Coronavirus more deadly than the flu?

[whatbogsends]

By any reasonable standard the sheer number of people a disease kills is the true measure of it's deadliness.
Flu annually infects over three quarters of a million people and kills up to 80,000. When coronavirus tops these numbers only then will it be 'more deadly' than the flu, imho.

As the sheer number of corona virus deaths surpasses that of the flu, it will become obvious as to how naïve your argument is, especially this late into the game.

 

[com7fy8]

Isn't obesity also terrible for putting a massive strain on the respiratory system?

Well, if a person does not exercise to keep his or her lungs in shape, the person's lungs might already be weak so the person's breathing can get in more trouble than if the person had been exercising well. And I suppose this could mean more breathing trouble for ones who have not stayed in shape.

This could go for not only obese people, of course. For all I know, this could be part of why seniors can be more vulnerable . . . if they have not done aerobic exercising. It might be not only an age factor, really, then.

Now, if such is true . . . I have been pretty healthy, not overweight, no substance abuse, on we could go. But I have not been doing much breath strengthening exercising, though some more only to maintain what I've got. So, what I just have written could mean I could be more susceptible than seniors who have done more jogging and walking and tread milling than I have.

I just got this consideration; no human has told me anything about this.

 

[hedrick]

We'll look at the numbers again when it's over.

How? The only countries and US states to have gotten out of exponential growth have used fairly strong restrictions. If all countries eventually do that, we'll have no convincing way to know what would have happened without the precautions. We'll only know that there would be no obvious way to stop exponential growth until some fraction (1/2? probably not quite that bad) have had it.

 

[gaara4158]

We'll look at the numbers again when it's over.

COVID-19 vs seasonal flu: What you need to know about both

If we’re both still here.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

As the sheer number of corona virus deaths surpasses that of the flu, it will become obvious as to how naïve your argument is, especially this late into the game.

If that happens I will happily stand corrected.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

How? The only countries and US states to have gotten out of exponential growth have used fairly strong restrictions. If all countries eventually do that, we'll have no convincing way to know what would have happened without the precautions. We'll only know that there would be no obvious way to stop exponential growth until some fraction (1/2? probably not quite that bad) have had it.

All things being equal efforts against coronavirus would also effect the flu. So we're left with known infections and deaths.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

If we’re both still here.

 

[whatbogsends]

If that happens I will happily stand corrected.

I won't actually be happy if i'm right.

 

[Al Touthentop]

It is, of course, a lie:

Arguments against vaccination are contradicted by overwhelming scientific consensus about the safety and efficacy of vaccines.


'nuff said.

Most arguments for the efficacy of vaccines, are based on past performance of famous vaccines such as smallpox and polio and are touted by ignorant people like yourself who have never seriously investigated this topic.

The WHO has claimed that smallpox was eradicated due to the vaccine but there are major problems with that claim.

1. Smallpox still exists. It is today called monkey pox and the WHO says these two diseases are "indistinguishable" from one another. Meaning of course that they are in fact the same disease. Therefore, it hasn't been eradicated, just relabeled.
Orthopoxviruses Pathogenic for Humans

2. The epidemiological studies on smallpox show that vaccination at best had a 3-5% reduction effect. Proper sanitation and bed bug control was far more significant. The so-called "herd immunity" for any disease is said to require up to 90% vaccination rates. Smallpox never achieved more than 10% vaccination rates. So much for "herd immunity."

3. There were countries and groups which had over 100% smallpox vaccination rates and suffered the worst smallpox epidemics both in raw numbers and death rates. Japan, the Philippines and the British navy are the best known examples of this.

4. The smallpox vaccine does not contain either attenuated or live smallpox virus. It contains cow pox (attenuated) virus and could never provide protection from smallpox if vaccination as a theory had any merit.

In the late 1800s, Dr. Crighton of England, after Alfred Wallace published "Vaccination proved useless and dangerous (A Summary of the Proofs That Vaccination Does Not Prevent Small-pox but Really Increases It, by Alfred Russel Wallace)" - a paper which caused England to suspend its forced vaccine program - called vaccination a "grotesque superstition." This is an apt description and proponents today have no better evidence than was presented in Wallace's day.

There has never been any evidence that vaccination of any kind provides immunity. Vaccine manufacturers admit that unlike getting a disease, vaccines do not and cannot provide permanent immunity which in practice means that they can't provide any immunity at all.

As far as flu vaccine goes, it has the same problems that the smallpox vaccine had. In many cases people get the flu after taking the vaccine. It's not clear that they contracted it from the vaccine or suffered a reduction in immune response. But the manufacturers cannot be sued when their vaccines kill or maim. One has to file a complaint with the VAERS system and restitution is slow and limited.

You sir, have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

All things being equal efforts against coronavirus would also effect the flu. So we're left with known infections and deaths.

Then we'll have to compare stats on the flu from the same period of time, rather than the annual average.

