Originally Posted by
SMT Member
It's been pointed out just a few post above your, that death rates are largely meaningless - it's the rate of new infections that's important. And where e.g. Germany (c. 400) Italy (ca. 500), France (ca. 100) and Spain (ca. 300) seemingly are getting the spread under control, the UK is at around 2000.
PS
87,9% (!) of all Covid-19 deaths have been 70+ years old, and usually suffering from one or more chronic diseases. Thus, the prudent and logical approach would have been to lock that age group down whilst allowing the rest of society to continue more or less as per normal. Why that hasn't been done is one of the great mysteries of how this has been handled.
Errrm so >12% of deaths UNDER THE CURRENT ARRANGEMENTS have been of folk <70 - do you not think this would rise? It's not the death rate that is controlled by lockdown but the rate of infection. Your suggestion would spread the disease far faster amongst the freely roaming population, thus ramping up the numbers of dead. Also in passing, removing from the population vast numbers of workers who become ill but do not die, thus having the dire economic effect that you are seeking to avoid.