America is giving up on the pandemic?

>Nobody on the far-left is advocating for the extreme violence

I have seen many people talking about "burning the system to the ground".

Trevor Bedford (Associate Professor in the Department of Epidemiology at the University of Washington) noted today that the protests will add 200-1100 deaths per day of protests: https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1269533303536664576.

Mapping Police Violence (https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/) notes that police killed 1098 people in 2019 in the US. Per the Washington Post, the figure is 1043 but that's specifically for shootings (which covers almost all officer involved deaths): https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/polic.... And in all likelihood, most of those situations were handled properly and professionally and the deaths were justified (without wrongdoing on the police's part).

So we've just taken on far more undeserved deaths due to irresponsible protesting and rioting than the very brutality we were outraged about in the first place! How was this even allowed? It is completely irrational to permit these protests, and to tolerate these super spreader events given the harsh restrictions we placed on our lives in response to COVID-19.

I cannot believe that healthcare professionals and public health officials are lining up to excuse the protests. This, just a couple weeks after they were all criticizing moderates/conservatives who wanted to see orders relaxed. The healthcare professionals and public officials who've jumped on the train of rationalizing their flip flopping are simply too afraid to admit that they're willing to tolerate the risks for activities and causes they align with, but they still want to force others to make sacrifices with the activities that they value. In other words, one set of rules for them, another set of rules for everyone else. I've lost faith in our elected officials, public institutions, healthcare providers, and academic bodies as a result of this hypocrisy and failure of logic.

A more fair and just handling of COVID would be to let every individual assess the risks and benefits of their activities themselves, as individuals, and let them go about their way. If a business wants to stay open, so be it. If a customer wants to visit a business, so be it. Those who are risk averse and afraid of exposure can choose to deal with that risk by impacting only their own lives by sheltering themselves.

In the very article you link to the case of New York is mentioned by Bergstrom, specifically to critique that estimate, and point that New York disproves it.

I verified that claim:

We know that the antibody tests in NYC gave the estimate of "all infected" of 20% of all. But there were around 20K deaths, and NYC has 8.3M population. Also even if we expect that the spread will stop once the 70% of population is infected the result is: 100e3 * 0.7 / 8e6 = 0.87%

Still much more than 0.4%. That it's closer to 1% matches all the statistics of the countries of the world that did a lot of testing compared to the number of cases and deaths.

Back to the article:

Bergstrom in the article: "Given that these parameter sets underestimate fatality by a substantial margin compared to current scientific consensus, this is deeply problematic."

In the same article, even CDC disclaims that their numbers are predictions:

"The scenarios are intended to advance public health preparedness and planning. They are not predictions or estimates of the expected impact of COVID-19" the CDC says.

So it seems you intentionally misinterpret CDC, given that it's all in the very article you linked.

Yes they are morally indefensible. Many of those decisions didn't make sense to me and yes I expressed outrage about it to friends.

But your point is also a straw man. For the most part, there are still prohibitions on large gatherings of people. These protests have been blessed as an exception. Why? Because the government's hand was forced by political expediency. In essence, the government has failed to protect the people from themselves.

And let me flip the question on you: why do we need to protest so urgently now, during a global pandemic? Why can't it be postponed until after we've resolved that problem and can permit it to go about safely?

I'll answer that for you: BLM has found outsized effectiveness because of coronavirus. Because people have more time, and are feeling less economically secure, and are more emotionally vulnerable. They were better primed to respond to the movement and organizers are capitalizing on that at the direct expense of human lives, even if that isn't obvious to them.

Worst of all, history suggests that these protests and the consequent loss of life will buy Black people next to nothing. Categorically the wrong solution to a very complex problem.

Yes but you can't plan these things. So here we are...