Dr. Fauci estimates about 100-200 thousand deaths due to COVID-19 in the US

[NotreDame]

Dr. Fauci predicts 100K to 200K Americans will die from COVID-19



But think of how good that will be for the economy!

Thoughts?

Well he vascilated. He made it clear he didn’t want to be “stuck” to those numbers. He was also unclear if that was worse case scenario or something in between a best/worst case scenario.

The number could change. I could be mistaken but based on the totality of his comments over the past several weeks, and the data, those are numbers spread out over several months, roughly maybe 10 or more. Treatments can mitigate those numbers, as well as a vaccine, depending on how quickly the vaccine is available.

 

[NotreDame]

Good point, but I almost guarantee that Covid-19 is more deadly to younger people than the flu is - a 40 year old will be significantly more likely to die if they get Covid-19 than if they get the regular flu.

Where’s the data to support your claim in regards to young people and 40 year olds?

 

[DamianWarS]

Few years and people will have mostly forgotten those 100000. There is always new crisis and those deaths will be divided over a longer period of time without anything as dramatic as skyscrapers falling down.

Perhaps, but it's not a few years from now yet

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Where’s the data to support your claim in regards to young people and 40 year olds?

It's not finalized data (since we don't know the complete number of infections), but these are the stats from China: Global Covid-19 Case Fatality Rates - CEBM

These are the stats for the flu in the US: US Influenza (Flu) & Pneumonia Death Statistics | LiveStories

In China, the COVID-19 mortality rate for people 20-49 was 0.32%. The mortality rate for 80+ was 15%. Let's call it 50x higher.

In the US, the flu mortality rate for 20-49 is around 0.002%. The mortality rate for 85+ is 0.38%. Let's call it 175x higher.

This suggests that the COVID-19 mortality is significantly (more than 3x) higher for people under 50 relative to the flu. There are, of course, a number of factors that could influence these numbers, but that's the data that we have right now.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You people are going to get the rest of us killed with your weapons grade ignorance.

So,
Stay home,
Wash your hands,
Don't touch your face.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yes.

I don't recall hearing that term used then (not saying it wasn't).

 

[SimplyMe]

So,
Stay home,
Wash your hands,
Don't touch your face.

A local donut shop had a great sign:

Donut Touch Face
Donut Hoard
Donut Worry

Mmm... Donuts

 

[OldWiseGuy]

A local donut shop had a great sign:

Donut Touch Face
Donut Hoard
Donut Worry

Mmm... Donuts

I like it. I have a Kwik Trip Classic Vanilla donut every morning. (Pulled this out of my hoard.)

 

[rambot]

Also, I wonder how many people that "died from the virus" truly died from the virus as opposed to WITH the virus; this is specially true of older people who have underlying conditions.

Yes but the people who died with, aids didn't kill them. Same kinda thing here, non? Pneumonia begins to develop and tends to be the cause of death I'd thought

 

[TLK Valentine]

I dont think praise is what God wants, rather, love one another. Be generous, merciful and just.

We can do that while taking Him out of the equation... but He wouldn't approve.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Well he vascilated. He made it clear he didn’t want to be “stuck” to those numbers. He was also unclear if that was worse case scenario or something in between a best/worst case scenario.

The number could change. I could be mistaken but based on the totality of his comments over the past several weeks, and the data, those are numbers spread out over several months, roughly maybe 10 or more. Treatments can mitigate those numbers, as well as a vaccine, depending on how quickly the vaccine is available.

Of course -- predicting the future is hardly an exact science, and Fauci acknowledges that there are a whole lot of unknown variables.

I'm operating under the (reasonable, IMO) assumption that Fauci is operating under two professional obligations which, for the moment, have a similar goal: as both a man of medicine and a representative of the federal government, Fauci wants to be honest but at the same time optimistic, lest we panic.

Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst, as the saying goes.

 

[NotreDame]

Of course -- predicting the future is hardly an exact science, and Fauci acknowledges that there are a whole lot of unknown variables.

I'm operating under the (reasonable, IMO) assumption that Fauci is operating under two professional obligations which, for the moment, have a similar goal: as both a man of medicine and a representative of the federal government, Fauci wants to be honest but at the same time optimistic, lest we panic.

Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst, as the saying goes.

