Much Ado About Nothing

I'm getting heartily fed up with those numpties who say Covid survival is 99.7% and it's all a fuss about nothing. Let's look at some facts:

• The 99.7% figure is an average. Always beware of averages unless you know the standard deviation - the mortality increases dramatically increases dramatically from almost zero for the young, to a much higher figure for the over 80s. 
• The mortality is greatly reduced by treatment, not forgetting the containment measures and simple preventions many are complaining about. Without those, infection would be much, much higher and deaths would consequently be higher.
• Of those who recover, a large percentage is left with debilitating conditions, some that could last a lifetime.
• No, doctors aren't listing Covid as the cause of death for people who don't have it - there's a strict protocol and, unless your name is Harold Shipman, it's adhered to on pain of being struck off. If anything, the protocol underestimates the number of deaths due to Covid.
• This isn't solely about Covid - it's about swamping the NHS system. If that happens, it effectively means we have no NHS and treatable conditions become untreatable, meaning many more will die needlessly. In many locations hospitals are close to saturation and some are operating at more than 100%. Such deaths, although as a result of not being treated due to a side issue of Covid, are not counted in the stats, but will be reflected in excess deaths. Such deaths have already occured in a number of instances.
• It's not just about the number of hospital beds - those beds need the staff to man them. The NHS currently is short of over 85,000 staff.
• Yes, we have Nightingale Hospitals, but no staff to run them (see the point above) - they have to be taken from existing numbers, many of which are self-isolating, as they are at the front line. over 6% of existing staff are self-isolating at any time - and that's an average (beware of averages).
• Countries with the same population (like Germany), but higher numbers of beds and health service staff per 100,000 people, have fared much better than the UK. It demonstrates the parlous state of our health service when such a small number of hospitalisations can bring the NHS to a grinding halt. 
• The longer the virus is around in a large number of people, the greater the chance of mutations.

Having sufficient beds and staff is like an insurance system - you plan for the worst. Unfortunately, our system has been underfunded and understaffed for far too long. While beds can be magicked up, qualified staff can't. 

If we've learned anything from the countries which have kept the lid on Covid, it's that early, hard lockdowns work and result in fewer, shorter lockdowns and hence less economic damage. Delayed tinkering results in longer and more economically damaging lockdowns.

People who claimed economic harm was to be actively welcomed and sought in the context of Brexit, seem to be precisely the same people now arguing passionately that we couldn't possible risk economic harm if all we were trying to do was keep people alive and minimise the spread of a lethal virus.

The difference, however, is that with Brexit you can quite accurately predict which companies are going to benefit and which will go to the wall - and invest or buy accordingly. With Covid, and its unpredictability, that's infinitely more difficult for the speculator. Its like the difference between a controlled and uncontrolled explosion. Speculators don't like uncontrolled explosions.