Coronavirus Outbreak...

[MaxVel]

It certainly seems to be a suicide related to a business failure. However, the article notes that this chain of stores has had a series of closures over the last year, the rest occurring before covid, and that the article writer is unaware of any evidence that this closure was covid-related.

The guy's store went from a turnover of $92,000 a week before Covid to nothing at all during the lockdown. I think it most likely that that was a major cause of his high stress levels, although the business might have failed even if there was no lockdown.

In a video with TVNZ during alert level 4, Green said many stores like his were struggling.

"We're just struggling big time, we need to sell meat to actually make any money," Green said.

"And at the moment we're not selling meat, so we're not making any money.

"The money I do have in the bank is all going to outgoings at the moment, it's just a tough struggle.

The shop had been turning over $92,000 per week prior to the lockdown but was making no money in level 4, TVNZ reported.

"The stress at the moment we're under trying to pay everyone is ridiculous.

"I've spent nights awake in bed.

"Some nights I've sat there crying, wondering what I'm going to do next. It's just not fair."

On April 25, a post to the Mad Butcher Pukekohe Facebook page said the shop would not be opening in alert level 3.

The Mad Butcher opened on the first day of the lockdown, saying it met the definition of an essential business, but they were eventually told to shut.

[carpedm9587]

The guy's store went from a turnover of $92,000 a week before Covid to nothing at all during the lockdown. I think it most likely that that was a major cause of his high stress levels, although the business might have failed even if there was no lockdown.

Personally, I think these forms of speculation are largely useless. Many (most?) on the left will say "was going down anyway" because that fits their narrative. Many (most?) on the right will say "it was due to covid" because that fits their narrative.

If we step away and just look at what we know - the answer is we don't know. Furthermore, unless he left a note or told someone before he died, we probably won't ever know.

[carpedm9587]

No - Trump fires people that are in his way and has no tolerance for competence or integrity that might eclipse loyalty to him.This has been the pattern for 4 years. It's just wrong to even try to claim there is any other reason at this point.

We are dealing with an administration that lies, obfuscates, and manipulates. It sets out to smear those it does not like and then, where it is possible, removes them. The most likely reality is that they grabbed any reason they could think of to smear the man and then unloaded him.

[MaxVel]

Personally, I think these forms of speculation are largely useless. Many (most?) on the left will say "was going down anyway" because that fits their narrative. Many (most?) on the right will say "it was due to covid" because that fits their narrative.

If we step away and just look at what we know - the answer is we don't know. Furthermore, unless he left a note or told someone before he died, we probably won't ever know.

You're probably right, we most likely won't ever know for certain why he died. But we can certainly say that the lockdown increased his stress levels - that's what he himself said.



And this - this hard to measure, difficult to quantify thing - is a variable that we need to include in our decision making process that forms our strategies for dealing with the pandemic. That's our tragedy here, too.

Lockdowns DO affect people's lives, and they do have a cost, hard (or impossible) though that is to measure. I'm mostly concerned that people are making decisions while looking at only part of the data, and are weighting that part too highly, because it's immediate, emotional, visible and quantifiable. As Leonhard said in his Denmark thread, there is a point (somewhere) where it costs too much to preserve one person's life.

The video that started me thinking about this more is here. An expert is saying that eventually, we will all face the spread of Covid through our community. In fact, it has already spread a lot more widely than many people realise - which is actually comforting in a way, because that would make the mortality rate lower than we currently think it is. IN the light of that inevitable spread, the value of a lockdown becomes less - it's a delay, not a solution.

[oxmixmudd]

You're probably right, we most likely won't ever know for certain why he died. But we can certainly say that the lockdown increased his stress levels - that's what he himself said.



And this - this hard to measure, difficult to quantify thing - is a variable that we need to include in our decision making process that forms our strategies for dealing with the pandemic. That's our tragedy here, too.

Lockdowns DO affect people's lives, and they do have a cost, hard (or impossible) though that is to measure. I'm mostly concerned that people are making decisions while looking at only part of the data, and are weighting that part too highly, because it's immediate, emotional, visible and quantifiable. As Leonhard said in his Denmark thread, there is a point (somewhere) where it costs too much to preserve one person's life.

The video that started me thinking about this more is here. An expert is saying that eventually, we will all face the spread of Covid through our community. In fact, it has already spread a lot more widely than many people realise - which is actually comforting in a way, because that would make the mortality rate lower than we currently think it is. IN the light of that inevitable spread, the value of a lockdown becomes less - it's a delay, not a solution.