Then perhaps say “the model projected those numbers but admittedly I’m unsure at the moment as to my level of confidence in those numbers, and do not want to be “stuck” to those numbers.”

Make those remarks.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

Perhaps, but it's not a few years from now yet

Tempus fugit

 

[DamianWarS]

Tempus fugit

Right now it's standing still.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then perhaps say “the model projected those numbers but admittedly I’m unsure at the moment as to my level of confidence in those numbers, and do not want to be “stuck” to those numbers.”

Make those remarks.

Seems to me that's basically what he said... with a little less legal/political jargon.

He was clear enough that those numbers were only estimates, and didn't want those numbers associated with him... probably for good reason. The man has a career to think about.

Of course, we're all hoping that his numbers are too high, and that the final death toll is far lower. He'll take some flak, no doubt, for exaggerating the potential damage, but he can take the hit without a problem.

The worry is what happens if he's wrong in the other direction? What if COVID-19 affects us far worse than his predictions? We've already lost six week because the administration didn't take this seriously enough when it was first discovered here, and who's getting the blame in the press for that?

The same person who will do what he does best -- find a scapegoat to blame for his own failures and shortcomings. And three guesses who that will be.

 

[cow451]

Not true, he will answer to me.

Donald? Is that you?

 

[NotreDame]

Seems to me that's basically what he said... with a little less legal/political jargon.

He was clear enough that those numbers were only estimates, and didn't want those numbers associated with him... probably for good reason. The man has a career to think about.

Of course, we're all hoping that his numbers are too high, and that the final death toll is far lower. He'll take some flak, no doubt, for exaggerating the potential damage, but he can take the hit without a problem.

The worry is what happens if he's wrong in the other direction? What if COVID-19 affects us far worse than his predictions? We've already lost six week because the administration didn't take this seriously enough when it was first discovered here, and who's getting the blame in the press for that?

The same person who will do what he does best -- find a scapegoat to blame for his own failures and shortcomings. And three guesses who that will be.

with a little less legal/political jargon.

Nothing I said was political or legal jargon.

Seems to me that's basically what he said

That’s not “basically what he said.” He said something very much different.

He was clear enough that those numbers were only estimates

We are aware he was discussing estimates but the “estimates” were within a range of 100,000 to 200,000 deaths. So, stating the obvious, “estimates” doesn’t change the fact he estimated a range of between 100,000 and 200,000.

Regardless, telling the public he’s unsure of his confidence in the numbers by the computers and didn’t want to be “stuck” to those numbers would have worked.

 

[TLK Valentine]

We are aware he was discussing estimates but the “estimates” were within a range of 100,000 to 200,000 deaths. So, stating the obvious, “estimates” doesn’t change the fact he estimated a range of between 100,000 and 200,000.

I wasn't aware that the range of his "estimates" was being questioned -- the numbers were pretty explicit.

Regardless, telling the public he’s unsure of his confidence in the numbers by the computers and didn’t want to be “stuck” to those numbers would have worked.

I'm still not seeing the difference between that and what he said.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then perhaps say “the model projected those numbers but admittedly I’m unsure at the moment as to my level of confidence in those numbers, and do not want to be “stuck” to those numbers.”

Make those remarks.

Perhaps, but Donald's already accepted either Fauci's remarks, or someone else's who has come to the same conclusions:

Trump says keeping US Covid-19 deaths to 100,000 would be a ‘very good job’

Donald Trump has extended America’s national shutdown for a month, bowing to public health experts, and scientific reality, and warning that the worst of the coronavirus pandemic is yet to come.

Speaking in the White House Rose Garden, the US president claimed that, if his administration keeps the death toll to 100,000, it will have done “a very good job” – a startling shift from his optimistic predictions of a few days ago when he said he hoped to restart the economy by Easter.

 

[Vylo]

Perhaps, but Donald's already accepted either Fauci's remarks, or someone else's who has come to the same conclusions:

Trump says keeping US Covid-19 deaths to 100,000 would be a ‘very good job’

Imagine thinking that putzing around while 100,000 of your people died was a good job. having 33 back to back 9/11s. 14 times the american death toll for the war on terror. nearly 3 years of flu deaths in a single one. 8 times the death toll of the swine flu, nearly as much as the entire WORLD lost from that pandemic.

And the worst thing is, this is probably the best number we can get, with nearly everything going right. We are actually probably already past the point of achieving this as I type.