Where is the common sense?

Here are five facts:

1.) the overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of dying from COVID-19;

2.) we have a clearly defined population at risk who can be protected with targeted measures: older people and others with underlying conditions;

3.) protecting older, at-risk people eliminates hospital overcrowding;

4.) vital population immunity is prevented by total isolation policies, prolonging the problem; and,

5.) people are dying because other medical care is not getting done due to hypothetical projections.

Complete contact tracing? Why? What good will it do at this stage? From the looks of it contact tracing is commonsensically helpful to prevent a pandemic in its early stage — but we already know many of our population are infected and according to epidemiologist Dr. John Wong we’ve been actually infected since January (ie., the first wave was January, the second wave is now or already happened last April; “Epidemiologist warns of ‘3^rd wave’ of infections,” PDI, May 7).

Complete mass testing? Why? At this stage of the pandemic, what for? If somebody is asymptomatic or having very mild symptoms, as 80-90% of infected likely are, then what’s the point? You can’t isolate everyone or put them in the hospital. So why not focus testing for clinical/diagnostic purposes on those exhibiting severe symptoms? But if Stanford and other studies shows that only around less than 0.01% — 1.7% of those infected need hospitalization and the infection fatality rate (IFR) is between .1-.2% (a University of Washington study declared an IFR of 1.3% but admits their calculation excluded asymptomatic patients) then why lock down everyone, including reasonably healthy people, when the hospital system can focus their attention on the elderly or those with chronic illnesses. . .

https://www.bworldonline.com/thoughts-in-a-triple-lockdown/?