 

[expos4ever]

You sir, have no idea what you're talking about.

Well, in a sense you are right. I, personally, know noting about vaccine safety.

That is why I defer to experts. Who do you defer to? Apparently some guy who would have us believe that no children were gunned down at Sandy Hook. Sorry man, but your cred has be in the gutter given this one simple fact.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Well, in a sense you are right. I, personally, know noting about vaccine safety.

That is why I defer to experts.

You defer to experts who have a financial incentive to uphold fallacy about vaccines. You don't recognize their conflict of interest.

Who do you defer to? Apparently some guy who would have us believe that no children were gunned down at Sandy Hook. Sorry man, but your cred has be in the gutter given this one simple fact.

1. I didn't defer to that reporter AT ALL regarding the research on vaccine efficacy. So this is false. I don't rely on reporters for information on that subject.

2. You haven't established that the reporter ever said any such thing. Give me a link to him saying that nobody was gunned down at Sandy Hook. People objected to him saying that there were multiple shooters, not that nobody was shot.

3. Even if the reporter had said something like you say, that has nothing at all to do with the facts he's presenting on this subject, facts which can be verified since they come from the WHO and CDC themselves.

 

[expos4ever]

deleted own post.

 

[Tanj]

Most arguments for the efficacy of vaccines, are based on past performance of famous vaccines such as smallpox and polio and are touted by ignorant people like yourself who have never seriously investigated this topic.

The WHO has claimed that smallpox was eradicated due to the vaccine but there are major problems with that claim.

1. Smallpox still exists. It is today called monkey pox and the WHO says these two diseases are "indistinguishable" from one another. Meaning of course that they are in fact the same disease. Therefore, it hasn't been eradicated, just relabeled.
Orthopoxviruses Pathogenic for Humans

2. The epidemiological studies on smallpox show that vaccination at best had a 3-5% reduction effect. Proper sanitation and bed bug control was far more significant. The so-called "herd immunity" for any disease is said to require up to 90% vaccination rates. Smallpox never achieved more than 10% vaccination rates. So much for "herd immunity."

3. There were countries and groups which had over 100% smallpox vaccination rates and suffered the worst smallpox epidemics both in raw numbers and death rates. Japan, the Philippines and the British navy are the best known examples of this.

4. The smallpox vaccine does not contain either attenuated or live smallpox virus. It contains cow pox (attenuated) virus and could never provide protection from smallpox if vaccination as a theory had any merit.

In the late 1800s, Dr. Crighton of England, after Alfred Wallace published "Vaccination proved useless and dangerous (A Summary of the Proofs That Vaccination Does Not Prevent Small-pox but Really Increases It, by Alfred Russel Wallace)" - a paper which caused England to suspend its forced vaccine program - called vaccination a "grotesque superstition." This is an apt description and proponents today have no better evidence than was presented in Wallace's day.

There has never been any evidence that vaccination of any kind provides immunity. Vaccine manufacturers admit that unlike getting a disease, vaccines do not and cannot provide permanent immunity which in practice means that they can't provide any immunity at all.

As far as flu vaccine goes, it has the same problems that the smallpox vaccine had. In many cases people get the flu after taking the vaccine. It's not clear that they contracted it from the vaccine or suffered a reduction in immune response. But the manufacturers cannot be sued when their vaccines kill or maim. One has to file a complaint with the VAERS system and restitution is slow and limited.

You sir, have no idea what you're talking about.

I have a PhD in viral epidemiology and 30 years of experience in biomedical research including vaccine production in government, private and public groups. You have posted a barrage of lies and disinformation which, in the current context, could lead to deaths.

The one that has no idea what they are talking about is you.

 

[Al Touthentop]

I have a PhD in viral epidemiology and 30 years of experience in biomedical research including vaccine production in government, private and public groups. You have posted a barrage of lies and disinformation which, in the current context, could lead to deaths.

Your pedigree does not give you the special dispensation to gaslight people with it. It's not a club to be used to dismiss facts. If I have lied, it was not intentional and it is incumbent on you to point out what is false since I have included cites for some of these things and am happy to provide cites for other things I've mentioned which I believe to be true, not because I am just pulling facts out of thin air but have read the sources.

The one that has no idea what they are talking about is you.

I'm no Phd in immunology. But I have had conversations with Phd's who are, and I haven't had this sort of response from any of them. They've been polite and haven't used their credentials as a way to shut down a conversation. Back in 1999 when I first started researching this issue, only about 25% of doctors would vaccinate their own families and you could easily find a doctor who would recommend against vaccination because, in many cases, according to the literature and vaccine inserts themselves, vaccines were more likely to cause serious side effects and even death, than the disease the vaccine was said to protect against.

I do wonder what danger there is in knowing the truth. How does an attempt to set the record straight put people in danger? I haven't recommended any action at all. People ought to make up their own minds based on the facts. The facts are that vaccines have never in history been found responsible for the eradication of any disease. Sanitation, hygiene and water treatment have been credited far more significant in the eradication of disease than vaccines.

