Restricting foreigners at airports may stall the propagation somewhat, but the virus is already here and will work its way through the population, no matter what.
The shutdown of public gatherings is useful only because it will slow (but not eliminate) the spread, giving our limited medical resources more room to react.
But the government is not facing the elephant in the room and the simple measure that would have the greatest mitigating effect.
A frank and measured response can keep the epidemic manageable if only the government made some hard and perhaps unpopular decisions.
Let us consider the facts.
Covid-19 is deadly to older folks and the immunocompromised, those with underlying health situations. The virus poses only a slight risk to healthy adults and is not at all dangerous to children.
These are the COVID-19 mortality rates by age calculated by the Chinese CDC:
- ages 10-19: .02% deaths
- ages 20-29 .02% deaths
- ages 30-39: .02 % deaths
- ages 40-49: .04 % deaths
- ages 50-59: 1.3 % deaths
- ages 60-69: 3.6 % deaths
- ages 70-79:. 8 % deaths
- ages 80 and over: 14.8% deaths
Of the 5,000 Covid-19 deaths so far, attributed by age
Clearly, we can see the real problem.Simply stated, 95% of all deaths due to Covid-19 occur in those over 60 years old.
- ages 10-19: 3 deaths
- ages 20-29 3 deaths
- ages 30-39: 3 deaths
- ages 40-49: 235 deaths
- ages 60-69: 654 deaths
- ages 70-79: 1,437 deaths
- 80 and over: 2,662 deaths
If we were to remove the highest at-risk group mentioned above, Covid-19 would be dangerous, but completely manageable.
The fact is that the average age of those who have died from the virus so far is 80 years old and the average age of hospitalization due to the virus is 60 years old.
Hospitals in Italy and around the world are jammed with so many elderly patients that the system cannot cope, leading to diminished outcomes and contributing to deaths that would perhaps be avoided had the system enough resources.
Governments around the world are trying to contain the virus by restricting public movement, a losing battle that won't be won because no western government could ever impose the draconian all-encompassing quarantine that saw tens of millions of citizens in China in lock down for about two months.
But there is another path, one that would allow us to manage the outbreak and preserve our hospitals to reasonably cope with the outbreak.
We must immediately impose a self-quarantine on everybody over 65 years old and those in vulnerable health categories.
Seniors would be obliged to go into home self-quarantine where they would be forced to ride out the storm. Senior residences would be put on lock down with no visitors and employees would be restricted to working in just one senior residence, reducing contamination from one home to another.
Not all seniors live alone in their own abode or a group home or residence, but for the majority in this category, such is the case.
Locking down these people will not only save many of their own lives but liberate our hospitals from being jammed up with serious and resource-hungry cases that will overwhelm our ability to fight the epidemic.
A support group of volunteers and mobilized government workers can see to those who need food delivery, medication and sundries and for those still working, immediate employment insurance.
While we cannot lock down our entire population as in China, we can take the most vulnerable and at-risk segment of our population and take them out of the firing line.
Taking care of seniors at home who require support is vastly cheaper than allowing them to get sick and cannibalize medical resources.
Nobody likes to discriminate over age, but in this case it is in everybody's interest.
As for the rest of the population, slowing down the progression is what the government should concentrate on so that our health resources are not overwhelmed. With the senior population safely quarantined and public restrictions in place, we can manage the situation.
As for myself, I'm going to be taking my own advice. I've laid in enough supplies for two months, both food and disinfecting materials and plan on placing myself in self-quarantine in my home.
The severity of the outbreak is squarely on the shoulders of seniors like myself, a group that will make or break our response to the outbreak.
It is time for the government to take real measures that can beat this epidemic and it can be done.
With all due respect, how did you come to this conclusion? Too, can the Chinese information be trusted?
ReplyDeleteTake away the 95% figure and the mortality percentages very well may be down to what they are with seasonal flu. Philip's reasoning appears sound.
ReplyDeleteThe following are the stats for the flu each year in the U.S. for the last 10 years:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html
Last year, there were about 60,000 deaths in the U.S. from the flu, with 810,000 hospitalizations.
That's over 1,000 deaths per week.
So far (as of this writing), in over 4 weeks, there have been 414 deaths and 32,356 cases of the Coronavirus in the U.S.
Does this mean it is just the beginning? Or that we have done a good job containing it so far?
Tony, it's now eight days later and New York State is in a panic. Surprised? I put a remark in the next blog about Orthodox Jews ignoring what mainstream society is doing. I also shared a story about a snowbird I know well, so take a look at that as I remarked on his observances. While Canada has too many of its own as well, America has absolutely no shortage of bumpkins, impudent ignoramuses, miscreants and just plain ol' dumbasses! No halo for you!
Delete