That figure is world wide. How can anyone looking at the numbers coming in from around the world not concede that if nothing had been done as far as gov shut downs and social distancing the death rate from COVID would reach well into the millions for the year.Quote:
LIE: COVID-19 is more dangerous than influenza. The second lie of the medically uninformed. Even among those who do contract COVID-19, most under 60, including virtually everyone under 21, will never know they had it. On the USS Theodore Roosevelt, 60% were asymptomatic. Of the 2 million people who have tested positive for COVID-19 globally, most have had mild to no symptoms. By the three and half month mark of flu season, the flu had resulted in over 2 million severe cases requiring hospitalization. Influenza results in 290,000 to 670,000 deaths annually. COVID-19 deaths will be discussed below.
CoronavirusIsntThatBad.orgJDCAG (NOT Colin) said:
I definitely trust things that are hosted by godaddysites.com
FIFY: In the last 1 month COVID-19 has killed 50,000 peopleSisyphus said:
According to the CDC, the number of flu deaths in the US last year was 34,147 (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html).
In the last 3 months, with incredible unprecedented efforts to stop it, COVID-19 has killed over 50,000 in the US
So you are saying those docs are not to be trusted?JDCAG (NOT Colin) said:
I definitely trust things that are hosted by godaddysites.com
This to me of everything seems most intentionally deceitful. On March 27 we had 2,000 deaths in the US attributed to CV. Today we have 56,000. That's 54,000 deaths in a month. The 2 months before that were the exponential ramp up period. Remember, on March 1st we had 1 confirmed death attributed to CV and 75 cases.Quote:
This is actually much worse than we thought. According to worldometers.info from January 1 to April 1, 2020 the worldwide deaths from COVID-19 were 46,438 as opposed to 121,993 for influenza. To recap, during the same three months, with the same social distancing, the same shelter in place, and even handicapped with a vaccine against it, the flu still killed more than two and a half times as many people as COVID-19.
I would. As would almost all the docs I know.oragator said:
I honestly can't believe a doctor would put his name to some of the stuff on that page.
I'll leave it that.
And that is a fair rebuttal and well done. The one thing I do not agree with in the article is the flu comparison. When people get sick with this, they get real sick.HotardAg07 said:
On whether CV is more infectious or not than flu, I would have to default to the epidemiologists who have said that the R0 of this virus is higher than the flu. It's a novel virus that has grown exponentially. I found that he was comparing apples and oranges in his flu vs. CV numbers -- estimated flu cases at the end of a flu season versus confimed CV cases while in the middle of an outbreak with shutdown.
Additionally, on his point that people not knowing they have it make it more dangerous is a lie, it seems like a very meaningful difference that you could have CV for 1-2 weeks versus 1-2 days with the flu.
On how we are overestimating deaths by testing everyone who dies, I think there's been really good reporting done recently by the Financial Times that shows spikes in all causes deaths that coincides with the CV outbreak above yearly averages. Those spikes exceed the reported CV total deaths in all cases.This to me of everything seems most intentionally deceitful. On March 27 we had 2,000 deaths in the US attributed to CV. Today we have 56,000. That's 54,000 deaths in a month. The 2 months before that were the exponential ramp up period. Remember, on March 1st we had 1 confirmed death attributed to CV and 75 cases.Quote:
This is actually much worse than we thought. According to worldometers.info from January 1 to April 1, 2020 the worldwide deaths from COVID-19 were 46,438 as opposed to 121,993 for influenza. To recap, during the same three months, with the same social distancing, the same shelter in place, and even handicapped with a vaccine against it, the flu still killed more than two and a half times as many people as COVID-19.
The "data journalists" I have seen pick and choose the data they want to make it say what they want. Why, for example, did he only pick those 13 countries? COVID could or could not be affecting the whole planet. People could be asymptomatic more in say, Ghana. We don't freaking know. The data gatherers are what got us into this mess in the first place. Those Silicon Valley pinheads are the ones that data mined the whole country into doing the exact same thing.HotardAg07 said:
He's a data journalist from what I understand. In this case, he's gone through the trouble of finding the all-cause deaths data from these different regions and made pretty pictures to help illustrate a situation.
