正文翻譯

圖

評論翻譯

If we ignore the Spanish Flu pandemic - then Heart Disease is the most lethal disease in the USA - killing 655,000/year, Cancer kills 600,000 - if we give Heart Disease a ‘10’ and Cancer a ‘9’ - then COVID scores about a ‘5’ out of ten.
BUT “AGEIsm”:
Rightly or wrongly, a lot of the spread of COVID has been put down to younger people - who are less likely to die from COVID ignoring the “no partying, wear masks” rules. This is CLEARLY because they rate COVID lower on the scale than the people aged 50 and above who are much more likely to die from it.
So what scale can we use if different people rate the disease differently?
BUT “TERROR LEVEL”:
When we compare the death rates from COVID and Ebola in West Africa - we SHOULD rate COVID much higher than Ebola - but I 100% guarantee that people living far from that area would put Ebola MUCH higher on the scale.

如果我們忽略西班牙流感大流行，那么心臟病是美國最致命的疾病，每年殺死655,000人，癌癥殺死600,000人，如果我們給心臟病定為“10” ，給癌癥定為“9”，那么新冠疫情大約是“5”。
“年齡歧視” :
不管對錯與否，很多新冠病毒的傳播都被歸咎于年輕人，他們不太可能因忽視“不參加聚會，戴面具”的規(guī)定而死亡。這很明顯是因為他們對新冠疫情的評分低于50歲及以上的人群，而這些人更有可能死于該疾病。
那么，如果不同的人對疾病的評價不同，我們可以使用什么標(biāo)準(zhǔn)呢？
“恐怖程度” :
當(dāng)我們比較西非的新冠疫情和埃博拉的死亡率時，我們應(yīng)該會把新冠疫情的死亡率排得比埃博拉的死亡率高得多的位置上，但是我百分百保證，生活在遠(yuǎn)離該地區(qū)的人們會把埃博拉的死亡率排在更高的級別上。

The reason is (I believe) that if you catch Ebola - you’re very likely to die - but if you catch COVID, it’s much less likely. However, even in places like Guinea where Ebola has struck hard - you’re much more likely to catch COVID but more likely to recover from it.
So should a disease with a low probability of you getting it but a high mortality rate score higher than a disease which spreads like wildfire, but has a 95% recovery rate?
What about AIDS - where only certain groups of people are at risk. A gay, intravenous drug-using, promiscuous male has to put AIDS further up the scale than a straight, non-drug-addicted woman who is in a stable relationship.
Their fear level is predicated by their risk levels again - and we don’t have a one-size-fits-all scale.
SHOULD IT EVEN BE A LINEAR SCALE?

原因是(我相信)如果你感染了埃博拉病毒，你很有可能會死亡，但是如果你感染了新冠病毒，這種可能性就小得多了。然而，即使在像幾內(nèi)亞這樣埃博拉病毒肆虐的地方，你也更有可能感染上新冠病毒，但也更有可能從中恢復(fù)過來。
那么，一種患病概率很低但死亡率很高的疾病，是否應(yīng)該比野火般傳播但卻有95%的康復(fù)率的疾病排名更高呢？
那么艾滋病呢？只有特定的人群處于危險之中。一個靜脈注射毒品，濫交的同性戀男性和有穩(wěn)定關(guān)系，異性戀，不吸毒的女人相比，前者肯定會把艾滋病放在一個更高的排名。
他們的恐懼程度再次取決于他們的風(fēng)險水平，我們沒有一個一刀切的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。
它應(yīng)該是線性標(biāo)尺嗎？

Sied Talebinejad former Freelancer, self-employed, web development
9 if you have an awful immune system or you're likely vulnerable to any kind of disorder or disease for that matter…
9 if you're an elderly person since many of them are suffering from the above
1 if you're a younger person or even middle age as long as you're born healthy like the majority of usually are, and avoid drinking, smoking, eating way too much junk food and processed food and exercise regularly or at least try to. Basically, you try to lead a normal healthy life, so you have nothing to worry about.
It's pretty pathetic that in American society people treat this virus as if it's the bubonic plague. The majority of us want to get on with our ordinary lives and here we have politicians scaremongering and overexaggerating the situation to instill fear, panic and feelings of helplessness to bring people under their exploitive control. First BLM, now this nonsense…

【回答】前自由職業(yè)者，個體戶，網(wǎng)絡(luò)開發(fā)
如果你的免疫系統(tǒng)很糟糕，或者你可能容易受到任何疾病或疾病的影響的話，是9。
如果你是一個老年人，他們中的許多人都遭受以上痛苦的話，是9。
如果你是一個年輕人，甚至是中年人，只要你像大多數(shù)人一樣健康地出生，并且避免飲酒、吸煙、避免吃太多的垃圾食品和加工食品以及經(jīng)常鍛煉，或者至少嘗試這樣做?；旧希阍囍^一種正常健康的生活，所以你沒有什么可擔(dān)心的。是1。
在美國社會，人們把這種病毒當(dāng)作黑死病來對待，真是可悲。我們中的大多數(shù)人都想繼續(xù)我們的日常生活，而現(xiàn)在卻有政客們在危言聳聽和過度夸大局勢，以灌輸恐懼、恐慌和無助感，將人們置于他們的剝削控制之下。先是黑命貴，現(xiàn)在又是這些胡說八道...

