• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Death rates aren’t a feeling. I want some hard numbers.

    I feel like we just don’t care if we live or die anymore.

    • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fun fact: the CDC readjusted what the ‘normal’ rate of deaths is to include the years of the pandemic so now it’s harder than ever to find hard numbers because “excess deaths” was one of the last ways to get any information at all!

      • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        For the love of god: everyone should ignores what the CDC says. You can see for yourself how many people died from Covid under their watch. They have no morals and they made it obvious by downplaying Covid

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.

        Anything that doesn’t make an observable, statistically significant difference, has no cause to further impose restriction on how people live their lives

        • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.

          Sharp edges don’t happen from demographic trends. This is pure rationalization.

          Further than what?? What restrictions??

          And what are you implying? Covid has no observable affect on public health? Tell that to the millions of people still getting disabled every year.

    • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know I’ve read reports about the latest variants being much less deadly. I did see one study recently which for patients presenting to hospital covid was a few percentage points more likely to result in death compared to hospitalized flu patients. There were a lot more covid patients though.

      Found it:

      death rates among people hospitalized for COVID-19 were 17% to 21% in 2020 vs 6% in this study, while death rates for those hospitalized for influenza were 3.8% in 2020 vs 3.7% in this study

      https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2803749

      So there is some data backing up the feelings I’ve gotten from everything I’ve been hearing and seeing.

      • glingorfel [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure how severe an effect this would have on the numbers, but the death rate would non-negligibly go down after millions of the most vulnerable people died in the first wave. As well, the newer variants get more contagious and bypass immune responses more easily, and we’re taking way fewer precautions as a society. so 6% is a lower percent but still an incredibly high number

        • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I saw it as an evolutionary benefit to be less deadly. The way I’m seeing this, the virus’s purpose in life is to spread, so a higher infection and contagious rate with less death rate is ideal from an evolution standpoint.

          • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Ideal for it, not ideal for anyone who enjoys the full function of their mind and circulatory system.

            The mind thing isn’t a dig at you btw, it’s a reference to the brain fog

        • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, that’s one way to look at it. I looked at it as only a couple percent higher death rate than the flu. Either way, a little less than 2x is way better than like 5x worse.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Obviously it’s better than before, but it’s also worth keeping in mind these deaths are in addition to the flu.

            Also, there are good and bad flu seasons. I see no reason for COVID to not be the same.

            • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Even if we pedantically accept that ‘almost double’ is really ‘just a few percent higher’ while we’re looking at a single digit likelihood, ‘just a few percent more’ than for the flu is a lot more people in overall numbers with something that spreads far quicker than the flu. We could get the death rate of Covid down to ½ the rate for the flu but if infections are more than double (this is just an example, I don’t know the actual stats on this one), it still means Covid would be more deadly. Unless I’m missing something obvious.

              • holland@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                COVID is basically a year round disease where flu is seasonal. So yeah it’s gonna produce about an order of magnitude more death with just a few percent higher death rate.

                • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That’s how I understood it, too. Turns out it’s a difficult thing to comprehend, though.

      • Mbourgon everywhere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s one crucial thing you overlooked in this: in 2020, most people hadn’t been infected, and hadn’t gotten the vaccine (because there was no vaccine until December,and even then it was in extremely short supply). Now, most people have some sort of immunity, be it from vaccine or from a prior infection. That definitely skews the hospitalization numbers downward. You can’t compare then and now, unfortunately, since there’s no real community that hasn’t been vaccinated and hasn’t caught it - and so you can’t compare their numbers.

        • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s fair, but I think you can still compare it to the flu, which is not that far off from covid percentage wise. At this point both the flu and covid should be at an equal level of people having vaccines and natural antibodies, right? Even if you go with covid being about twice as deadly as the flu, twice as deadly as almost nothing is still almost nothing.