5 ms·
I'd argue the opposite. If it's insignificant at all, it's only because of our response to it. Lots of people worked very, very hard for us to sit here typing "
by madrox 4y ago
I'd argue the opposite. If it's insignificant at all, it's only because of our response to it. Lots of people worked very, very hard for us to sit here typing "it wasn't that bad" unless you believe that our global covid response did very little to change the outcome. If you do believe that, though, there's probably little point in continuing this thread.
- tasuki 4y agoYes, lots of people worked very hard to make the outcome better. I'm grateful to them for helping protect my aged relations. They did make a difference. With that out, the Covid-19 pandemic, even without any measures at all, was still incredibly mild. Wikipedia says 0.1-0.3% global population lost [0]. It would have been I don't know, perhaps 0.5% without measures? Compare to the other pandemics on that list, you routinely see ones that wipe out 20-50% of the regional population - now that is significantly bad. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_epidemics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_epidemics
- astrange 4y agoThose other pandemics are before we had any ability to defend ourselves or even know what was going on. SARS-1 and MERS are quite fatal too but we stopped them from spreading.
- tasuki 4y ago> Those other pandemics are before we had any ability to defend ourselves or even know what was going on. Yes, of course. And I'm simply adding that Covid-19 would be nowhere as bad as those even if we had no ability to defend ourselves.