Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
New CDC figures give pause for thought
Options
Comments
-
Deleted User wrote: »No, it is because people are not getting sick enough to require a hospital.
We've had no shortage of cases over the last number of weeks.
😀 for the first time in Ireland we ain't ringing in sick. We've **** ourselves and left the doctors alone Figures are so low for nearly 5 Million folks.
Getting a bit messy now, especially when normal winters bugs start flying around
👀
This just a saga now0 -
https://theweek.com/speedreads/935157/fauci-shoots-down-false-claim-only-6-percent-coronavirus-deaths-are-legitimate-are-real-deaths-from-covid19
Fauci made it clear Tuesday morning that the information Trump was touting wasn't exactly accurate. "The point that the CDC was trying to make was that a certain percentage" of people who died "had nothing else but just COVID," the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease said. "That does not mean that someone who has hypertension or diabetes who dies of COVID didn't die of COVID-19. They did," he continued. "So the numbers you've been hearing, the 180,000-plus deaths, are real deaths from COVID-19," Fauci decisively said. "Let there not be any confusion about that."
https://twitter.com/GMA/status/1300754835546005505?0 -
You don't know that, 50% of the deaths in the article do not have the underlying condition disclosed. A further large proportion of the illnesses include hypertension, influenza and diabetes, all of which are completely treatable and non life threatening if well managed.Makai Delightful Cocoon wrote: »According to the latest figures from the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), COVID-19 was the sole cause of death for 6% of the overall figure of deaths in the US (the COVID-only deaths would therefore be roughly 10,000 people). For all the other deaths, there was an average of 2.6 additional contributing conditions. These conditions were often very heavy, such pneumonia, respiratory failure, diabetes, or heart disease.
The figures are interesting because they show that COVID-19 is mostly fatal to people who are already thoroughly sick. It also raises the question of the need to restructure anti-COVID measures so that they protect such people and allow the rest of society to return to living their lives, earning their livelihoods etc.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/most-us-covid-deaths-had-other-factors-cdc-admits
Just to put this bomb drop in perspectove, approximately 50% of Americans have an underlying health condition. 81 million(25%) of American suffer from at least two or more chronic illnesses.
https://nationalhealthcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/AboutChronicDisease.pdf
Bit less shocking when you see the whole picture huh?
So even if people with underlying conditions were no more likely than completely healthy peple to die with COVID, which would be ridiculous obviously, you'd expect that at least half of COVID fatalities in the US would suffered an existing underlying health condition before contracing or dying from COVID.0 -
Yeh, we do know though, that they died of covid. 225,000 excess deaths as of mid August in the United States clears that conundrum right up.Quite a bit higher than the official death toll. Probably due to deaths in Southern states being counted as pneumonia deaths , pneumonia deaths in Texas, Florida many times higher than any other preceeding year and this suspiciously conincides with a viral pandemic.paw patrol wrote: »it is news worthy, the media (and politicians) have been telling us this is the end of days.
The fact that the average death has had between 2-3 underlining conditions not 1 would imply that a whole host of illness could have killed them rather than covid itself. We have no idea if the 94% died "from covid" or "with covid" and that is a huge glaring hole considering our lives have been dictated by those stats for the previous 6-8months.
It's not a shocker that very sick people are more at risk than healthy people for any serious illness. This proves Covid19 is over hyped and not that special (when compared to other illness like influencza ) and the restrictions imposed worldwide are not rational.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/12/us/covid-deaths-us.html
Estimated 500,000-800,000 Americans died of Spanish flu btw. USA predicted to touch just under 330,000 COVID deaths around New Years,obviously USA population was 3x smaller back then but still.. nothing special gotcha.0 -
The figures don't mean what a lot of people posting about them seem to think they mean.
6% represents where Covid was mentioned as the ONLY cause of death.
That doesn't mean that Covid played no role in the remaining 94%, far from it.
Firstly, It was listed as a contributing factor in ALL deaths, which shouldn't be underplayed or forgotten.
Secondly, If you look through the list of attributed comorbidities a huge proportion of them are medical conditions that are well known associated symptoms of Covid: Pneumonia, respiratory failure, respiratory arrest etc, etc. Covid was the root cause of why many people developed these conditions in the first place.
You would expect to see this. Covid doesn't just kill people by itself, it's what it does to the body - it causes pneumonia, it causes respiratory failure, heart failure, renal failure. These will be listed on most death certificates as comorbidities.
That doesn't mean that 94% of those people had serious prior underlying conditions. Obviously some did, but a lot of those comorbidities are textbook examples of symptoms of Covid.
