doom and gloom from A&M researcher

13,406 Views | 107 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by Pinata Man
Gordo14
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Texan_Aggie said:

Yes, obviously if everyone stayed home and we contact traced effectively, this would be the best path forward from a lives perspective. But this approach has obvious costs, most notably the economy and people sustaining jobs.

This will come down to a cost benefit analysis. Yes, we will lose lives, but at what cost to the greater population are we willing to do so. It is morbid to say we are okay with more people dying so that others can work, but it likely will happen that way.


Except people's actions will change as well if the virus is prevalent in society. Thus it will have costs to the economy and people sustaining jobs. You can't just revert to Jan 2019 at this point.
Texan_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Gordo14 said:

Texan_Aggie said:

Yes, obviously if everyone stayed home and we contact traced effectively, this would be the best path forward from a lives perspective. But this approach has obvious costs, most notably the economy and people sustaining jobs.

This will come down to a cost benefit analysis. Yes, we will lose lives, but at what cost to the greater population are we willing to do so. It is morbid to say we are okay with more people dying so that others can work, but it likely will happen that way.


Except people's actions will change as well if the virus is prevalent in society. Thus it will have costs to the economy and people sustaining jobs. You can't just revert to Jan 2019 at this point.
I never said revert back to January 2019 and I do think behavior will change. At some point though, it is not worth it for those out work in "non-essential" jobs to be out of the opportunity to perform such work to "save lives". I don't know that point, nor does anyone in my view, but its a very real judgement call coming soon.
California Ag 90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
on the subject of vaccines, the attached NIH study is fascinating. looks at influenza mortality since early 1900's by year, and studies the impact of broadly available vaccines since the 1980s.

influenza in the USA over time

Quote:

However, recent research suggests that vaccination is an unlikely explanation of mortality trends. A 2005 US National Institutes of Health study of over 30 influenza seasons "could not correlate increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group."19(p265) Other research has reviewed available international studies of inactivated influenza vaccine effectiveness and efficacy. One study concluded that "evidence from systematic reviews shows that inactivated vaccines have little or no effect on the effects measured."20(p915) Considered in light of the data presented here, these studies imply that other causessuch as an improvement in living conditions or naturally acquired immunity from similar strains of influenza virusmay have been partially responsible for the declining trends in recorded influenza mortality.
We're from North California, and South Alabam
and little towns all around this land...
Pinata Man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Saw this from tamu researchers last night:
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.