> Why should Governments force people into lockdown for a virus with a CFR of 0.26%
Do you have a source for that--not something like "The Dental Tribune," but a link to the CDC page, or scientific study. I haven't seen anything in studies below 0.4%. You're leaving out long term consequences in your calculation, which we're seeing but haven't quantified yet.
You're also leaving out the explosive speed of spread, which can overwhelm ICUs.
Mask wearing is cheap and easy and seems to be associated with a region bringing it under control, so perhaps you can make your case about lock down, but the "open up without masks" seems foolhardy given those other facts.
Do you have a source for that--not something like "The Dental Tribune," but a link to the CDC page, or scientific study. I haven't seen anything in studies below 0.4%. You're leaving out long term consequences in your calculation, which we're seeing but haven't quantified yet.
You're also leaving out the explosive speed of spread, which can overwhelm ICUs.
Mask wearing is cheap and easy and seems to be associated with a region bringing it under control, so perhaps you can make your case about lock down, but the "open up without masks" seems foolhardy given those other facts.