Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dibt 1269 days ago
> '2 weeks to slow the spread'

Wasn't that to prevent over-crowding of hospitals? Were hospitals not over-crowded?

1 comments

Aside from a few urban hospitals which were turned into COVID case dumping grounds in the early weeks, no, they weren't. Hospital employment tanked at the beginning of lockdowns and has only just recovered to pre-Covid levels: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES6562200001
It doesn't seem like you've said anything backed by facts.

The number of employees in hospitals dropping at the start of the pandemic supports that hospitals were under extra stress.

Also, it's logical to assume that a crowded and understaffed hospital is a bad place to be when there's an airborne disease spreading. Hard to argue against suggesting people do everything can to stay home for two weeks to not get a new under-researched disease in those conditions.

If these measures had actually lasted for only two weeks we'd hardly still be discussing them in the waning days of 2022.
You're still in quarantine?

The original comment I was replying to was implying 'two weeks to stop the spread' was a conspiracy.

Nice to see people downvoting me for a reasonable comment, while I can't downvote them. Typical for HN. Feel free to downvote this one.