An example would be - If you get Covid and covid gives you pneumonia and that pneumonia then causes respiratory failure, which in turn causes a cardiac arrest then all of those factors can be listed as comorbidities - but the only reason you suffered from them in the first place is because you contracted Covid to begin with.0 -
Advertisement
-
If you had HIV, got the flu which lead to pneumonia and died
What killed you?
HIV or the flu?
If you had 3 underlying illnesses, got Covid and died
What killed you?
Underlying or Covid?
In the first example, in normal circumstances, you won't be so weakened by AIDS that a flu will kill you. So the Influenza might be the thing that does you in, but you wouldn't have been killed by it in the first place without already having the underlying condition that's the root cause of your problems. There's no mystery there to be honest.
Now, nobody disputes that Covid is more dangerous to people with prior existing underlying conditions. It's a fact. But what's confusing things here is that people are mistakenly confusing underlying conditions with comorbidities. They aren't the same thing. A large proportion of those comorbidities are directly linked to covid. A patient suffers from pneumonia because they've contracted Covid or respiratory failure because of Covid. Covid is, in many cases, the direct reason they develop these comorbidities.
People aren't walking around suffering from underlying respiratory failure, they get Covid and then suffer from it. That isn't an underlying condition, it's a contributing cause of death linked to a primary condition; a comorbidity.0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »Excellent contribution... :rolleyes:
Honestly it's better than your reductive nonsense0 -
Trumpist knuckle draggers suck this kind of propagandist crap right up0
-
paw patrol wrote: »........ illness. This proves Covid19 is over hyped and not that special (when compared to other illness like influencza ) and the restrictions imposed worldwide are not rational.
Without restrictions every hospital in the world will be overflowing with the folk you know will potentially die from it, there's an awful lot of them.0 -
Can the people who are under the impression only ten thousand people have died in the US from Covid, explain over two hundred thousand excessdeaths in the US?0
-
Advertisement
-
By this logic, if should be totally acceptable to murder a diabetic considering they had an underlying condition and were going to die sometime in the next 1 to 40 years anyway. Complete nonsense.
Only someone who hasn’t lost someone, or watched someone die from Covid would spout this crap.0 -
-
Del Griffith wrote: »Odd that it hasn't happened in places with minimal restrictions then
Look, this nonsense needs to be knocked on the head.
Countries will 'minimal' restrictions had restrictions, both state mandated and those that individuals chose to implement themselves.
Things didn't just carry on as normal in ANY country.
The images from Italy back in March/April were an example of what could happen in societies that had close contact between high risk groups and didn't lock down fast enough.0 -
Look, this nonsense needs to be knocked on the head.
Countries will 'minimal' restrictions had restrictions, both state mandated and those that individuals chose to implement themselves.
Things didn't just carry on as normal in ANY country.
The images from Italy back in March/April were an example of what could happen in societies that had close contact between high risk groups and didn't lock down fast enough.
So there was absolutely no need for all the hand wringing about Sweden and the US then? Because there were a lot of people saying that the healthcare systems in those countries was on the verge of collapse due to the lack of restrictions or the reopenings or the amount of cases. Didnt happen though.0 -
Look, this nonsense needs to be knocked on the head.
Countries will 'minimal' restrictions had restrictions, both state mandated and those that individuals chose to implement themselves.
Things didn't just carry on as normal in ANY country.
The images from Italy back in March/April were an example of what could happen in societies that had close contact between high risk groups and didn't lock down fast enough.
Its not nonsense. As disappointing as it must be, your doomsday scenario has not happened. Even now with 100s of cases per day here and 1000s per day in the UK, more people are dying from car crashes. Excess mortality has been higher, even in Sweden, in previous flu seasons. Hospitals and societies did not break down.
https://link.medium.com/q7OTGqLKs90 -
Doomsday scenario has not happened because of restrictions, both state mandated and those implemented by the vast majority of the population. Thousands/hundreds of cases yet few deaths is a good thing...would you rather more deaths? Shows that those getting it are now primarily not in the high risk groups....ie restrictions work.Del Griffith wrote: »Its not nonsense. As disappointing as it must be, your doomsday scenario has not happened. Even now with 100s of cases per day here and 1000s per day in the UK, more people are dying from car crashes. Excess mortality has been higher, even in Sweden, in previous flu seasons. Hospitals and societies did not break down.
https://link.medium.com/q7OTGqLKs90 -
Del Griffith wrote: »Its not nonsense. As disappointing as it must be, your doomsday scenario has not happened. Even now with 100s of cases per day here and 1000s per day in the UK, more people are dying from car crashes. Excess mortality has been higher, even in Sweden, in previous flu seasons. Hospitals and societies did not break down.
https://link.medium.com/q7OTGqLKs9
It is completely unprecedented. Do you think it's common that 0.58% of the population of a city as large as Bergamo dies inside an 8 week period?
