Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="seebs" data-source="post: 7942539" data-attributes="member: 61529">It isn't in and of itself. The curve is quite likely to eventually get fairly close to zero. It might take a long time. But flattening the curve reduces the total harm during the time the disease is active. Again, look at the charts of St. Louis and Philadelphia during the 1918 flu. Flattening the curve meant that half as many people died.And the graph eventually went to zero, even though we didn't have any of the tools then that we do now.Slowing it down gives us time to develop a supply of people with immunity, it gives us time to work on antibodies and vaccines (some researchers claim to have isolated antibodies for it, already!), and also reduces the number of people who get killed. Sure, it'll still be bad, but it'll be way less bad, and it's also the only thing most people can do anything about personally.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="seebs, post: 7942539, member: 61529"] It isn't in and of itself. The curve is quite likely to eventually get fairly close to zero. It might take a long time. But flattening the curve [I]reduces the total harm during the time the disease is active[/I]. Again, look at the charts of St. Louis and Philadelphia during the 1918 flu. Flattening the curve meant that [I]half as many people died[/I]. And the graph eventually went to zero, even though we didn't have [I]any[/I] of the tools then that we do now. Slowing it down gives us time to develop a supply of people with immunity, it gives us time to work on antibodies and vaccines (some researchers claim to have isolated antibodies for it, already!), and also reduces the number of people who get killed. Sure, it'll still be bad, but it'll be way [I]less[/I] bad, and it's also the only thing most people can do anything about personally. [/QUOTE]

Verification