Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahler9th
"We should not be continuing to use even the slightest uptick in cases as justification to prolong our current state, much less, as as happened in some jurisdictions, use them to justify regressing to previous stages of lockdown or other restrictions."
Why not? Don't hospitalizations and deaths automatically follow such upticks?
|
They do. Hospitalizations do follow such "upticks" in cases, but for some time have not kept pace with the initial ratios of cases/hospitalizations/deaths. In other words, while cases are up, hospitalizations are markedly down, and deaths are dramatically down.
Yet we are now seeing an emphasis on
cases, where previous reporting was focused on hospitalizations and deaths. We are asked to believe that mere
cases are justification for continued lockdowns, or even regressions to previous lockdown levels, while we were originally told that the lockdowns and restrictions were in place to cut down on
hospitalizations and
deaths.
You know,
flattening the curve. As I stated earlier, that curve has been flattened - we now enjoy excess capacity in our hospitals, having reopened them for elective surgeries. We are "out of the woods" on that original justification - so now mere
cases are being used as the new justification. I've explained all of this already... What is it you do not understand?