You ignored my question, you already said less than 1% is unacceptable, and just repeated yourself. Forget COVID, I'm referring to a future theoretical disease - at what death rate does a nationally enforced lockdown of a few weeks become acceptable?

10 times the rate of the flu is a good basis I think, or 1% death rate. But confirmed, not like right now where we all know we haven't counted a lot of people in that number of cases and therefore the death rate is a lot lower.

Another thing, it's not weeks, we're talking months here, May 1st it's not gonna be back to business as it was before.

Currently reported cases in New York is 160038

Multiply by 100, get 16 million

Population of New York state is 19 million

Maybe there's still more to learn about the COVID-19.

Remember, this virus has circulated weeks before the confinement, so don't you think a doubling R0 have completely changed the number of cases that have been modeled so far, and therefore the CFR?

Of course we have much to learn and this new R0 number is part of that learning process, but imo, we can't think like 2 days ago when we thought the R0 was between 2 and 3.

Still, the total reported cases in the US is 460k, so if there are 100 unreported cases for every reported case, that's 46 million, or 1 in 5 people.

But I'm open to new evidence. At the very least, we'll know in a week if this still makes sense. ;-)

I'm just reading about that city in Germany, Gangelt, where they did those blood tests to 1000 people, they found out that 2% are actively infected, and 14% have the antibodies (indicating a prior infection):

https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/04/09/999015/blood-tes...

So we're talking 1 in 7 for that particular city.