There are some major errors in that article. Take one statement: "But if we tracked flu or other seasonal viruses in the same way, we would also see an exponential increase". That, while not untrue, is missing one crucial point: these other viruses are considerably less transmittable than CV-19. The number of cases of flu typically take weeks to double. With CV-19, it's 3 days. That can -
and is, in Italy - overwhelm the medical facilities in short order, increasing mortality for both CV-19 patients and other patients who also need ICU places.
He looks at the data from Iceland - and calculates a mortality rate from it. Yet there is insufficient data from Iceland to make any meaningful conclusions. The numbers are far too small to be able to come up with reliable numbers. That's an appalling bit of science. Any scientific paper going of publication would be rejected with assumptions like that one. Worse than that, the illness has not reached an outcome in most infected Icelanders. The outbreak is still in its early stages: his "0.3% mortality" will go up.
Also, he compares the excess mortality used by the CDC to estimate the effect of flu with the direct deaths caused by CV-19. These aren't the same thing. In all probability, the excess mortality due to CV-19 will also be higher than the deaths noted in the ICU wards. It'll take time for that to make itself obvious. He seems to be suggesting that we sit back until that signal becomes all too obvious. At that point, it'll be too late to do anything about it.
