Austin_Bill
2,500+ Posts
Using a population of 10 million, a 0.0015% death rate would be 1,500. Take off the controls and maybe the percentages quintuples and the rate becomes a still miniscule 0.0075%. Now you have 7,500 deaths. But since the virus spreads exponentially without controls, the death rate increases over time as greater numbers of the population get exposed.
The counter argument is that people would eventually starve without resuming economic activity, maybe in even greater numbers.
Your point that the virus is practically harmless is wrong. In fact it’s deadly. It’s just that the alternative of sheltering in could be worse.
The idea is that people can go back to normal while simultaneously changing behavior to reduce spreading the virus. This is where China, Singapore, and South Korea are. But cases are starting to recur there again.
Even if your numbers are right, that is still less than half of the number of people that die on Texas roads each year. I'm still trying to understand why we don't start to harvest the Antibodies from people who have already gotten the Corona Virus.