[avereveard]

> estimate of 30-60x the case fatality rate of flu

so what do you call comparing cfr of a novel disease that so far has often went unreported, had a small sample size, is often misdiagnosed with pneumonia or the common flu and has no immunization, with another where people at risk get vaccinations and there's large statistical data coming from decades of modern countries tracking strains efficiently?

no, comparing cfrs is disingenuous.

not to say that this disease isn't severe, but enough already with the flu multipliers. it's bullshit and is not making any point across.

[missosoup]

Flu multipliers are the most effective way to convey the risk of this disease to simple-minded people who dismiss it as 'just the flu'.

In a more technical context, I would entirely agree with you and not use such figures.

[avereveard]

yeah but people will look up the figures, figure out the statistics are misleading, and be even more entrenched in their 'just the flu' assumption.

there needs to be a better way and I think "your elders' and your friends elders' are vaccinated against the flu, not this and are gonna catch it from you and 30%^ of them straight up dies" seems a better angle and more solid against argumentation.

^ or whatever % is today