Harvard, Oxford, Stanford doctors among leaders of global anti-lockdown movement

Re:Harvard, Oxford, Stanford doctors among leaders of global... by unethical_ban on Monday October 12, 2020 @03:46PM (#24758650)

It's odd that you're attacking what I said when I'm kind of supporting what you're saying. That we can't sustainably lock down indefinitely until a vaccine, that we need to balance the desire to protect lives with the need to live and work.

Your statement about flatten the curve is exactly what I said.

I will say, though, I bet we disagree on this: The federal government should have minted off a few more trillion dollars to keep people home as needed without them losing their jobs or insurance. Our American political/economic system is not built to keep people healthy or economically secure, and the government should take a more active role in fixing that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Harvard, Oxford, Stanford doctors among leaders of global... by basch on Monday October 12, 2020 @03:52PM (#24758714)

Im not sure if I agree or disagree that blindly throwing more money is the right approach, but I can say I think we did a poor job of using the information we had early on (age, weight being major factors) and using that to selectively protect the most vulnerable. Locking down elderly care to an extreme level and having the social support and food to do so, might have saved more lives-years than keeping everyone at home.

All in all, it just wasnt feasible to tell the elderly to stay home while the rest of the world continued humming. This was one way to get everybody to care.

I wasn't disagreeing with what you said about flattening the curve, I'm saying its meaning has changed in some usages, from what you described to something else.

[ Parent | on HN ]