@isagalaev Death isn't necessary.

Removal from the reproductive pool or a markedly-lower probabalistic success in reproductive / survival are.

@kravietz

@dredmorbius

There was some research on higher incidence of impotence as result of COVID-19 complications.

I was also thinking about this older age mortality factor — I might be wrong but in humans the reproductive success seems to be multi-generational and associated with social status.

If your anti-vaxx parents die, you have lower chances of getting to prestigious university, get a well-paid job and generally lower influen on others.

@isagalaev

@kravietz @dredmorbius interesting!

@isagalaev @kravietz @dredmorbius how many other diseases with 99.5% survival rate have significantly affected human evolution?

@CensorshipBureau

That's the point — Covid-19 mortality is highly age-dependent

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/

@isagalaev @dredmorbius

@CensorshipBureau A disease with 0% mortality but effectively sterilising an individual (genital warts-based cervical cancer, several other VDs) would have that effect.

Diseases which don't impact the parent but induce severe birth defects or spontaneous abortion would be others. Scarlet fever (leaves fetus deaf and/or blind) a case in point.

The observed case fatality rate of COVID-19 remains about 1.6%, and is probably the best comparison with historical diseases, as here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_disease_case_fatality_rates

That's still relatively high, especially in modern times.

Note that infectious disease is not a static entity, that there is ongoing mutation (as with Delta and Lambda variants of SARS-COV-2), that characteristics can change, and that impacts other than death should be accounted for, including convalescence and recovery, long-term effects, overwhelming of health and support services, and economic impacts. (Covid's largest impacts remain secondary to the illness itself, through economic disruption even in the absence of specific government-mandated shutdowns. People don't like exposing themselves to serious or fatal illness, funny that.)

There's also the fact that the true death toll (and true case count) are far higher than official statistics. The Economist estimates 15.4m deaths to date (95% probability range: 9.5--18.5m), against 4.6 officially-reported deaths. That's 3.35 above the official statistics.

They also estimate total cases working backwards from deaths.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-estimates

@isagalaev @kravietz

@dredmorbius @CensorshipBureau @isagalaev

> Scarlet fever

Also zika virus (microcephaly), toxoplasmosis (neurological problems)

@CensorshipBureau Keep in mind too that Covid now looks to be a disease which can reinfect individuals or infect those who are fully vaccinated. This means that you're not looking at a single-game probability of death but a multi-game probability.

The resulting mortality risk will depend on the reinfection rate as well as the trend in mortality with repeat infections. I don't know the data on this, though if Covid becomes endemic (this seems fairly likely), it could mean roughly 1% odds of mortality, perhaps on an annual basis.

A 99% survival rate per instance over 10 instances is a 90% survival rate. Over 20 instances, it's about an 80% rate.

(Raise the decimal probability (0 <= p <= 1) to the power of occurrences to find the value. Multiply that by 100% to get percentage.)

We're early in the Covid game, there's much still unknown, and much that can change.

@isagalaev @kravietz

@dredmorbius @isagalaev @kravietz you are estimating that based on what exactly? several studies show robust post-infection immunity for >6 months, e.g.

The study estimated the efficacy of natural infection against reinfection at 95.2% by comparing SARS-CoV-2 incidence in those antibody-positive to those antibody-negative... Remarkably, this efficacy estimate is similar to the efficacy reported for the two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00141-3/fulltext

@OscillatingAgama

It's not gerrymandered, it's outright misrepresentation of the data (second paragraph)

https://fullfact.org/health/miscarriage-vaccine-misinfo/