It's not the current death tolls in European countries that are completely unprecedented, although they still are very high, it's how high they would be without restrictions.
Let's look at the excess deaths in some major cities globally where we know COVID has spread widely and has caused a notoriously high death toll.
Ecuador's largest city Guyaqill- Population 3 m excess deaths 14,600 -Just under 0.5% of the region population has died in the last 5 months
Mexico city-Population 8.8m 22,500 excess deaths - 0.27% of the city population
NYC - population 8.3 m 25,000 excess deaths - 0.3% of the city population
Lima population 10 million , excess deaths 23,000 - 0.23% of the city population
Manaus , Brazil - Population 1.8 million , excess deaths 3,600 - 0.2% of the city population
Madrid population 6.6m excess deaths 16,000 - 0.25% of the city population, and no that is not where it will end either, hospitalisations are growing quickly in Madrid in particular in recent days.
Rio- Population 12.2 million excess deaths 21,000 - 0.17% of city population.
New Jersey population 8.8 million , excess deaths 17,400 - 0.2% of region population
And of course Bergamo, highest number of deaths in the world. Population 1.1 million , excess deaths 6400 - 0.58% of the region's population died in excess in a 7 week period.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/08/20/covi-a20.html
These figures are also from weeks ago and exclude hundreds or thousands more deaths since.
And you think the rest of Europe with it's massive elderly population would escape this faith or worse if we dropped everything and just let it spread? It's likely that 0.3-0.5% of the population of many European countries would die in the scenario. Sweden may be an exception, or maybe other places would do similarly well without high level of restriction, but there more than enough precedents worldwide historical and ongoing that prove it is very far from being the rule.
I cannot believe that we still have so many people so incredibly stubborn in their belief that it just can't happen here. I don't think anything will convince them until it does happen. By now dozens of large regions and cities across the world have lost 0.1%-3% of their populations to COVID. Dublin's is much lower because of restrictions, we've seen how low the antibody test showed spread to be.0 -
It is completely unprecedented. Do you think it's common that 0.58% of the population of a city as large as Bergamo dies inside an 8 week period?
It's not the current death tolls in European countries that are completely unprecedented, although they still are very high, it's how high they would be without restrictions.
Let's look at the excess deaths in some major cities globally where we know COVID has spread widely and has caused a notoriously high death toll.
Ecuador's largest city Guyaqill- Population 3 m excess deaths 14,600 -Just under 0.5% of the region population has died in the last 5 months
Mexico city-Population 8.8m 22,500 excess deaths - 0.27% of the city population
NYC - population 8.3 m 25,000 excess deaths - 0.3% of the city population
Lima population 10 million , excess deaths 23,000 - 0.23% of the city population
Manaus , Brazil - Population 1.8 million , excess deaths 3,600 - 0.2% of the city population
Madrid population 6.6m excess deaths 16,000 - 0.25% of the city population, and no that is not where it will end either, hospitalisations are growing quickly in Madrid in particular in recent days.
Rio- Population 12.2 million excess deaths 21,000 - 0.17% of city population.
New Jersey population 8.8 million , excess deaths 17,400 - 0.2% of region population
And of course Bergamo, highest number of deaths in the world. Population 1.1 million , excess deaths 6400 - 0.58% of the region's population died in excess in a 7 week period.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/08/20/covi-a20.html
These figures are also from weeks ago and exclude hundreds or thousands more deaths since.
And you think the rest of Europe with it's massive elderly population would escape this faith or worse if we dropped everything and just let it spread? It's likely that 0.3-0.5% of the population of many European countries would die in the scenario. Sweden may be an exception, or maybe other places would do similarly well without high level of restriction, but there more than enough precedents worldwide historical and ongoing that prove it is very far from being the rule.
I cannot believe that we still have so many people so incredibly stubborn in their belief that it just can't happen here. I don't think anything will convince them until it does happen. By now dozens of large regions and cities across the world have lost 0.1%-3% of their populations to COVID. Dublin's is much lower because of restrictions, we've seen how low the antibody test showed spread to be.
You're arguing a point no one made.
