That math doesn't work out, because the infection fatality ratio measures fatality - non-existence - not impaired existence.
Long covid is a thing, and affects a staggeringly large percentage of people who get covid and do not die, significantly affecting the rest of their lives. One recent study claims an infection impaired-quality-of-life ratio of over 50% (https://www.psu.edu/news/research/story/how-many-people-get-...).
And in the other direction, we have lived over 2% of our lives in the pandemic living our lives, certainly not as well as any of us would have hoped, but living them nonetheless.
So either the math needs to take into account the reduced quality of life from those affected by covid (not to mention those affected by losing family members, caretakers, etc., those affected by knock-on effects like delayed surgeries, and so forth), or it needs to say, well, we haven't died from the so-called "lockdowns," so if any lives at all were saved, that outweighs the 0% of time we spent dead during them.
It is certainly still possible that the interventions were still net negative, but it's not as simple as 1% of the population dying from covid < 2% of people's lives spent in "lockdowns."
Touché, but I think it's pretty clear that even under the most generous but still fact-based interpretation of the effects of "lockdowns," covid kills a lot more people.
Long covid is a thing, and affects a staggeringly large percentage of people who get covid and do not die, significantly affecting the rest of their lives. One recent study claims an infection impaired-quality-of-life ratio of over 50% (https://www.psu.edu/news/research/story/how-many-people-get-...).
And in the other direction, we have lived over 2% of our lives in the pandemic living our lives, certainly not as well as any of us would have hoped, but living them nonetheless.
So either the math needs to take into account the reduced quality of life from those affected by covid (not to mention those affected by losing family members, caretakers, etc., those affected by knock-on effects like delayed surgeries, and so forth), or it needs to say, well, we haven't died from the so-called "lockdowns," so if any lives at all were saved, that outweighs the 0% of time we spent dead during them.
It is certainly still possible that the interventions were still net negative, but it's not as simple as 1% of the population dying from covid < 2% of people's lives spent in "lockdowns."