The real issue is that the comorbidities is something of a red herring. We don’t actually have to worry about vaccinating <20 yr old diabetics. They are still at an extremely low chance of covid complications.
Well, true, but relatively few diabetics are that young. Of the ~27 million diabetics in the US, less than 4 million are under age 45. (Source: CDC)
Which is more proof that age is the important criteria.
Sorry if I’m coming off as argumentative but the quoted bit does bug me. The various governments seem to be going with the age cohort scheme. So unless the writer is suggesting we immunize 15 yr old diabetics before healthy 45 yr olds, they’re basically saying “this won’t be over until the end of the vaccination program”. Ok. Sure. But we can breathe a big sigh of relief when the 60+ crowd is done.
I’ll just note that the quote which I highlighted wasn’t from a journalist, it was from a report from the White House coronavirus task force, which the Post had gotten hold of. Make of that what you will.
Yuck. Well, managing expectations is SOP to a degree. I have political thoughts but that’s for elsewhere.
Not sure if everyone saw this already, but it made me think of this thread:
The author suggests:
But maybe we need a P.S.A. featuring someone actually on a ventilator in the hospital. You might see that person “bucking the vent” — bodies naturally rebel against the machine forcing pressurized oxygen into the lungs, which is why patients are typically sedated.
Another message could feature a patient lying in an I.C.U. bed, immobile, tubes in the groin, with a mask delivering 100 percent oxygen over the mouth and nose — eyes wide with fear, watching the saturation numbers rise and dip on the monitor over the bed.
I suspect it might be too late for these things, though, for at least a couple reasons. Again from the article:
These P.S.A.s might sound harsh, but they might overcome our natural denial. “One consistent research finding is that even when people see and understand risks, they underestimate the risks to themselves,” Mr. Van Bavel said. Graphs, statistics and reasonable explanations don’t do it. They haven’t done it.
I think there is a fair argument to be made, though, that by and large people are pretty good at figuring out how to avoid things that are clearly very dangerous. Like, accidents do happen, but people don’t routinely walk out into busy streets. People do gamble with money, and some get addicted to it and some go so far as to lose everything they have. But those people are, in any fair analysis, infinitesimal in their numbers. It’s because most people, even if they get a thrill from gambling, will recognize when it’s getting too expensive for them and will stop (or have to). Likewise, if ever a disease is so bad that people are dropping in the streets, folks aren’t so dumb or preoccupied that they won’t notice. In other words, maybe it’s not that the average joe is too foolish, in this case, but that the perceived risk is just too low. That’s a decent possibility to consider.
Of course that’s what’s happening n a lot of average joe’s minds. They are correct that their individual risk is low. Why would you think people hadn’t considered something that has been shown in many televised interviews with average joes?
I have not seen any of those interviews. I’m addressing the notion that we need to ‘scare’ people in order to make them adjust their behavior in a certain way. I’m suggesting that perhaps it isn’t as self-evident as it may seem, the idea that they are behaving irrationally.
Maybe those people should write their senator and ask for desperately needed financial help that senator McConnel & Co. continue to thwart.
Yeah, I don’t think that’s new ground. Those people who aren’t personally scared aren’t generally considered irrational. I’m personally not scared of the virus at all.
Putting aside the politics, you really don’t seem to grasp the financial destruction this has caused people and the need for them to work. No stimulus package is going to fix that.
Your solution is toss everyone out there and let them work. So what if it kills 500,000 people?
My solution was to allocate resources toward those who are vulnerable instead of destroying the economy needed to fund it.
Deaths are hitting the 3K mark today. Final number isn’t known but at least 3,164. New cases today at 220K.
Up to 50 million food insecure Americans at present. Some of them will go to work sick to feed and shelter their families. Maybe one of them will be handling a delivery to you today or handling what you buy shopping.
Deaths just ticked up to 3,181. 17 additional deaths reported in the time it took me to write this little post.
The USA desperately needs a COVID relief package that provides direct cash payments and extended unemployment insurance.
We should not have to wait until January 20 to get something done. It’s needed now.
More deaths today in the US than happened on 9/11.
And the Trump administration does not care.
And people are more concerned about their “freedom” to infect others, and how it is a terrible infringement that they cannot go to a party.
And Pearl Harbor.
And it has been happening almost daily for a week or so now (maybe more…I forget).
Well, I still think comparisons to war are super inappropriate.
The issue being someone had the temerity to poke us rather than how many people they killed?
The issue being purposeful murder and destruction is different than people dying from a disease.