I didn't say Covid19 was made up and does nothing. It's a bad illness that can even kill people who are seriously ill already, or rarely even those that are exposed to a massive viral load repeatedly over a long period of time.
For the 99.5% of other people, the risk is not high of any sort of mortality.
As I said in my post also, the excess deaths in most places are not unprecedented (see 93,95, 2018 flu seasons amongst the examples in my link), we just didn't hear all about because as morbid as it sounds, old and sick people dying when they catch something bad is not usually considered extraordinary.
As for the anti-body test, its totally unreliable as we know, because 1) a lot of people are found to beat it without even generating enough anti-bodies to pass the anti-body test, and 2) it doesnt account for t-cell immunity.
NYC has had restrictions from reasonably early btw.
Florida has had practically none.
Which has higher excess mortality?0 -
Del Griffith wrote: »You're arguing a point no one made.
I didn't say Covid19 was made up and does nothing. It's a bad illness that can even kill people who are seriously ill already, or rarely even those that are exposed to a massive viral load repeatedly over a long period of time.
For the 99.5% of other people, the risk is not high of any sort of mortality.
As I said in my post also, the excess deaths in most places are not unprecedented (see 93,95, 2018 flu seasons amongst the examples in my link), we just didn't hear all about because as morbid as it sounds, old and sick people dying when they catch something bad is not usually considered extraordinary.
As for the anti-body test, its totally unreliable as we know, because 1) a lot of people are found to beat it without even generating enough anti-bodies to pass the anti-body test, and 2) it doesnt account for t-cell immunity.
NYC has had restrictions from reasonably early btw.
Florida has had practically none.
Which has higher excess mortality?
And as I said in my post, you are wrong, the excess death is unprecedented, especially in the US, South America and Europe.
https://brazilian.report/coronavirus-brazil-live-blog/2020/06/21/covid-19-is-now-the-deadliest-event-in-recent-brazilian-history/
COVID is now the most deadly event in Brazilian history since colonisation. Not unprecedented enough for you?
And what are you on about? Florida had a stay at home order issues to most of the state from April until mid may. Schools were closed from early March, as were bars and mass gatherings.
https://en.as.com/en/2020/04/02/other_sports/1585830082_278276.html
Just more fake news from yourself, making **** up as you go along.
You don't even know what you are arguing about anymore do you? What exactly is your point? That apparently it's a mild virus but it's actually killed a pretty significant proportion of the entire population of several regions worldwide and you accept that yet somehow you hold on to your point which belives otherwise?
And okay so T cells, apparently nearly everyone has had COVID and is doing great according to this theory and places with high deaths likely have herd immunity becaue so many infected did not register antibodies. So explain how MAdrid, with one of the highest COVID deaths in the world now has COVID cases growing exponentially and ICU and hospital admissions doubling every week,why is this happening here. 15% of the population had antibodies, T cell theory esimates then that 30-45% of Madrid population should then have been infected. If that many were infected, cases would not be growing exponentially with restrictions in place. Makes the theory seem very unlikely.0 -
And as I said in my post, you are wrong, the excess death is unprecedented, especially in the US, South America and Europe.
And what are you on about? Florida had a stay at home order issues to most of the state from April until mid may. Schools were closed from early March, as were bars and mass gatherings.
https://en.as.com/en/2020/04/02/other_sports/1585830082_278276.html
Just more fake news from yourself
You don't even know what you are arguing about anymore do you? What exactly is your point? That apparently it's a mild virus but it's actually killed a pretty significant proportion of the entire population of several regions worldwide and you accept that yet somehow you hold on to your point which belives otherwise?
And okay so T cells, apparently nearly everyone has had COVID and is doing great according to this theory and places with high deaths likely have herd immunity becaue so many infected did not register antibodies. So explain how MAdrid, with one of the highest COVID deaths in the world now has COVID cases growing exponentially and ICU and hospital admissions doubling every week,why is this happening here. 15% of the population had antibodies, T cell theory esimates then that 30-45% of Madrid population have been infected. If that many were infected, cases would not be growing exponentially with restrictions in place. Makes the theory seem very unlikely.
Fake news lol.. that didn't take long. Different opinion is I think what you mean.
Florida re-opened a of things very quickly, relative to everywhere you keep bringing up such as Madrid and other outliers that have had older populations that have been hit hard.
Can you explain how 99.5% of people are fine and don't die? Or how the vast majority only have mild symptoms? Does this stuff register with you at all or just get completely ignored?
We know the answer.
