People really need to multiply that death rate against a population of people who are likely to be infected. And they are skipping this step for whatever reason.

A death rate of 20% isn’t bad if it’s a rare disease that has a 10 cases worldwide (2 deaths), whereas a 0.2% death rate is devastating for a highly contagious virus that spreads rapidly over the planet (millions of deaths)

That was already done, and specified in the comment.

>>“Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.”

In fact, it was the entire point of the article - this disease is so bad because the entire population of people is subject to infection, and the death and disability rate is very substantial.

>>whereas a 0.2% death rate is devastating for a highly contagious virus that spreads rapidly over the planet (millions of deaths)

We've got that. Here. In this topic and case.

So, I'm really struggling to see the point of the comment. ?

> a significant portion end up losing 7-10 IQ points just from dementia

There probably is an IQ drop, but I question this figure. I recall a study doing the rounds here which showed this figure as a ballpark and it was very low quality.

From direct accounts, the figure is likely low. A good attorney friend has a friend who used to be one of the sharpest and most witty attorneys he knew. Months after a "mild case" (no hospitalization), the friend is not all there, fading in and out - he'll literally fade in and make a witty comment almost like before, then seconds later not remember it..., and hasn't been able to get back to work. That sounds like a lot more than 10 points, more like 140->95.

Even if the effects are temporary, and even if it's "only five points", I'm not interested in that risk, and you shouldn't be either.

Was that attorney vaxxed?

> I'm not interested in that risk, and you shouldn't be either.

Well, I share your anxiety about it at least. It's my biggest concern about COVID as a young person. Even 2 points is too much given the asymmetric payoff at the margin.

IIRC, he got it before the vaccines were available. I'll check the next time I chat with my friend.

>>Even 2 points is too much given the asymmetric payoff at the margin.

YUP!! It feels like for someone close to 100, 5 points lower would be a loss putting them suddenly below a huge group they were ahead of, and for someone close to 140, 5 points lower would be a huge step down in overall capability, even though the group they are suddenly below is not that large. Either way, both the studies about the CV-19 clotting issues and mini-strokes, and that it is now known to infect, thrive in, and kill central nervos system cells is really scary.

Just the fact that one of the first things to go is the sense of smell - that's one of the oldest and most core neural pathways, leading right into the brain core. And the phnomena of patients recovering their sense of smell for a while and then it going off so that every smell/taste is like gasoline or rotting pork so they lose 30Lbs in 3 months is horrifying enough, but when I consider what it's likely doing to the brain (neuroscience was my minor in college), that just gives me the creeps. I'll take plague instead, thanks, at least it's just ordinary misery.

Edit: Here's a new interesting point - "Long covid with neuro symptoms:

Not real enough to be factored in to disease prevention plans

Real enough for drug trials"

https://twitter.com/DFisman/status/1477732646130106368

I'm curious what this drug is trying to do. You can see COVID brain damage on an FMRI, not sure how a drug is supposed to reverse that.

Indeed! I'm very curious about that too.