Invalid comparison

I read Rich Bowman's letter in today's paper, and I am left wondering if Mr. Bowman is comparing apples to apples. Mr. Bowman is comparing flu epidemics of the '50s and '60s were minimum steps were taken to contain the viruses to the COVID-19 pandemic were drastic steps were taken. Should he not be comparing the prior epidemics to the COVID-19 pandemic if less drastic steps were taken - if the states had not closed the schools and businesses; had not shut down the medical institutions to visitors; and had not stressed the wearing of masks and the keeping of social distances?

Mr. Bowman appears to be concluding that the same relationship of deaths which previously occurred would have occurred if the states had not taken such serious steps. Does he have data to support such a conclusion? Should he not be comparing the prior results to the projected results if the states had minimized the safety precautions? The projections ranged up to a million or more individuals. Maybe he only projects 500,000 deaths. How does that compare with the prior flu epidemics? How does a million deaths compare?

Chris Spitzer

Vernon Hills