>0.3% is the case only after torturing statistics

Ironic, since a 0.3% (or 0.6%) fatality rate is vastly exaggerated for people in low risk groups. The only reason the number is even that high is due to the high death tolls of people in high risk groups.

That is how averages work. One could equally point out that 0.6% IFR actually underestimated the risk for some adults.

Many people shared Facebook memes of a “99.9%” survival rate not understanding that they personally were at greater risk than that. This page was available on the CDC website for quite a long time explaining the different risks in a pretty straightforward table https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investi...

> The only reason the number is even that high is due to the high death tolls of people in high risk groups.

The only reason the fatality rate is that high is because people died? What are you trying to say here? What else would it measure?

Let's try this another way. If you're healthy and under 50 your odds of dying from covid are roughly on par with being struck by lightning.

Better?

I'm neither so not really.

Ha - I wish they were respectful. In my home state, the respect was very much lacking. Whatever they could get away with was the strategy.

To say they were respectful - absolutely they were not.

Edit: They were literally advising people to snitch on each other, even neighbor on neighbor, and make sure to keep that Christmas gathering at 10 people! Last I knew that was a communist tactic. Respected us?

Edit 2: The above would be for Christmas. Earlier in the year it was much worse, don’t attend church unless you are in your car with windows shut for months.

Communist tactic is a bit ... weird .. of an association. Getting neighbors to snitch on each other is a technique every country's law enforcement uses. Or is the "See something, say something" announcement in the airport also communist? Is Texas' bounty on snitching on women who have medical procedures also communist?

Your comment would have been stronger if you didn't wave out the 1950s red scare tactics. Overall, it sounds like you were personally frustrated by the limitations - is that about what you wanted to say?

Only if you define "neighbour" to mean literally anyone, which isn't what it means.

gjsman is using the word neighbour correctly to mean someone who physically lives next to you, which is dystopian because it effectively extends the power of law enforcement inside the walls of everyone's homes to criminalize normal pro-social behaviour, and does so by manipulating and exploiting the bonds that form robust communities. It's very different to seeing someone break into a shop on the street and reporting it.

Neighbors reporting each other for crimes is a good thing. Codes of silence between neighbors are what lead communities to cover up murders and refuse to talk to police.

I suppose the actual issue here is the “pro social” behavior piece. I haven’t actually heard of any U.S. state where significant fines or enforcement of private home gathering sizes was done after a few months in March, most states relied on the honor system even if governors ordered allegedly strict restrictions (e.g. one “blue” state I traveled to required me to submit a form for travel, however, each time I went there I was never approached by police or anyone else to check my form and I easily could have never done it).

> Neighbors reporting each other for crimes is a good thing. Codes of silence between neighbors are what lead communities to cover up murders and refuse to talk to police.

People voluntarily gathering in defiance of COVID restrictions is a classic "victimless crime". Comparing it to covering up a murder is an example of the type of hyperbolic language that makes it impossible to have a rational discussion about policy.

I guarantee you regardless of which state of the 50 you're discussing, red/blue/whatever, that people still went to bars, to indoor dining, to parties. In New York the national guard was sent to SUNY Oneonta to forcibly quarantine the entire student body because the administration was unwilling to enforce lockdown.

Also, "communist tactic"? The red scare is still with us but to see that shit on HN is always alarming. If holding people accountable so that they don't sacrifice grandma and the immunocompromised for "the economy" (whose economy? certainly hasn't benefitted me) is necessary then I'll do so gladly. If you don't care for public health or the people around you why should I?

The federal government and most governors didn't do shit. It sounds like you live in one of the few places that tried, and got fucked by the sobering reality that a constant 33-40% of this country can not handle epidemiological outbreaks while we sport a pretty weak central government.

US might have a low death rate because of fancy hospitals and some of the best specialists on the planet — it never needed to infect this many people or kill a million Americans. If COVID is no big deal I don't want to have to "never forget 9/11" or whatever bullshit people refusing to vaccinate or quarantine say.

And for the dig at communism, China's zero-covid policy worked. Westerners can say the numbers are cooked, with a population of 1.4 billion you're not going to hide 1 in 3 getting infected. That's the number in the US as of the end of 2020, 1 in 3. Vietnam's zero COVID policy was also working, until they ended it for the economy. Maybe profit motives are unethical where human lives are concerned? By what calculus do you get to determine which outbreaks are worth the bare minimum of germ theory and which ones we get to sacrifice our families and neighbors to for the economy?

I'll end with the note that there are outcomes beyond death. My boyfriend and I contracted COVID before vaccines were available (he works in healthcare) and he couldn't smell or taste for a year. Made eating very difficult. My grandfather can't walk a block anymore, and hasn't been able to in months, but survived. My coworker started to lose her hair in clumps and was embarrassed to wear a wig, but survived. Personally, as a 23 year old with no comorbidities, who was fit and had no physical issues—I'm still recovering a year later. My run times aren't the same, I have a lot less lung capacity, I developed clinical depression. I lived in Argentina for a time and caught swine flu as a child. I'd easily put this as worse. During the infection even putting on a shirt hurt. I'm happy most people are vaccinated now and unlikely to have severe outcomes, but the risk of exposure was totally unnecessary.

". If holding people accountable so that they don't sacrifice grandma and the immunocompromised for "the economy"" But isn't that the point of this article and the OP? That it wasn't just about sacrificing grandma? And it wasn't just about saving the economy (although that is important a week) personally I don't think we will truly understand the cost of the lockdowns for years. But I think they're were better ways to save grandma that shutting down the world.

This may be a red state, blue state difference

> Anyone who went to an open bar or a packed church service in the USA in December 2020 can tell that governors and the courts were both very sensitive to business and religious concerns about impact on worship, business, and employment.

By December maybe, but earlier in 2020 this varied greatly by state, and there are plenty of educational, business, and religious institutions that still haven't recovered. I think people are underestimating just how much damage was done.

> 0.3% is the case only after torturing statistics or using international statistics from countries that skew younger and have fewer risk factors.

Or countries that don't keep accurate records pertaining to hospitalizations and cause of death.