For the record I was all for restrictions when they came in. We were told to flatten the curve. We did. The hospitals coped. They are still coping. The world needs to keep turning, even if you want it to stop.
Especially when the data suggests restrictions do **** all good anyway.0 -
Advertisement
-
Del Griffith wrote: »Fake news lol.. that didn't take long. Different opinion is I think what you mean.
Florida re-opened a of things very quickly, relative to everywhere you keep bringing up such as Madrid and other outliers that have had older populations that have been hit hard.
Can you explain how 99.5% of people are fine and don't die? Or how the vast majority only have mild symptoms? Does this stuff register with you at all or just get completely ignored?
We know the answer.
For the record I was all for restrictions when they came in. We were told to flatten the curve. We did. The hospitals coped. They are still coping. The world needs to keep turning, even if you want it to stop.
What's your opinion on the fact that COVID is the most deadly event in Brazilian history then?
I don't know what you want me to explain. Not dying is not the same as being fine. About .65% of people die yeh, but considerably more than that go to ICU or or hospitalised. When millions of people become infected, these figures add up, as we can see.
For the record, I don't want another lockdown or anything of the sorts. I'm just not ignorant enough to compare it to a common flu though,and can appeciate the seriousness of the situation, you make it sound as if these are the only two extreme opinions you can hold.
Outliers? The average person in Peru and Ecuador is 28 years old. They have the highest death tolls in the world.
Just more completely contradictory nonsense points from you, yet again.
I won't even get started on the fact you are conflating the words restrictions and lockdowns. Of course restrictions do a lot. Closing concerts and festivals is a restriction, that I'm sure even you are in agreement is not something that does '**** all good anyway'?0 -
What's your opinion on the fact that COVID is the most deadly event in Brazilian history then?
I don't know what you want me to explain. Not dying is not the same as being fine. About .65% of people die yeh, but considerably more than that go to ICU or or hospitalised. When millions of people become infected, these figures add up, as we can see.
For the record, I don't want another lockdown or anything of the sorts. I'm just not ignorant enough to compare it to a common flu though,and can appeciate the seriousness of the situation, you make it sound as if these are the only two extreme opinions you can hold.
Outliers? The average person in Peru and Ecuador is 28 years old. They have the highest death tolls in the world.
Just more completely contradictory nonsense points from you, yet again.
I'm confused as to why you have this idea that I need or want you to explain anything. You're the one that keeps coming back to the thread with your knickers in a big twist because I posted that doomsday hasn't happened here. It hasn't.
Peru and Ecuador are you serious, bastions of health alright how could that happen there? Oh yea wait, living conditions might be less than ideal, with high risk of infectious disease already.
Newsflash also, people die from the flu every year. Old, sick people. The flu is not a common cold, and the comparison to a severe flu season not outlandish in any way.
We haven't even touched on the negative impact globally of the lockdown which is set to kill more people than the virus itself. Locking down further at this point makes no sense. We need to move forward.0 -
Del Griffith wrote: »I'm confused as to why you have this idea that I need or want you to explain anything. You're the one that keeps coming back to the thread with your knickers in a big twist because I posted that doomsday hasn't happened here. It hasn't.
Peru and Ecuador are you serious, bastions of health alright how could that happen there? Oh yea wait, living conditions might be less than ideal, with high risk of infectious disease already.
Newsflash also, people die from the flu every year. Old, sick people. The flu is not a common cold, and the comparison to a severe flu season not outlandish in any way.
We haven't even touched on the negative impact globally of the lockdown which is set to kill more people than the virus itself. Locking down further at this point makes no sense. We need to move forward.
So why did you ask me to explain it then ?Can you explain how 99.5% of people are fine and don't die? Or how the vast majority only have mild symptoms? Does this stuff register with you at all or just get completely ignored?
Look , youre the one that made the point. You said they were outliers becasue of elderly populations. Peru and Ecuador do not have elderly populations.
All I'm doing is coutnering your many many contradictory arguments as you continually move your goalposts.
Anyway if poor healthcare is the reason COVID is devastatting Peru and Ecuador, and COVID is comparable to flu which hits Peru and Ecuador annually, why do these countries not see this record level of deaths often seeing as their healthcare cannot even deal with high level of flu infection?
I think you know the answer!
And as I have previously stated, I do not support lockdowns as a means of preventing widespread infections. I completely agree that we cannot lockdown again.Lockdown will cause many deaths and it was very poorly implemented. Howveer I feel your next point about moving means in your mind completely ignoring COVID exists, which cannot be done at this moment in time without severe consequences.0 -
The point I made originally was in the context of the rest of the thread if you read it, around restructure of anti-COVID measures due to the recent from CDC.
