4 ms·

0.05% is tiny. If you extrapolate any top 10 causes of disease death to the world population, it's holocaust-scale. It doesn't mean we impose severe restrictio

0.05% is tiny. If you extrapolate any top 10 causes of disease death to the world population, it's holocaust-scale. It doesn't mean we impose severe restrictions, that significantly reduce quality of life, on the other 99.95%.

FeepingCreature 5y ago
> 0.05% is tiny. If you extrapolate any top 10 causes of disease death to the world population, it's holocaust-scale. Yes it is. If we could fix any of those with severe but temporary restrictions, I'd be all for it.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  None of these problems, including COVID, could be permanently fixed with the COVID restrictions. COVID is endemic. The reduction in quality of life for the 99.95% as a result of the restrictions is far too high a price to pay even if it saved the entire 0.05% of this demographic who die from COVID. The costs to mental health, economic well-being, education, as a result of the restrictions, are also staggering. Any rational person would trade a 0.05% increase in chance of premature death, which is only 1/2,000, to live without the COVID-motivated restrictions for the remainder of their 80 year lifespan. Basic math tells you that. 0.05% of an 80 year lifespan is only 14 days. Would you endure all the COVID-related restrictions, for your entire life, just to add 14 days to your life? And this thought experiment is under the absolute best case scenario for the restrictions which is that they completely eliminate the risk of dying from covid which they do not in reality. I would bet for most people, the COVID restrictions reduce quality of life by at least 5%. Meaning people would be willing to shorten their lifespan by 5% in order to not live with them. A 0.05% risk of death doesn't even come close to justifying the restrictions. The simplistic narrative that supports these restrictions is simply wrong. It's unscientific and irrational and only supported due to the inertia of public opinion.

FeepingCreature 5y ago

> 0.05% is tiny. If you extrapolate any top 10 causes of disease death to the world population, it's holocaust-scale. Yes it is. If we could fix any of those with severe but temporary restrictions, I'd be all for it.

CryptoPunk 5y ago
None of these problems, including COVID, could be permanently fixed with the COVID restrictions. COVID is endemic. The reduction in quality of life for the 99.95% as a result of the restrictions is far too high a price to pay even if it saved the entire 0.05% of this demographic who die from COVID. The costs to mental health, economic well-being, education, as a result of the restrictions, are also staggering. Any rational person would trade a 0.05% increase in chance of premature death, which is only 1/2,000, to live without the COVID-motivated restrictions for the remainder of their 80 year lifespan. Basic math tells you that. 0.05% of an 80 year lifespan is only 14 days. Would you endure all the COVID-related restrictions, for your entire life, just to add 14 days to your life? And this thought experiment is under the absolute best case scenario for the restrictions which is that they completely eliminate the risk of dying from covid which they do not in reality. I would bet for most people, the COVID restrictions reduce quality of life by at least 5%. Meaning people would be willing to shorten their lifespan by 5% in order to not live with them. A 0.05% risk of death doesn't even come close to justifying the restrictions. The simplistic narrative that supports these restrictions is simply wrong. It's unscientific and irrational and only supported due to the inertia of public opinion.