Tetanus might be an exception wrt vaccine effiacy but tetanus is not a virus and the means by which one receives the vaccine also corresponds to the way in which they would contract the disease - ie; a wound which is not oxygen rich. Do I need to cite these facts or do they seem reasonably accurate to you?

 

[hedrick]

So it appears that the President of the US is agreeing with the premise of this thread. He thinks the mortality rate is looking more like the flu. He's thinking of reopening the economy next week. Should be interesting.

I'm continuing to listen to the briefing. Trump says he's being guided by the fact that the mortality rate just isn't as high as we had been hearing. He says it substantially under 1%, and that's without taking into account the fact that there are lots of people with the virus that aren't being counted.

 

[Al Touthentop]

So it appears that the President of the US is agreeing with the premise of this thread. He thinks the mortality rate is looking more like the flu. He's thinking of reopening the economy next week. Should be interesting.

I'm continuing to listen to the briefing. Trump says he's being guided by the fact that the mortality rate just isn't as high as we had been hearing. He says it substantially under 1%, and that's without taking into account the fact that there are lots of people with the virus that aren't being counted.

Well, in some cases, without taking into account the unknown, the rate is higher than 1%. But I don't really understand why the narrative got so out of hand. It should have been assumed all along that we couldn't know the actual number of infected people. That's not to say that washing hands, social distancing and other precautions aren't a good idea. But total chaos and panic? Crazy. The cure is more deadly than the disease. A total shutdown of the economy can itself be deadly.

 

[hedrick]

Well, in some cases, without taking into account the unknown, the rate is higher than 1%. But I don't really understand why the narrative got so out of hand. It should have been assumed all along that we couldn't know the actual number of infected people. That's not to say that washing hands, social distancing and other precautions aren't a good idea. But total chaos and panic? Crazy. The cure is more deadly than the disease. A total shutdown of the economy can itself be deadly.

Remember, what scared leaders wasn’t mortality, but the impact on hospitals. We can only guess the mortality rate, but we can see the problems with the hospitals.

I think some governors have used language that is unnecessarily scary. Shelter in place has a specific meaning. It does not include access to grocery stores. It is very understandable that people panicked. It was further confused because several leaders asked people to keep 2 weeks of food. This was not because they expected to close grocery stores or lock people in their homes, but because they wanted people to be prepared for 14 days of isolation if they were exposed. But in the context of talk about shelter in place, it sounded like a warning that we might get cut off from food. The NJ governor was more careful in his language, but our people are reading national press.

Many governors were understandably miffed by people continuing to have big events after being told not to. When trying to get people to take the situation seriously, they failed to take precautions against panicking people.

Even in NJ, the governor has been misquoted. Our government has been clear that we have shut down nonessential *retail* business. The word retail has gotten dropped, and given the impression that the whole economy is being shut down except for grocery stores. The NJ governor has used the same language.

 

[Kentonio]

If Trump thinks he can use half measures to stop this, then you guys are going to be experiencing worse than Italy very quickly. I’m extremely sorry for you.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Your pedigree does not give you the special dispensation to gaslight people with it. It's not a club to be used to dismiss facts. If I have lied, it was not intentional and it is incumbent on you to point out what is false since I have included cites for some of these things and am happy to provide cites for other things I've mentioned which I believe to be true, not because I am just pulling facts out of thin air but have read the sources.

If it’s not intentional, then you haven’t done a very good job of verifying your claims. To wit:

Smallpox still exists. It is today called monkey pox and the WHO says these two diseases are "indistinguishable" from one another. Meaning of course that they are in fact the same disease. Therefore, it hasn't been eradicated, just relabeled.

That isn’t at all how the WHO describes monkey pox:

Monkeypox

That was the very first thing I found when I started looking into your claims. The next was a story about some quack doctor who tried (and failed) to link bed bugs and smallpox. Additionally, your stats don’t pass any sort of smell test - only a quarter of doctors vaccinated in the late 90’s?!? That certainly wasn’t my experience with a mother and family members in the medical community; we all got all of our shots on time as did everybody else. It was never even questioned.

I don’t believe anything you wrote. Please provide citations for all of it.

I'm no Phd in immunology. But I have had conversations with Phd's who are, and I haven't had this sort of response from any of them. They've been polite and haven't used their credentials as a way to shut down a conversation. Back in 1999 when I first started researching this issue, only about 25% of doctors would vaccinate their own families and you could easily find a doctor who would recommend against vaccination because, in many cases, according to the literature and vaccine inserts themselves, vaccines were more likely to cause serious side effects and even death, than the disease the vaccine was said to protect against.

You spouted a bunch of dangerous nonsense then told somebody else that they didn’t know what they were talking about. You invited that sort of harsh rebuke.

I do wonder what danger there is in knowing the truth. How does an attempt to set the record straight put people in danger?

You didn’t set anything straight.