PeoplemoverTTA
Well-Known Member
One "argument" I'm struggling with in this thread is the debate over the actual mortality rate.
While the percentage may decrease based on how many asymptomatic or unreported/untested cases there are, 40,000 (number is made up for this example) people flooding hospitals (in NY, for example, which is closing in on 40k cases and is still predicted to be 2-3 weeks from peaking, which could result in 40k or more in actual hospitals) that are ill-equipped to handle that many people are still 40,000 people.
We are working to flatten the curve so that people don't unnecessarily die and our healthcare system isn't unnecessarily overwhelmed with patients it cannot treat (and as a result, people with other urgent medical needs do not unnecessarily die).
Whether the percentage is one point lower or not, the actual number of people needing urgent care and overwhelming our hospitals will remain high (too high) if the country doesn't continue social distancing and other preventative measures.
So please stop with the percentages.
While the percentage may decrease based on how many asymptomatic or unreported/untested cases there are, 40,000 (number is made up for this example) people flooding hospitals (in NY, for example, which is closing in on 40k cases and is still predicted to be 2-3 weeks from peaking, which could result in 40k or more in actual hospitals) that are ill-equipped to handle that many people are still 40,000 people.
We are working to flatten the curve so that people don't unnecessarily die and our healthcare system isn't unnecessarily overwhelmed with patients it cannot treat (and as a result, people with other urgent medical needs do not unnecessarily die).
Whether the percentage is one point lower or not, the actual number of people needing urgent care and overwhelming our hospitals will remain high (too high) if the country doesn't continue social distancing and other preventative measures.
So please stop with the percentages.