Snoopy said:
JRPGfan said:
"Subtract the elderly, infants and people with prior conditions and the percentage is a lot less."
^ wrong.
the 19% here, is refering to people that get the infection.
Virologists think perphaps upwards of 70% of a population can get it.
Out of 100 that get this, 19% are hospitalised.
And upto 70% of a population can get it.
"So healthy middle age people should be fine and go about their daily lives."
^ this will prolong the periode the elderly will have to stay home at lock down.
And it will continue to spread, until ~70% of the population has it.
Alot of elderly that wouldnt need to get sick, will.
They will take some unnessary risk, or get it from just getting foods ect.
Its alot more risky (for the risk groups) than just haveing everyone quarantined, and stopping spreads early.
"However, let's stop the economy completely which affects 100% of the population and will lead to the great depression. "
The alternative, is to hire people to go pick up corpses instead.
You want a job picking up the dead? your plan could lead to there being a few million more.
|
Wrong? Did you not see the graph where the vast majority of hospitalization and deaths are elders?
Picking up dead? We are going to do that regardless. Sorry, but we are going to pick up dead people no matter what the case is . We can't stop working or else there will be no food, medecine supplies, ect which affects 100% Sorry, we have to play the percentage and not on feelings or fear.
|
Snoopy you are entitled to your opinion. You will not be able to convince anyone on the opposite side differently, and we will not be able to convince you differently. All we can do is let this play out because there is no going back from the decisions that have been made and will be made, and pray that the worst case scenarios does not occur.
