>>13591016It's literally just the flu though. Maybe not exactly the same as the flu, but around 4-5 times deadlier last time I looked into the exact numbers. Initially, very early on, the estimates for IFR were as high as 3%, but newer data seems to suggest an IFR closer to 0.2%-0.7%, with the CDC citing a figure of 0.65% - which is typical for infectious diseases, for two reasons, namely that they tend to become less dangerous over time, and because early data points in an epidemic tend to come from populations with more virulent forms of the disease, just because these are the populations that doctors and epidemiologists tend to investigate first.
Looking at influenza, on the other hand, the IFR appears to be around 0.1%, according to several sources, including the CDC. Comparing those numbers, it would appear that COVID is roughly 6x deadlier than the flu. So it's definitely deadlier than the flu, but still not a very dangerous disease, and the difference in fatality rate is around half of a percentage point. The question is, should we be systematically shutting down the economy, instituting things like "mask mandates" and "vaccine mandates", giving MULTI-TRILLION dollar bailouts to Wall Street, and permanently expanding the scope of surveillance and censorship afforded to tech companies and the mainstream media, all to prevent the spread of a disease that is maybe 6x deadlier than the flu? Maybe that's how we should address the situation, but I personally think that is a bit excessive. Either way, at the very least, we need to be able to discuss the issue, and weigh pros and cons on each side of the debate. The problem is that most of the general public and the mainstream media is not interested in allowing for any sort of public discussion concerning the matter, because people like you tend to think that anyone who is critical of public health measures or the mainstream media is a far-right, scientifically illiterate conspiracy theorist.
