Covid is still killing hundreds a day, even as society begins to move on
latimes.com
latimes.com
At the same time, these articles lamenting that "everyone has just gone back to normal" — what do they think we should be doing instead?
> [Dr. Thomas Yadegar] lamented that other people had become “complacent” and unwilling to take simple steps such as wearing a mask indoors to protect those at highest risk. > > “We’ve sacrificed the lives of our most vulnerable for our own convenience,” Yadegar said. “The elderly, the immunocompromised, and the unvaccinated or under-vaccinated — they are the ones that account for the vast majority of deaths due to COVID-19.” As hundreds perish daily, “thousands more are left behind, tormented by the loss.”
Masking is laughably less effective than vaccination, so outside of situations where someone can't be vaccinated, (like say, if I'm going into an assisted care facility or something) why are we bothering with this? I just don't get it.
The "X kills more people!" arguments were always missing the point, as is the argument that the current lack of urgency around the ongoing death rate means there shouldn't have been urgency in the past.
At this point, COVID is so little different from certain other previously existent viruses that no special measures are justified anymore. Furthermore, those that were applied already with many still unexplored social and health consequences not only worked only ambiguously at best, they also should have been carefully examined before being pushed even further for any reason.
I'm not sure of the quoted doctor's agenda (aside from maybe some self-serving free media publicity by playing into that same media's need for fear-clicks) but he's proposing an absurdity through emotional appeals that he himself should know to be untenable for a functional world.
Goes to show our ruling class only cares about a crisis so long as it helps them to get and stay in power.
[1] https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/09/18/politics/biden-pandemic-6...
Maybe if covid was actually treated in the hospital and treatment options weren't suppressed by the medical establishment, more lives would be saved. [2]
[1]: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavi... [2]: https://covid19criticalcare.com/
monumental and impressive effort so far
its sad that right now, its just a matter of time before any of us become immunocompromised temporarily (after a surgery, or during a cancer treatment), and then snuffed out by the ongoing opportunistic viruses floating around
so, they live. but need to not be exposed. so, you can certainly beat their track record of 2 and a half years. but the world gets orders of magnitude more dangerous now, than pre-covid, for immunocompromised, and that doesn't seem to have a light at the end of the tunnel.
(some people draw further distinctions by saying "severely immunocompromised", but the concept is the same, post-surgery, cancer, hiv. circumstances a very large portion of society gets into at least once. According to cancer.gov, approximately 39.5% of men and women will be diagnosed with cancer at some point during their lifetimes (based on 2015–2017 data), chemotheraphy puts them in a immunocompromised state)
But that’s self-inflicted so LA Times chose to highlight something else.
Edit: the data scientist of the article could probably read more.
Like this Los Angeles County Health Dept.
There, I did some journalistic leg work.
http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/sapc/MDU/SpecialReport/Acci...
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ershdb/emergencyresponsecard_29750...
Does she need to ride your personal hobby horse in every single article she ever writes for you to realize it's possible for people to care about more than one problem at a time?
Need to make society functional and educated … again.