perhaps i should clarify a point that people may be unclear about, because they may not know better.

while it is the case that old people are more vulnerable to weak viruses, this specific virus is particularly deadly for the elderly because it's entirely novel. the reason it kills so many of them is that they've never seen it before, and their immune system is unable to mount a defence, because it's so old and weak.

when people in middle age today get into these older age brackets, whether they are able to mount a response or not will partially depend on how well their body was trained to deal with this virus when they were younger. it follows that protecting a 55 year old from this virus is just eliminating the body's time window to mount a defense, and leaving them vulnerable as they age.

it follows that the mortality rate should decrease as younger people get older if they get proper exposure when they're young; otherwise, we're going to see a pattern set in, where people get systematically wiped out as they age.

i could get conspiratorial, and i have a mind to, but i think ockam's razor is to blame it on our collective stupidity. we had the right answer and we attacked it; we did everything wrong, instead, blinded by our own arrogance, and this human instinct to dominate and control.

it's frustrating.

and, you wonder why i hate people.