On big subs, like worldnews.

Like, a lot of people quoting one CDC report on IFR that presented COVID as less dangerous, without actually knowing the difference between CFR and IFR. Despite the fact that the numbers (in the report) are still very fucking high.

I hear more and more people saying that countries overreport deaths, based on some anecdotal evidence (one time a bike crash was reported as a COVID death), which is complete bullshit, of course, easily checked by looking at excess deaths.

Absolutely braindead comparisons to seasonal flu, as if seasonal flu isn't

  1. less dangerous
  2. a huge fucking problem and a cause of millions of deaths

Chapos, COVID is the most deadly airborne virus pandemic since spanish flu, and the most deadly virus since HIV/AIDS.

Oh yeah, I say "since HIV/AIDS", but HIV/AIDS pandemic is still happening. Literally millions of people die. We haven't cured it. Who said that we'll cure this one?

Also, you cant really compare coronavirus to HIV, but if we look at annual deaths, then HIV was at its peak at ~1.9 million deaths (in 2005, I think). Compare that to COVID. This is just the first 7-8 months of the pandemic and we already have more than a million deaths! That is, despite the fact that:

  1. Deaths are seriously underreported (I'm talking 30-50% just in the US. Imagine fucking Brasil. Russia? In Russia its way worse).
  2. Coronoviruses are seasonal and they peak at winter
  3. The whole world went into lockdown for months.

Holy shit, I fucking can't.

  • 420bootywizard [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    I think it's a perfect example of how the general public has a limited vocabulary with which to discuss these things.

    I'm also a clinical lab scientist, so speaking in very specific terms about this stuff is kind of my bag.

    • GottaJiBooUrns [they/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I’m also a clinical lab scientist, so speaking in very specific terms about this stuff is kind of my bag.

      lol. Ah, well there's your answer.

      I worked as an ER scribe for several years and then as a hospitalist scribe for a couple years after that. Throughout all this time I saw innumerable examples of the physicians saying the patient "caught" pneumonia, or "got" pneumonia, or whatever generalized term you want to use. Medical professionals understand that you catch Strep pneumo, or Klebsiella, or Mycoplasma, or whatever, and not just "pneumonia," but there's really no need to be anally retentive like that when discussing the patient with another person on the treatment team, you know? Especially considering that most of the time they don't even know what pathogen is causing the pneumonia until a blood or sputum sample gets down to you guys.

      And yeah, the general public might not understand that you don't actually catch pneumonia, you actually catch some pathogen that causes it, but again, I'm struggling to see how that makes much of a difference in this case.