I have a totally different take on whose "data"you accept and/or reject. I like to look at all of it and then use common sense and logic .to look for truth.HotardAg07 said:
Bohunk,
He showed the areas where he was able to get the all cause data historically and for this year. Not all areas make it available and he is seeking it out. Good luck getting something like that from say, China.
I have to ask you a serious question -- would you be scrutinizing these graphs as much if he was a data journalist showing graphs that supported a viewpoint that you hold/promote? Or have you tried to poke a hole in this guy because he's showing something that helps a narrative you do not personally espouse?
I think it is fair to question his source data, how the data is displayed, and what conclusions could be gained from that data. However, I find it quite common here for us to reject the sources that don't agree with our priors.
I'm not sure you know as much as you think about what I personally espouse. And I'm not trying to be purposefully obtuse to you. Without giving away much personal information here, I have quite a bit of stake in the game here, and quite a bit of experience gathering just this type of data, believe it or not.HotardAg07 said:
Bohunk,
He showed the areas where he was able to get the all cause data historically and for this year. Not all areas make it available and he is seeking it out. Good luck getting something like that from say, China.
I have to ask you a serious question -- would you be scrutinizing these graphs as much if he was a data journalist showing graphs that supported a viewpoint that you hold/promote? Or have you tried to poke a hole in this guy because he's showing something that helps a narrative you do not personally espouse?
I think it is fair to question his source data, how the data is displayed, and what conclusions could be gained from that data. However, I find it quite common here for us to reject the sources that don't agree with our priors.
oh how the turns have tabled from our R&P board convos.Quote:
I have a totally different take on whose "data"you accept and/or reject. I like to look at all of it and then use common sense and logic .to look for truth.
Texaggie7nine said:oh how the turns have tabled from our R&P board convos.Quote:
I have a totally different take on whose "data"you accept and/or reject. I like to look at all of it and then use common sense and logic .to look for truth.
Why do people say the virus has grown exponentially? That hasn't happened since March. For April the number of new daily cases has increased linearly and daily deaths has leveled off for the past ten days or so.HotardAg07 said:
On whether CV is more infectious or not than flu, I would have to default to the epidemiologists who have said that the R0 of this virus is higher than the flu. It's a novel virus that has grown exponentially...
Proposition Joe said:
Godaddy domain.
Generic clipart.
Generic doctor name with no real background credentials given.
Speaking for "a number of doctors".
Political angle.
Bezos/Amazon angle.
NBA/China angle.
Claims that people are lazy or have an agenda - but somehow the writer is above that.
Anecdotal evidence cited with no actual sourcing.
Scientific evidence cited with no actual sourcing.
Yeesh. I think even a middle school periodical would say no to that. All it needs is a reference to a Geocities article.
influenza has a vaccine which I am sure acts way better than social distancing.Texaggie7nine said:
There are many aspects I agree with of it, but some just seem quite flawed.
For exampleThat figure is world wide. How can anyone looking at the numbers coming in from around the world not concede that if nothing had been done as far as gov shut downs and social distancing the death rate from COVID would reach well into the millions for the year.Quote:
LIE: COVID-19 is more dangerous than influenza. The second lie of the medically uninformed. Even among those who do contract COVID-19, most under 60, including virtually everyone under 21, will never know they had it. On the USS Theodore Roosevelt, 60% were asymptomatic. Of the 2 million people who have tested positive for COVID-19 globally, most have had mild to no symptoms. By the three and half month mark of flu season, the flu had resulted in over 2 million severe cases requiring hospitalization. Influenza results in 290,000 to 670,000 deaths annually. COVID-19 deaths will be discussed below.
I don't see any room to say it is a lie that Covid is more dangerous than influenza.
