The Lemon Fool

zico wrote:
So - if we all became super-healthy and fit with great doctors, early diagnoses and no waiting times, we'd save 110,000 lives.
Compare that with the actions taken since the start of the pandemic, where we've almost certainly saved 270,000+ lives.

Much of what you say is true, but the 110,000 wouldn't be a one-off, the 270,000 is. You can't just make that comparison as a numerical one alone.

In addition you need to look at both sides of the analysis, the costs and the benefits. Those 270,000 lives saved might have come at a cost 10 times greater than the measures to save the 110,000. Without addressing those flaws, and just focusing on the literal numbers, your conclusions are logically suspect.

NeilW wrote:

vrdiver wrote: What other comparisons can help put the impact of Covid-19 into perspective?

We lose 2000 people per day normally. That's over 10,000 per week, and is normally elevated above that at this time of year.

The Spanish Flu killed 228,000 people in the UK over two years in 1918/19, which population adjusted would be equivalent to 350,000 people at our current population levels.

Death happens, and some years it happens more than others. It is that we have to keep in perspective.

NeilW

And from a slightly wider perspective
- Estimated that Spanish flu killed 1 in 7 of the Indian population
- When the Conquistadors landed in the Americas in 1492, they brought flu with them, to which the local population had never been exposed - guess at 90% mortality? Still, they gave the "Old World" syphilis in exchange