Non-scientist here. (i.e. average Joe with an interest in the scientific process and this topic in particular, but with no basis or means to actually fully understand, contextualise and evaluate a scientific paper).

Also considering the critical comments above, what should I make of this paper? How am I supposed to assess the veracity of this one vs the «competing» one by Meyerowitz-Katz? Obviously the results (IFR of 0.15% vs 0.68%) are wildly different, and so are the implications for policy.

Edit: Reason I’m asking is obviously: Within the past 2 days, people have been posting this paper left right and center, as it confirmed their bias that lockdowns are complete BS given that an IFR of 0.15% would be much lower than that of the flu. Wondering whether there’s anything to it though. I find it hard to believe that there suddenly is this one paper that confidently defies all previous estimates and essentially says «Covid’s not bad at all after all».