This while "not that many people have died stop overreacting" stuff makes no sense to me. The whole point is to stop it before more people die. We have testing shortages and world leaders such as in China and Iran buried need about the disease, which has led to thousands of deaths. If we wait for 1-3% of the world population to die before deciding it meets some statistical threshold to start reacting - then that just makes no sense. We're trying to stop people from dying - we can't bring people back after they're gone.
> All of the coronavirus deaths have been people that were going to die anyway.
Yes, all the doctors in China in their 20s, 30s, and 40s who died were just gonna die anyways, so who cares? For that matter, everyone's going to die, so it really doesn't matter, right? I'm hoping my sarcasm is apparent in my tone here, but if not; your argument is both counter-factual and full of fallacy.
> The vast majority of them have been people that were going to die soon, if not of coronavirus then of something else.
Again, this is BS.
> Is the mass panic really sensible in the face of this?
Panic isn't, but taking quick, decisive, and committed action is the only way that a crisis can be averted. If you don't understand this, I imagine you haven't had to deal with life or death decisions before. This all may blow over, but the facts DO NOT support that outlook. They all point to a bend in the hockey stick, and if we don't have a strong plan of action to mitigate this, people you know, and people I know, will die.
> The first sentence you quoted is irrefutably correct, and will remain so as long as immortality is not achieved.
Glad you agree. I imagine most of those doctors in their 20s-40s had at least 40 years of life left. Really interesting to hear that half a lifetime fits in your definition of "soon".
> If you believe the second sentence is BS, please provide evidence.
See my statement above, which extrapolates on a fact that you agree is "irrefutable".
Feel free to respond to my third paragraph as well, so as not to avoid the most important issue in this argument.
I try not to lose sleep over aspects of HN that are true of humans in general.
He had reason to believe the stercoraceous flavour, condemned by prejudice as a stink, was, in fact, most agreeable to the organs of smelling; for, that every person who pretended to nauseate the smell of another’s excretions, snuffed up his own with particular complacency; for the truth of which he appealed to all the ladies and gentlemen then present.
It is true of every cause of death, but I don't think it's meaningless. Some people's lives are being shortened, and in response we're making a much, much larger number of people's lives significantly worse.
