Ok I understand that. But then surely that contradicts all these people who say "We still can't travel! We still need masks! The vaccine won't stop the spread!"
Because if it reduces the likelihood of catching it by 95% when that likelihood is already pretty low, and the survival rate is over 99%, then the chances of a random person dying from it are almost non existent.
For arguments sake, lets say we had no vaccines, and 10% of the population caught the coof in a year. If the death rate is 1% (probably a lot lower but we'll say 1% for the sake of this), then that's 0.1% of the population who would die per year. With an average lifespan of around 80, you'd expect 1-2% of the population to die of natural causes each year anyway. So if you take away 95% of cases, you're also taking away roughly 95% of deaths. Meaning there would be like 0.005% of the population dying of the coof per year. So that means like 1 in 3000 deaths in a given year would be cause by the coof.
If that is the case, why would we still need lockdowns and masks? I'm being really generous with numbers here too so it's probably a lot less than what I'm thinking.
I'm just kind of asking rhetorical questions, I know it's never been about the virus.
Ok I understand that. But then surely that contradicts all these people who say "We still can't travel! We still need masks! The vaccine won't stop the spread!"
Because if it reduces the likelihood of catching it by 95% when that likelihood is already pretty low, and the survival rate is over 99%, then the chances of a random person dying from it are almost non existent.
For arguments sake, lets say we had no vaccines, and 10% of the population caught the coof in a year. If the death rate is 1% (probably a lot lower but we'll say 1% for the sake of this), then that's 0.1% of the population who would die per year. With an average lifespan of around 80, you'd expect 1-2% of the population to die of natural causes each year anyway. So if you take away 95% of cases, you're also taking away roughly 95% of deaths. Meaning there would be like 0.005% of the population dying of the coof per year. So that means like 1 in 3000 deaths in a given year would be cause by the coof.
If that is the case, why would we still need lockdowns and masks? I'm being really generous with numbers here too so it's probably a lot less than what I'm thinking.
I'm just kind of asking rhetorical questions, I know it's never been about the virus.