Select to expand quote
D3 said..
Can we agree that we shouldn't compare USA with Australia, not least because we did manage to keep covid under control for the majority of the past two years.
Making statements akin to 'it only kills the old and infirm' us extremely misleading and you come across as though 15% of the population is fair game because they're old.
And that's not even counting people who have complicated health status through no fault if their own.
Lots of people have these co-morbidities that mught otherwise not be an issue.
Apparently 2/3 of Australians are obese or overweight. Sure some could get that sorted over time, but right now they're at greater risk.
And then there are all those other quite common co-morbidities:-
Pregnancy
Previous or current smoker
Hear diseases
Lung disease
Kidney diseases
Liver diseases
So when state 'we need to protect the vulnerable', I totally agree. But we need to be clear as to just how many people in our society are actually at risk
When looking at the effects of COVID you need to look at USA and UK because of the massive amount of data and it's commonality with Australia on demographics and healthcare.
Also, my comments were about identifying and protecting the vulnerable, not saying they are "fair game" that is an emotional strawman argument.
The main co-morbidites for death (rather than hospitalisation) are cancer, diabeties, cronic kidney disease or hypertension. The others just increases risk of hospitalisation. As I mentioned over 90% of deaths have on average 2.5 co-morbidities. This is not a large % of the population and is easily identified.
The point is that an otherwise healthy person under the age of 55 has the same chance of dying from covid as dying in an accident, it is not very high. This is not the risk profile that is being promoted.
No one is arguing that COVID is not a severe disease or risks are not involved, I am saying the risks are only high for a very small % of the population. What no one wants to balance that against is the cost of the lockdowns and restrictions on the whole population here in Australia compared to somewhere like Florida that did not take that approach.
The deaths that will occur because of people not getting routine cancer screening will be massive. There has been a huge increase in mental health issues, domestic violence, child abuse, alcohol and substance abuse, teenage suicides are up. The cost of kids not being at school for large periods has not been quantified.
The effect of the government responses has been horrific for kids, but no one wants to balance that with the risk to older and sick people. Thats not even assessing the long term economic effects. There is a clear correlation between the strength of economies and the health of communities.
It's not popular to balance one group of deaths and impacts against another, but that is what public response is supposed to do.