WIKI bad, WHO good, UM reporting on WHO even better, though estimations are estimations are estimations. Revised estimations, well that's another better than....
--- "How deadly is it if contracted, and how easily and quickly does it spread?"
Well, the numbers tell you that answer. SARS CoV and MERS were NOT quickly nor easily spread, with but about a thousand deaths worldwide. So your "important numbers" weren't important after all. Not in those cases.
--- "But if you want to go by some Chinese guy's outdated numbers, fine."
Generally I use Johns Hopkins and US gov census numbers, so I've simply chosen some different "old bums."
Just how many deaths came from SARS CoV1 and MERS worldwide? Choose any source you like. I will accept the number of deaths from your source.
It appears you, sir, are showing your true colors. You trust Wiki, I don’t for most things. John Hopkins is fine by me.
Again, the total number of deaths worldwide vs world population has nothing to with how deadly or dangerous or contagious a disease is.
Pretend for a moment you are living in a real life comic book movie, and Dr. Evil gives you a choice between:
1. Spraying SARS1 in the faces of everyone in your neighborhood. Quarantine and warnings to the outside world are allowed.
2. Fogging your entire neighborhood with the original SARS-Cov-2 virus (and here, also pretend it is a brand new virus and no one has immunity, but Dr. Evil has provided you the actual CFR and R0). No quarantine or warnings to the outside world allowed for 30 days.
3. Innoculating every 10th person in your neighborhood with Ebola, and providing hazmat suits to all the other residents. Quarantine and warnings to the outside world are allowed.
Further pretend that you are 100% altruistic, and your goal is the least number of worldwide deaths. Which do you choose?
If you choose #1, somewhere between 11% and 20% of your neighbours will die, but further spread blocked.
If you choose #2, millions worldwide could well die.
If you choose #3, and you all wear the hazmat suits and observe strict protocols when interacting with the sick and handling their bodies, between 2.5% and 9% of your neighbors will die, depending on the strain Dr. Evil chooses. Further spread will be blocked.
So, which are you going to pick? Or are you going to compare total deaths from each disease to world population (which would be silly)?
The response to the SARS1 outbreak was rapid and efficient, and its mutation rate mercifully swift. When it came to Covid-19, the Chinese hid the problem until it was out of control and had already spread to other countries.
In the case of Covid-19, at first it was thought that it was less deadly than SARS1 (but more deadly than it actually was) and more contagious than SARS1 (but less contagious than it actually was). Based on the information available at the time, these were reasonable assumptions. They turned out to be wrong, but they were reasonable.
When it became clear that Covid was not as deadly, and that lockdowns did not work, they should have lifted the lockdowns, but protected the vulnerable (elderly, diabetics, etc.). Instead, they kept on keeping on with the lockdowns, which caused great harm in terms of both human suffering and economic damage.
Compare Covid-19 waves to the 1918 Inluenza waves:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-commemoration/three-waves.htm
http://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/22427.jpeg
No, not exactly the same, as worldwide air travel was not common back then as it is now. Three waves, two really nasty ones, then the 1918 flu mutated to what we now call swine flu and live with, although pig flu can be nasty and can kill you, especially if you are elderly and/or have other health conditions.
Covid has had three nasty waves (original strain, then Delta). The first wave is higher than the 1918 flu because of faster spread enabled by faster travel. Now it has mutated to the much milder Omicron variants, which, like swine flu, can be nasty and can even kill you, especially if you are elderly and/or have other health conditions. But we’ll just have to live with it, same as pig flu.
Yes, the 1918 flu was more deadly, and killed about 675,000 Americans (about 0.65% of the total population). According to Johns Hopkins, Covid has killed about 1,079,870 Americans (about 0.33% of the total population). We also have antibiotics, and eventually other effective treatments such as monoclonal antibodies, etc. and vaccines came along. It’s quite likely that without the medical advances since 1918, Covid would have been more deadly with a mortality rate more similar to the 1918 flu.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html
