Covid

In Australia in 2017 the “common” flu deaths was 1,255 with 251,142 lab-confirmed cases of flu. A death rate of 0.5%.
(source: https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/3303.0~2017~Main%20Features~Deaths%20due%20to%20influenza~5)So far, of all countries, Germany has had the most “aggressive” (read; intensive) testing for coronavirus. The number of deaths to date in Germany is 267 and the number of clinically proven cases is 43,938. A death rate of 0.6%
(source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/)There’s plenty of error in these numbers. The biggest issues:1. Unreported clinically proven cases not included in the data, for both coronavirus and especially the common flu, since there usually isn’t the same degree of panic associated with common flu symptoms. Also, for both common flu and coronavirus, there are many unreported asymptomatic cases.2. The deaths recorded against these diseases probably needs to be weighted for each case, based on the severity of the underlying conditions. That is, most people that died had pre-existing conditions so, for example, a very morbid person maybe shouldn’t be counted as one death, but a small fraction of one since the virus wasn’t the major cause of death but just the last straw. This way the severity of the illnesses being compared could be factored into the statistics.Even allowing for these and other sources of error, the raw death rates for the common flu and the coronavirus currently are very similar despite the fact that many people have partial immunity to the common flu strains, so probably don’t get as sick as they otherwise could.So the real issue with the coronavirus isn’t its morbidity. Rather it is its virulence. Without an vaccines or inherent resistance the virus is supposedly free to spread completely through the population. Especially since it spreads during the symptomless early stages of infection.For example the population of Australia is 24,600,000. If 100% of the people caught the coronavirus and the death rate remained at the German rate of 0.6%, then we could expect 149,488 deaths in the first wave.Note, in 2017 the total number of reported flu cases in Australia was just 251,142, just 1% of the population. That is, without any lockdowns, closures, social distancing and the like, only 1% of the population caught the flu (although this is probably a lower bound to the true figure, because of unreported cases).Assuming the coronavirus mutated it would come back around and each time it would have a lower death rate, and infect less of the population because of (a) inherent partial immunity, and (b) vaccines as developed by then. After a few years it would become just another “flu”.The issue with the coronavirus is that the peak in the first wave of infections and deaths could totally overwhelm the medical system, leading to deaths that otherwise might not have occurred. By way of example, in Italy the death rate from Coronavirus is 10.2%, up from the German baseline of 0.6%. This is primarily a result of the medical system getting overwhelmed, but also the quality of the medical system and the underlying poor health of the elderly population could be contributing factors. The major difference though is probably that the Italians are probably not doing much testing, so the number of reported cases is drastically under-recorded leading to an exaggerated death rate.Our government-led imperatives to slow down the spread of the virus are all based on the proposition that if they do not do so, then the population will be very ready to blame the politicians for any subsequent unnecessary deaths.Country-to-country comparisons will give the electorate the ammunition they need in order to blame the politicians for any lack of action.Since the politicians are elected or rejected by the people, it’s quite Pavlovian of them to behave the way that they are now. Basically, it’s “bugger the economy” for a while.However at some point, re-winding the economy backwards in time (as measured by consumption per capita of energy and raw materials) will cross over some emotional threshold where a majority of the people will consider the effort too great for the benefits of saving yet more people from an untimely death.My guess (based on living a few years) is that after a few weeks of the “big re-set” that we have already wound back to 1990. I don’t think the Australian people will be willing to go back past 1960, no matter how many lives that doesn’t save.The real trick for the silly buggers “in charge” will be to finesse the attenuation of the economy so that the medical system can “just cope”. This way, no unnecessary deaths will occur. As the population gets more resistance and vaccines become available then the economy can slowly adjust back to its previous completely unsustainable state (based on ever-increasing high levels of personal consumption).Of course, nothing will be learned.

The party will stop one day. For good.