You are right in that if the mortality is actually very low and if there is nothing that will keep most from getting the disease, then that lowers the value of a lockdown significantly. But we cant really know enough to evaouate that cost without widespread testing, which the administration has tended to treat as unnecessary and/or tended to drag its feet in implementing.

right now we have whispers that it might be 1/2 of the apparent mortality. Whispers. But the hard facts we have is that of those diagnosed, 3 to 6% die. Just look at any nation's case count vs mortality. And if those whispers are correct, that is still 1.5 to 3% mortality. And those numbers say the lockdown is worth the price, because those numbers will bring us to our knees if we dont slow the spread.

[little_monkey]

You're probably right, we most likely won't ever know for certain why he died. But we can certainly say that the lockdown increased his stress levels - that's what he himself said.



And this - this hard to measure, difficult to quantify thing - is a variable that we need to include in our decision making process that forms our strategies for dealing with the pandemic. That's our tragedy here, too.

Lockdowns DO affect people's lives, and they do have a cost, hard (or impossible) though that is to measure. I'm mostly concerned that people are making decisions while looking at only part of the data, and are weighting that part too highly, because it's immediate, emotional, visible and quantifiable. As Leonhard said in his Denmark thread, there is a point (somewhere) where it costs too much to preserve one person's life.

The video that started me thinking about this more is here. An expert is saying that eventually, we will all face the spread of Covid through our community. In fact, it has already spread a lot more widely than many people realise - which is actually comforting in a way, because that would make the mortality rate lower than we currently think it is. IN the light of that inevitable spread, the value of a lockdown becomes less - it's a delay, not a solution.

The lockdown is not about preventing the spread of the virus, but about spreading too fast as too many people would be sick at the same times, meaning an overwhelming of the health system would cause many more deaths as many infected would be unable to get the necessary treatment such as ventilators. Until there is an effective vaccine the virus will spread. It's a question of how fast or how slow.

[seer]

So its not just us...

Fury in Germany as thousands join protests across country over lockdown

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-measures.html

[seanD]

So its not just us...

Fury in Germany as thousands join protests across country over lockdown

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-measures.html

Those dang Trump supporters, and their refusal to adhere to science!

[oxmixmudd]

So its not just us...

Fury in Germany as thousands join protests across country over lockdown

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-measures.html

Yeah, the idocy surrounding Bill Gates hatred and anti vaxxers clearly is not just a US phenomenon. Stupidity is a human problem. Not a geographical one.

[carpedm9587]

You're probably right, we most likely won't ever know for certain why he died. But we can certainly say that the lockdown increased his stress levels - that's what he himself said.

If he said it, then I accept it as his experience.

And this - this hard to measure, difficult to quantify thing - is a variable that we need to include in our decision making process that forms our strategies for dealing with the pandemic. That's our tragedy here, too.

Lockdowns DO affect people's lives, and they do have a cost, hard (or impossible) though that is to measure. I'm mostly concerned that people are making decisions while looking at only part of the data, and are weighting that part too highly, because it's immediate, emotional, visible and quantifiable. As Leonhard said in his Denmark thread, there is a point (somewhere) where it costs too much to preserve one person's life.

The video that started me thinking about this more is here. An expert is saying that eventually, we will all face the spread of Covid through our community. In fact, it has already spread a lot more widely than many people realise - which is actually comforting in a way, because that would make the mortality rate lower than we currently think it is. IN the light of that inevitable spread, the value of a lockdown becomes less - it's a delay, not a solution.

I find it tiresome listening to the "let's reopen now" crowd. The complaints strike me as so mundane. I have to wear a mask. I have to stay six feet from other people. I have to wait in line (separate by six feet) because the location has an occupancy limit. I find myself wondering how many lives "wearing a mask" is worth. How many lives is "social distancing" worth? At what point do we feel justified in saying, "I will not do these basic things to help prevent the spread of this virus and save lives?"

[Mountain Man]

Anybody who is even minimally informed shouldn't find this at all surprising...

Over 86,500 people have reportedly died in the United States from the Coronavirus, and the fear generated by those deaths is driving the public policy debate. But that number is a dramatic overcount. Our metrics include deaths that have nothing to do with the virus. The problem is even worse as the Centers for Disease Control over counts even some of these cases and the government has created financial incentives for this misreporting. Relying on these flawed numbers is destroying businesses and jobs and costing lives.