Places with relatively severe lockdown and places with minimal restrictions have had hardly any notable difference in overall numbers of excess mortality (please don't start with outliers of regimes like Korea.. it's not relevant).
What is also relevant with the CDC figures is that in MOST places, excess mortality is not hugely off the scale of previous severe flu seasons. Theres nothing "fake news" there.
Somewhat relevant also is that Ireland has between 10x and 50x more cases per day now than we did when restrictions were lifted, yet hospital figures are roughly the same and deaths negligible.
Brazil, Ecuador and Peru and other places with high density areas of poor living conditions, or older populations (esp older living with younger), are having a sh*te time you say? Well ok.
Neither of us support further lockdown measures then.. great.0 -
Del Griffith wrote: »The point I made originally was in the context of the rest of the thread if you read it, around restructure of anti-COVID measures due to the recent from CDC.
Places with relatively severe lockdown and places with minimal restrictions have had hardly any notable difference in overall numbers of excess mortality (please don't start with outliers of regimes like Korea.. it's not relevant).
What is also relevant with the CDC figures is that in MOST places, excess mortality is not hugely off the scale of previous severe flu seasons. Theres nothing "fake news" there.
Somewhat relevant also is that Ireland has between 10x and 50x more cases per day now than we did when restrictions were lifted, yet hospital figures are roughly the same and deaths negligible.
Brazil, Ecuador and Peru and other places with high density areas of poor living conditions, or older populations (esp older living with younger), are having a sh*te time you say? Well ok.
Neither of us support further lockdown measures then.. great.
Those parameters of South America culture exist every year. So I repeat, why is covid devastating South America for the reasons you've listed above, when flu which in your opinion has a similar mortality rate and strikes annually does not have any kind of similar impact as covid has?
Again, just completely incorrect. Excess deaths in winter 17/18 in the US was one of the worst on record with 80,000 excess deaths. Covid has caused 225,000 deaths as of mid August, that's already almost 300% higher than the most severe flu in recent US history and btw with no end in sight to US covid deaths.
If you choose to see that as comparable to the severe flu then sure, but at least appreciate that a majority of people absolutely do not, hence the continued restrictions worldwide .0 -
Those parameters of South America culture exist every year. So I repeat, why is covid devastating South America for the reasons you've listed above, when flu which in your opinion has a similar mortality rate and strikes annually does not have any kind of similar impact as covid has?
Again, just completely incorrect. Excess deaths in winter 17/18 in the US was one of the worst on record with 80,000 excess deaths. Covid has caused 225,000 deaths as of mid August, that's already almost 300% higher than the most severe flu in recent US history and btw with no end in sight to US covid deaths.
If you choose to see that as comparable to the severe flu then sure, but at least appreciate that a majority of people absolutely do not, hence the continued restrictions worldwide .
Sweden, France, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland have all had comparable (or higher) excess death from previous severe flu seasons.
That's a fact. Link to numbers and graphs already provided.
That's what I said in my first post and that's still what I'm saying now because it's true.
You really just can't handle that or something, I don't know why.
So anyway, in the context of the thread yes restrictions should be reconsidered imo0 -
My interpretation of these figures is that the whole thing stinks. It seems that virtually everyone who is in danger of death needs to be suffering with 3 other serious conditions. I imagine this is mostly the elderly and the chronically ill. Why not cocoon such people and thus ensure their safety and allow the rest of society to continue with some minimal restrictions?
The lock-down has caused untold misery. A man I know recently went to a funeral of a girl who took her own life, no doubt precipitated by the what is happening. How many others died like her? How many livelihoods were ruined? How many people will be consigned to a soul-numbing existence on the dole once this mother of all recessions kicks in?
Countries like Sweden never had a proper lock-down and their stats aren't apocalyptic. Some serious questions need to be answered.0 -
Makai Delightful Cocoon wrote: »My interpretation of these figures is that the whole thing stinks. It seems that virtually everyone who is in danger of death needs to be suffering with 3 other serious conditions. I imagine this is mostly the elderly and the chronically ill. Why not cocoon such people and thus ensure their safety and allow the rest of society to continue with some minimal restrictions?
Your interpretation of the figures is fundamentally wrong as you still seem unable to comprehend the difference between a complicating condition as a result of infection by covid-19 and a pre-existing condition which makes you vulnerable to the impact of covid-19."To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)
0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement