> You guys seem to have decided early on that this virus is a terrible happening Nah just the precautionary principle. > (presumably because it would benefit your cause by upending social order) We don't need that to do our thing. In fact society lasting a little longer until we are established would be better for us. But we have viable plans for both scenarios. > And it appears to me you've hyped it so much you aren't able to change your minds. 1. The precautions I suggested early on would NOT have crashed the economy so keep that in mind. 2. I won't care if I was wrong and have to admit that - for that matter I have never said I 100% believe one or the other. I take pride in being cautious. 3. We can only act on the information we have and all of my suggestions to people have been easy and cheap to do. > If by, say, the end of May the total deaths from acute viral respiratory infections were comparable to previous years, would you revise your estimation of the seriousness of this virus? I would, but it seems we are surpassing the normal total death rate in some places. That could indicate something bad is going on. I must admit I'm confused because looking at Dream Princess and South Korea you would expect a mere 2.5% fatality rate, but that low number can't explain places with several times the normal total deaths. Btw I think we will know by start of May already how bad it is. > Or would you claim that's evidence we "flattened the curve" by taking these extreme measures The measures have been half hearted despite their economic destruction so have only delayed the spread. I am assuming rampant spread so the only question remaining is how bad the virus really is and why different regions see such different outcomes. > are lying about their death tolls? If they can hide the deaths then the virus is too mild to truly disrupt society beyond financial crisis that was coming anyway. If it's bad they won't be able to hide the deaths. I'm not going to invent complex conspiracies in the first case no.