Yesterday’s blog on the coincidental evolution hypothesis mentioned a 2014 Aeon article: When bacteria kill us, it’s more accident than assassination. I argued that the same ratio applies to viruses: “Sometimes, a virus kills its host. This is by accident and not by intent. A virus needs its host.” This might be the only way to explain the asymptomatic Covid-19 anomaly. See picture below for details of this anomaly.
In my view, the c.5% Covid fatality rate is (very) high. The anomaly, however, is that only about 5% of any population faces this c.5% fatality rate. Combined, it explains the accumulated average fatality rate in most countries of about 0.2% to 0.3%. Even on a global scale: 8 billion x 0,25% = 20 million deaths. Currently, we are at 4 million deaths which is probably too low due to incorrect, incomplete and/or late reporting.
My diagram above explains the discussions between both groups. The asymptomatic group focuses on the accumulated 0.25% fatality on a national level (ie, macro). The symptomatic group focuses on its c.5% fatality risk (ie, micro). In general, the differences between the micro and macro perspective are (very) large. It doesn’t help that many – if not most – people are even unaware of asymptomatic virus carriers.
The rather high fatality risk of c.5% for symptomatic virus carriers might result from a genetically engineered virus at a BSL-4 lab. Its release would have been an accident rather than an assassination (biological warfare).
So far, we have no clue how to determine who belongs to which group. As a result, social distancing is essential for limiting the overall consequences (eg, fatalities, hospitalizations).
A major disadvantage of this approach is that the impact will last longer. The more you prevent virus infections, the longer the virus will wander around as a virus has one objective: infect c.100% of the population. Also see my 2020 blog on the mission, goals, strategy, tactics and operations of viruses.
I suppose that governments prefer using fear about the 5% of their population rather than educate the remaining 95%. Perhaps, using fear facilitates inoculations and social distancing. If I can explain this to you then so could and should they.
Note: all markings (bold, italic underlining) by LO unless stated otherwise.