The majority of my family members and close friends who got it were fine. They survived as annoying as it was. I even know a few people with preexisting health conditions who survived it and it wasn't as bad as they had originally feared. It's going to vary obviously person to person, body to body, but I'm sick and tired of Western idiots who try to scaremonger and advocate for shutting down the economy when millions of jobs are at stake.?
In China and most of Asia, people have moved on with their lives and solved the problems immediately, whereas in the US politicians on both side of the debate intentionally help spread the disease. Moreover, in some nations like Iran, the people have chosen to ignore scaremongering of politicians regarding the virus and very few actually became ill and despite China, Iran, Italy, Spain among others suffering from the virus during the initial outbreak, the number of sick people and deaths have been proportionally fair and normal compared to what we're witnessing in the US
People need to stop panicking and worrying. Instead, wear a mask when in front of strangers and coworkers, social distance for the moment being, continue going to school, college, work and like we've historically have always been doing. Shutting down an entire economy is incredibly irrational and barbaric. How does starving to death solve the issue? It doesn't!

我的大多數(shù)家庭成員和親密的朋友都得了這種病，他們都很好。雖然很煩人，但還是活了下來。我甚至認(rèn)識一些已經(jīng)存在健康問題的人，他們幸存了下來，而且并不像他們最初擔(dān)心的那樣糟糕。這種情況因人而異，但是我已經(jīng)厭倦了那些西方的白癡，他們試圖在數(shù)百萬工作機會岌岌可危的情況下散布恐慌，鼓吹封鎖經(jīng)濟。
在中國和大多數(shù)亞洲國家，人們繼續(xù)他們的生活，并立即解決了問題，而在美國，雙方爭論的政治家都在故意幫助傳播這種疾病。此外，在像伊朗這樣的一些國家，人們選擇忽視政客們關(guān)于病毒的危言聳聽，很少有人真正生病，盡管中國、伊朗、意大利、西班牙等國在最初的疫情爆發(fā)期間受到病毒感染，但與我們在美國目睹的情況相比，病人和死亡人數(shù)在比例上是公平和正常的。
人們需要停止恐慌和擔(dān)憂。取而代之的是在陌生人和同事面前戴上口罩，暫時保持社交距離，繼續(xù)上學(xué)，上大學(xué)，工作，就像我們以前一直做的那樣。封鎖整個經(jīng)濟體是非常不理性和野蠻的。餓死怎么能解決這個問題？不可能！

Mike Brant Retired Geezer
I’d rate it at an 9, currently. I answered this question months ago, and I’m increasing my level of concern.
It is becoming clear to me that because we are deep in this medical crisis, the medical community is utterly focused on acute symptoms - on keeping patients alive - and completely unable to deal with the fact that this virus can test negative and somehow still be wreaking havoc. While this might be a failure of the testing, which is usually a nasopharyngeal swab after all, and not a blood test

【回答】退休老人
目前我給它打了9分。幾個月前，我回答了這個問題，現(xiàn)在我正增加我的關(guān)注程度。
我越來越清楚地認(rèn)識到，由于我們深陷于這場醫(yī)療危機之中，醫(yī)學(xué)界完全專注于急性癥狀，維持病人的生命，而完全無法面對這樣一個事實，即這種病毒可能檢測為陰性，還以某種方式在造成嚴(yán)重破壞。雖然這可能是檢測的失敗，畢竟通常是鼻咽腔拭子，而不是血液檢測。

Jeffrey Werbock musician, lecturer
It’s hard to know what you are actually asking; by “serious” do you mean medically, socially, economically, psychologically? Let’s take medically serious first. For those who get infected, there seems to be a small but significant minority who get really sick from it then recover, an even smaller but still significant minority seem to have long term symptoms and this is referred to as long covid-19. An even smaller but still quite significant minority die from this new disease. I think that is pretty serious even before we compare those stats to some other disease. The most serious cases which entail long covid-19 and death appear to be caused by blood clots. A lot of microscopic blood clots in the lungs will mimic life threatening pneumonia and can kill by triggering a cytokine storm that causes the victim to drown in their own fluids.
Socially it is pretty devastating as you read reports on the misery inflicted by the lockdowns and the damage done to relationships, careers, friendships and mental health. Economically, probably you know as much as anyone the damage already done and yet to be done by this epidemic. Psychologically we are all living with a new fear. Pretty serious, I would say. Is it as serious as climate change? Water / soil / air pollution? Nuclear war? Big asteroid? No. But it is, statistically, much worse than the earthquake of Dec 26, 2004 that killed a quarter million in southeast Asia.

【回答】音樂家，講師
很難知道你實際上在問什么；你所說的“嚴(yán)重”是指醫(yī)學(xué)上、社會上、經(jīng)濟上、心理上的嗎？讓我們先談?wù)勧t(yī)學(xué)上的嚴(yán)重問題。對于那些被感染的人來說，似乎有一小部分但很重要的是少數(shù)人真的因為感染而患重病然后康復(fù)了，甚至更少但很重要的是少數(shù)人似乎有長期的癥狀，這被稱為長期新冠肺炎。死于這種新疾病的人數(shù)甚至更少，但仍然相當(dāng)多。我認(rèn)為這很嚴(yán)重，即使在我們將這些數(shù)據(jù)與其他疾病相比較之前。肺部的大量微小血凝塊會模擬危及生命的肺炎，并且可以通過引發(fā)細(xì)胞因子風(fēng)暴，從而導(dǎo)致受害者溺死在自己的體液中。
從社會角度來說，當(dāng)你閱讀關(guān)于封鎖帶來的痛苦以及對人際關(guān)系、事業(yè)、友誼和心理健康造成傷害的報告時，這是相當(dāng)具有破壞性的。在經(jīng)濟上，你可能和其他人一樣知道這場疫情已經(jīng)造成的破壞和尚未造成的破壞。心理上，我們都生活在一種新的恐懼中。我會說，非常嚴(yán)重。