to be honest.
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 02:58 PM
Apr 2020

And we won't know, contra numerous specious claims, for a while.

So you're unemployed. Do you get unemployment? Is your state kicking in the additional bonus amount? If so, you won't be at a loss unless your income's fairly high.

No unemployment benefits and unemployed? Serious ouchage. But wait--some sole proprietors *can* apply for loans, and gig workers can collect unemployment. So much has shifted so quickly it's hard to account for all the updates.

But a lot of people aren't unemployed. My family--two income, both still working, but now that we're working from home we don't have gas, mileage, quite the number of expenses. And we have more trouble eating out. We're ahead. That'll change if 1 or more of us get sick.

Oh. And that's not counting the $1,200 breathing stipend. Per person.

If things get up and running soon, the damage to businesses that are shut can be reduced. But there are loans and grants, and while most of the loans/grants have been for under $150k (by a wide, wide margin), that's only something like 1.2 million businesses. (Those getting over $50 million? Under 5k business. Them's the big boys, but they're less than 10% of the total.) But now there's more money. Thing is, some of those businesses are having moral or practical problems with the pass-through funding.

States and cities got some help the last two spending bills. Will it be enough? Dunno. Depends where they put it--if in their pensions, laying off workers instead of funding them so they can claim cuts are because of the Model T, then those politicians should be seriously voter-shafted next time they're exposed. But it may not be enough.

As with a lot of things that depend on how long a circumstance lasts, you can't know the cumulate effect until the end.

EarthFirst

(2,901 posts)
15. That is exactly where our household is at...
Fri Apr 24, 2020, 07:13 AM
Apr 2020

We lost my wife’s income permanently. Along with our healthcare and her retirement benefits.

As much as we’d love our return to the previous version of normal; it just isn’t going to happen.

The benefits she is receiving are limited in scope from where we were a month ago.

There is no entertainment fund or “lavish non-essentials” for us.

We’re in survival mode.

We aren’t the only ones...

sop

(10,226 posts)
7. "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic." - Josef Stalin.
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 01:54 PM
Apr 2020

Trump is in good company.

Squinch

(50,989 posts)
8. Sandra and Pia appear to be imbeciles. The whole premise for this "opinion" is
Thu Apr 23, 2020, 02:19 PM
Apr 2020

ridiculous. We WILL have 100,000 deaths and possibly many more from this virus.

Ford_Prefect

(7,917 posts)
14. We are not yet to the end of phase 1. Such arbitrary judgement has no bearing on the disease,
Fri Apr 24, 2020, 01:12 AM
Apr 2020

nor on the degree of infection and distribution yet to be accurately observed.
COVID-19 is not like any previous disease we have encountered. There is no such thing as Herd Immunity, nor does having the disease seem to convey immunity from its many variants.

We are ever so far from over. We have only begun to count the dead and the dying because we cannot yet tell accurately why and how they died.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Commentary: What a lower ...