“The case definition is very simplistic,” Dr. Ngozi Ezike, director of Illinois Department of Public Health, explains. “It means, at the time of death, it was a COVID positive diagnosis. That means, that if you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live, and then you also were found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death. It means, technically even if you died of clear alternative cause, but you had COVID at the same time, it’s still listed as a COVID death.”

Medical examiners in Michigan use the same definition. In Macomb and Oakland Counties, where most of the deaths occurred, medical examiners classify any deaths as Coronavirus deaths when the postmortem test is positive. Even people who died in suicides and automobile accidents meet that definition.

Still, these broad definitions are not due to a few rogue public health officials. The rules direct them to do this. Unlike other countries, “if someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death,” as Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House coronavirus response coordinator, recently noted.

[...]

Erroneous data unduly scare people about the risks of the disease. It keeps the country locked down longer than necessary, which destroys peoples’ lives and livelihoods in many other ways. Exaggerated fears of the virus endanger lives by keeping people from obtaining treatment for other medical problems. It also makes it impossible to accurately compare policies across countries.

https://townhall.com/columnists/john...eaths-n2568925

[lilpixieofterror]

You are right in that if the mortality is actually very low and if there is nothing that will keep most from getting the disease, then that lowers the value of a lockdown significantly. But we cant really know enough to evaouate that cost without widespread testing, which the administration has tended to treat as unnecessary and/or tended to drag its feet in implementing.

right now we have whispers that it might be 1/2 of the apparent mortality. Whispers. But the hard facts we have is that of those diagnosed, 3 to 6% die. Just look at any nation's case count vs mortality. And if those whispers are correct, that is still 1.5 to 3% mortality. And those numbers say the lockdown is worth the price, because those numbers will bring us to our knees if we dont slow the spread.

Which still doesn’t tell us anything. Look at the testing and distribution over ages. As of now, 88% of confirmed China Flu positives and 92% of all deaths come from those 55 or over, which says that mortality rates and serious complications are rarer, if you’re under 55. Meaning we are destroying our economy and landing millions in the poor house, when we should be protecting older or less healthy Americans, and letting the rest return to a more normal life. Unless you don’t mind a few million homeless people, increased suicide rates, increased domestic violence, and increased child abuse.

[seanD]

Yeah, the idocy surrounding Bill Gates hatred and anti vaxxers clearly is not just a US phenomenon. Stupidity is a human problem. Not a geographical one.

The problem is that y'all think this is just those unruly "anti-science" Trump supporters, when in fact, this might be a grave miscalculation on your part. Not only are their signs that not all these protests nationwide are just rightwingers, but as the economic agony drags on and more and more folks become unruly about being trapped in their homes, this could all impact the 2020 election outcome. I wouldn't at all underestimate that if I were an anti-Trumper like you.

[lilpixieofterror]

The problem is that y'all think this is just those unruly "anti-science" Trump supporters, when in fact, this might be a grave miscalculation on your part. Not only are their signs that not all these protests nationwide are just rightwingers, but as the economic agony drags on and more and more folks become unruly about being trapped in their homes, this could all impact the 2020 election outcome. I wouldn't at all underestimate that if I were an anti-Trumper like you.

Our friendly Trump supporters are CNN:

(CNN) If the coronavirus pandemic continues to drive unemployment levels as high as predicted, homelessness will increase 40% to 45% by the end of the year, according to an analysis by a Columbia University economics professor.

That would mean 250,000 more people in the US would experience homelessness compared with last year, bringing the total number of those experiencing homelessness to above 800,000.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/15/us/ho...rnd/index.html

Meh, what’s a few hundred thousand homeless people? We stopped the spread!

[Starlight]

Anybody who is even minimally informed shouldn't find this at all surprising...

...that number [of Covid deaths] is a dramatic overcount.

Everyone who is even minimally informed is aware that most countries hard hit by Covid are seriously struggling with regard to the fact they have been significantly under-counting the deaths caused by Covid.

Yet, here is MM, with his usual links to anti-fact propaganda outlets, claiming the exact opposite.

Why do you have to be so constantly wrong MM? And not just wrong. Extra, extra stupidly absurdly wrong. Constantly. About pretty much literally everything. To the point where if you claimed the sky was blue it would be pretty safe to assume the exact opposite was true.