Which doesn’t do anything to support your statement of most of the people would have died from the flu at all. That was what I took issue with not that the people who are most vulnerable to the flu are also most vulnerable to Covid (those people are essentially most vulnerable to everything).
Now we are getting somewhere. Covid (best as we can tell) doesn’t have a season. So not only do we have data that shows it’s more deadly in the same time frame compared to the flu but that it is consistently a threat.
Agreed. But scientists have tried and have done studies to show those differences. We have no idea what this will look like over time but can definitely look at right now. And again unless I’m missing something the majority of evidence shows that it’s more infectious, more deadly, and requires more hospitalizations.
If you had said this I wouldn’t have posted because I agree with it. But that’s not what you said.
I don’t get what you are saying here, looks like two contradictory sentences.
We don’t know how consistent of a threat it will be, we could end up with multiple strains that continue to infect people over and over or it could end within a few months. While it has some similarities to the flu, they only go so far.
The infectious part yes, the rest is questionable. We already went over this a few posts back, there are conflicting stories and issues with the official data so it’s impossible to conclude that one is deadlier than the other in the long term. Similar, but not the same.
Ok, but there are statistics that show that COVID kills more of those infected than the flu so what are we supposed to believe?
I think we’re getting carried away with this flu vs. COVID argument, all I was trying to say is that people don’t get all worked up about the flu and many people are overreacting to COVID despite the fact that for most people the risk of death or severe illness is very low. We are in a situation where one way or another there are going to be problems, if everyone gets COVID then more people will die and if things are shut down or operating at limited capacity it presents another set of issues, which includes people dying in some cases.
It’s not questionable based on the data we have. Is the data perfect? Of course not. Does it paint a picture that puts what I said into question? No it doesn’t. The biggest point of argument would at this point would not really be is Covid more deadly than the flu but how many more times deadly is it. Right now the data says a lot.
? He’s saying to come to the conclusion that the flu is more deadly the numbers for Covid need to be way way off. The flu is likely over reported and Covid under (according to article at bottom).
Dude the reason we’re even discussing it is from you saying most of the people who have died from Covid would have died from the flu. Which again based on the data we have is a pretty out there conclusion. Covid is basically the flu has essentially been the mantra of don’t change anything in life all of this is overblown since day one.
This is probably the third or fourth article that I’ve read that states there is evidence this virus has been detected for many months around the world longer than the accepted December 2019 starting point in Wuhan. If this is true though, why were we not seeing the exponential spread of cases and the corresponding overwhelming of hospitals back then? There are so many inconsistencies with what we know or think we know about this virus.
Except that a lot of people have died or required hospitalization. What we saw in Northern Italy has repeated itself here, from NYC to Texas to Arizona. If we focus on what is consistent and not what isn’t, we will be closer to figuring out how to deal with it efficiently.
No. I have read enough articles expressing various opinions on the topic that I don’t see any use in reading more subjective opinions at the moment. Other scientists and doctors say the opposite, and the official statistics (flawed as they are) show the opposite as well. If you have something relevant to tell me then just copy and paste, I’m not going to read a bunch of articles that aren’t saying anything new.
COVID has the potential to kill more people within a given period of time because it spreads more easily and doesn’t appear to have seasons like the flu does. However, there are multiple strains of the flu and pretty much everyone ends up getting it at some point, and based on what we know the death rate for a given number of infections is higher than for COVID. So maybe it depends on how you want to define “deadlier”, the initial plan was to “flatten the curve” to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed and now it has gone well beyond that.
Another thing that complicates the data is the high rate of false negative tests. While there is a lot of talk from right wingers lately about false positives, those are actually a very small proportion of tests and depend on the machine being used for the test while false positives are around 30%. Combine that with 50-80% of cases being asymptomatic and tests not being widely available until recently, it’s quite likely that the actual number of COVID infections is much higher than the official 11+ million.
Well they had reasons in them that weren’t subjective but I will respect your wishes and not share anything as you’re apparently tired of attempting to discuss the subject in anything but an emotional manner.
How am discussing this in an emotional manner when I’m providing data for flu and COVID? Me and you always end up in a debate over trivial matters, I think it’s time to move on. How about addressing this:
I did but no need to continue if you have stated you don’t care what anything says. So I won’t waste my time. Other people can share stuff with you if they want but I won’t.
I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings. Please don’t cry.
You didn’t post anything refuting the statistics I quoted about flu and COVID death rates other than the fact that flu deaths may be over reported, but the problem is that COVID infections are likely under reported and deaths over reported plus there is no data that I am aware of showing asymptomatic flu infection rates. So what are we really supposed to do with all this data? COVID would kill more people right now if it spread uncontrolled, but if you don’t get the flu this year you will probably get it within the next few years and the risk is similar. That’s all I have to say on this topic.
You didn’t hurt my feelings in the least bit. You simply let me know you weren’t interested in reading anything about the topic. I’m not interested in looking at articles and cutting and pasting them because you don’t want to read too much.
That’s a good question, I think there are going to be restrictions in place until the virus is either gone or close to it. I would be skeptical about any vaccine, last time a vaccine was made in such a hurry (H1N1) it actually had the opposite effect of what was intended:
In late spring 2009, concern was raised in Canada that prior vaccination with the 2008–09 trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) was associated with increased risk of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1) illness.
Normally it takes several years for a vaccine to be tested for safety and effectiveness. While a lot of people like to talk shit about “anti-vaxxers”, there are some people who think anything named vaccine must be good for you.
But as far as handling the situation, you can go one of two ways - either let most people get it (the original plan with “flattening the curve”) until the virus dies of from lack of new hosts, or try to prevent the spread altogether as is being done in places like Canada. Both have their risks, either from the virus itself or as a result of restrictions meant to stop the virus, and trying to stop it may well prove futile as long as a few people are still infected somewhere.
The problem the US is having is due to too much half-stepping, shut things down for a while then encourage people to protest and riot, open things up again and then the virus is out of control so they have to shut down again. As much as either of the options I mentioned can lead to problems, the worst is not sticking to a coherent plan. All they did was delay the spread of the virus, and therefore prolong all the associated problems.