>>5065>a sizeable casualty rate should be sufficient data for that, no?
Of course not, no.
Not for a claim of 'likely'. I'd consider likely to represent more than 50%, at bear minimum, and realistically at least 75%.
If you want to say it can
cause people to end up in the hospital, sure. Especially the elderly and those with pre-existing medical issues, or weakened immune systems.>Because the virus doesn't just pack its bags and leave and we still have no proper way to deal with it.
Yes, obviously. Thus the statement I made in >>5064 right before
what you're quoting here, about how it was to "delay".
You cannot get rid of viruses by quarantining the general population if the virus is already present. You only delay it.>If we give up now, we could have as well done nothing special when it started.
If we "give up now", we'd be doing exactly what we said we were going to do
Nobody, not a single person I know of, ever said we need to quarantine indefinitely until there is a cure.
It was always to flatten the curve.
Do you know what flattening the curve means, or are you uninformed on the particulars of this item? It was all over the media, pretty well plastered at every level, so I'm going to have to say, I'll be quite surprised if you somehow managed to miss it.> Let it rage and kill off a good part of the population but at least we still have our freedom, huh?
If it's a choice between let it rage and kill off a portion of the population, or quarantine for ages and let economic deprevation and food shortages on top
of the virus that will not just magically go away not to mention general civil unrest killing off the population, the choice is rather easy, isn't it?
It's quite literally "kill 50 people" vs "kill 50 people later, and also hundreds of other people on top of that".>Sure, it sucks for you if you get sick, but you're gonna infect other people who don't want to get sick and who might likely die.
Then they should be quarantining themselves.
This is the thing that I do not get.
So many people echo this argument as though it makes any kind of rational sense.
Listen: If I drive a car, there's a risk I might get hit by someone. I accept that risk by getting in to my car and driving.
It would be utter madness to say to everyone "Nobody gets to drive a car, because he's scared he might get hit by someone". If I'm scared, I shouldn't be driving, I absolutely shouldn't force everyone else to stop just because of me.