> we should treat flu more seriously Agreed (though in the US we do have a yearly nation-wide vaccination program, imperfect as it is, and largely staff and eq

> we should treat flu more seriously Agreed (though in the US we do have a yearly nation-wide vaccination program, imperfect as it is, and largely staff and equip hospitals to handle the high-water mark of cases). > I think making predictions on how many people "could have died" when we're doing extremely limited testing isn't helpful. I disagree with that. The alternative to making imperfect predictions (predictions are imperfect by nature) is to not make predictions. Without predictions you can't make reasonable decisions to direct your future. Of course, when your predictions are too far off you can't make good decisions to direct your future either, but that just suggests you should try to make the best predictions you can (hence the science and study of epidemiology), not that you shouldn't make predictions. If you don't make predictions (or you make them based on hunches or by other low quality means) you're just throwing yourself randomly into the future and are unlikely to get good outcomes.