Hacker News Reader

Comment by seibelj | Hacker News Reader

And yet when I suggest that we re-open spaces for the young and healthy, and let the old and infirm decide to quarantine for themselves, I'm called inhumane and callous. The elite of this country have decided this is the sacrifice we will make - sorry for your friends, hopefully they get jobs in a warehouse or manage to get on the government dole.

View on HN

I don't necessarily disagree with the premise that isolation (and support for those in that isolation) should be directed at those at greater risk, especially when Covid has such a divergent risk profile based on age and other factors.

That said, my (relatively young) friends are classically trained musicians and ballet dancers. They are still screwed if their audience, which skews older, can't attend. This dynamic exists in lots of places, e.g. keeping kids home from school is extremely detrimental to their development, but what do you do for elderly teachers and professors?

I still say, let everyone make the decision for themselves. Many old people (the majority) that get COVID don't die, but recover. They can attend performances.

I don't see why we need to destroy everyone's lives for a minority of high risk people. Let everyone make their own decisions rather than use the iron fist of government to decide for us.

It's not only high risk people who get the disease, or even only high risk people who die. And, those same "young and healthy" people you're wanting to let loose still suffer serious aftereffects. You're trivializing it by saying "only old people die," not the least because it's it's not true.

Disagree - the statistics say the vast majority of those who get COVID when they are young recover. This is why outbreaks at colleges get a lot of attention for the cases, but no follow up because no one dies. You look at the oddball death and panic over it. But this is not the norm!

Binary live-vs.-die statistics aren't the full story. This illness is known to cause lingering side effects (lungs and heart) that in particular would affect those in physically demanding careers -- e.g. musicians and dancers as was mentioned by OP.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/08/08/athletes-co...

What is the incidence rate and magnitude of COVID effects in young people? One should naturally expect such a follow up question when quantifying death and risk in public policy.

Further, those young people who don't die still take the disease back out into public with them, spreading it elsewhere. This is why simply saying "let people who think they are invulnerable do whatever" doesn't work, because even if they are in fact unkillable their actions can still result in the deaths of others.

Can you quantify how much damage the virus will do to young people, including the incidence rate of serious side effects in young people?

Because your beliefs directly challenge those who believe everyone must wear a mask, and everyone be locked down. No one can stand to be challenged anymore, and they react very negatively.

> I still say, let everyone make the decision for themselves. Many old people (the majority) that get COVID don't die, but recover. They can attend performances.

While we're at it, let's do the same with drunk driving. After all, most intoxicated drivers don't actually get into accidents and many drive large safe cars that protect them well. Why shouldn't they get to decide their own risk preference for themselves? /s

The disease also kills young people and can do significant damage even if you don't die from it.

How many young people have died so far in the US?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com