Hab ich grad auf fb gefunden (Stammt von einer australischen Seite): „How can a disease with less than 1% mortality shut down the country?“
There are three problems with this question.
-
It neglects the law of large numbers.
-
It assumes that one of two things happen: you die or you’re 100% fine.
-
It ignores that the survival rate is a variable.
1
Australia has a population of 25 Million. If one percent of the population dies, that’s 250000 people dead. 1/4 million people dead would monkey wrench the economy no matter what. That more than doubles the number of annual deaths all at once. The amount of people who die is determined by how deadly the disease is - yes others are worse but it’s not great - and how contagious a disease is. You’ll find a beautiful visualisation of this @ https://informationisbeautiful.net/…/the-microbescope…/
Yes SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to rip through whole populations and then kill shitloads of people. We can literally see that around the globe.
2
The second bit is people keep talking about deaths. Deaths, deaths, deaths. Only one percent die! Just one percent! One is a small number! No big deal, right?
What about the people who survive? Survival does not mean full recovery. For every single person who dies*:
• 19 more require hospitalisation.
• 18 of those will have permanent heart damage for the rest of their lives.
• 10 will have permanent lung damage.
• 3 will have strokes.
• 2 will have neurological damage that leads to chronic weakness and loss of coordination.
• 2 will have neurological damage that leads to loss of cognitive function.
So now all of a sudden, that „but it’s only 1% fatal!“ becomes:
• 250000 people dead.
• 4750000 hospitalised.
• 4500000 people with permanent heart damage.
• 2500000 people with permanent lung damage.
• 750000 people with strokes.
• 500000 people with muscle weakness.
• 500000 people with loss of cognitive function.
Obviously some people have a combination of those unfortunate outcomes.
*this is an ongoing pandemic. Don’t be upset if you’ll find more recent research which adjusts these numbers or adds additional long term damages we didn’t know about.
3
The third part is that this 1% isn’t always that number. The Infection Fatality Rate (IFR**) is not a constant. Some countries managed to press it down to 0.6% with improvements in the healthcare system as well as lockdown measures. This 0.6% IFR means a survival rate of 99.4% NOT a recovery rate of 99.4% - the covidiots get this wrong all the time and lockdowns & public health measures are part of the reasons WHY it’s only 0.6%.
However if you let it rip, that number goes the other way far beyond 5% because the system will be overrun. Then people will die which could have been treated & saved by a healthcare system which is not beyond capacity. And just to be clear: That also means a lot of younger people will die who aren’t in the „let’s sacrifice nanna for the economy“-age bracket. That was the whole point with flattening the curve but obviously that got wiped from the covidiots’ memory.
**The IFR is different to the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) which is per definition higher than IFR.
Bottom-line:
These are the things which the covidiots who keep going on about „only 1% dead, what’s the big deal?“ don’t get. The choice is not „ruin the economy to save 1%“. If we reopen without any measures, the economy will be destroyed anyway. The Australian economy cannot survive everyone getting COVID-19.
…
