I am, however, questioning CDC since even liberal publications like Atlantic and NYT have said their data is faulty on Covid.
How fautly, exactly? Degree matters.
I don’t know if nations are gathering data and reporting the same way. When Belgium has a fatality rate twice that of the Netherlands, I tend to doubt data are being kept the same way.
It is hard to say. In the last month both Belgium and the Netherlands have had covid deaths in the single digits per day. With such small numbers we can’t really compare one with the other.
But while the deaths are tragic, among people below age 64 it’s very low. Below 55 it’s practically nonexistent.
These are subjective terms, “very low” and “practically non-existent”. Not a very good way to set national policy, which should be driven by numbers, not subjective descriptions.
Thos are the working ages. I can see a case for protecting the elderly, but none for lockdowns.
The dichotomy you propose is ambiguous. Are you saying that if we properly isolate the elderly, the rest of society can proceed without wearing masks or social distancing or making any accommodations to reduce the spread of the virus? If so, that is just nonsense. Assuming you
didn’t mean that, then lockdowns themselves could be vastly reduced if everyone complied with public health recommendations on wearing masks and other accommodations, short of actually shutting down businesses. In fact, if we had done that from the beginning, we would already have a much more open economy than we do now, which is hampered not only by government mandates, but by public reluctance. The best example of that is the airline industry. They are bleeding money because so many people refuse to fly, even though the industry is not shut down by government mandate. So mask up, everyone, and let’s get this over!