Even if it kills (which it likely will), our track record shows that didn't care enough about that, and in a decreasing manner. So it'll only be worse.
Pretty sure every virus has killed people, from the cold, to flu, and of course covid. It feels like now the death rate for the latest variants of covid are pretty comparable to the flu, the virus has lost a lot of its killing power over time.
yes, and we should be masking for that as well. even so, covid is far more insidious because so many of the disabilities it leaves behind are invisible.
I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency, it is not an apple to orange kind of thing to say all viruses can kill. I'm not denying some kill more than others, but they all kill. If you can't understand this fact, I don't know what to tell you.
I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency
You're stating that all viruses kill (which may have some holes in it already) therefore all viruses are technically the same, which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.
If you can't understand this fact, I don't know what to tell you.
If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn't see it. You're just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.
That's not what I'm saying at all, does saying all people die mean all people are the same? Does saying all murders kill mean they are all the same? No, there are obviously differences.
which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.
The fact I said isn't about differences in damage, facts don't have to say everything to be facts. My fact also isn't saying or implying that they do the same damage.
If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn't see it. You're just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.
Look at the context of who I was responding to. They were basically saying that if it kills we should wear a mask, I pointed out that All viruses kill and we don't wear masks because of those, so just the fact that it kills isn't enough.
Look at the context of who I was responding to. They were basically saying that if it kills we should wear a mask, I pointed out that All viruses kill and we don't wear masks because of those, so just the fact that it kills isn't enough.
And there's the false equivalency that you're trying to banish with sophistry magic.
They said "it kills" in a non-precise pedantically-incorrect way about something that is dangerous and you're doing victory laps congratulating yourself on a tier "technically correct" masturbatory moment.
Again, I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency, what I am saying isn't that.
Define dangerous, because I wouldn't call current strains of covid dangerous. The hospitalized death rate isn't that far off the flu at this point. It used to be more deadly, but it's just not anymore.
But hey, at least we can agree I'm technically correct.
You're being dense on purpose because it's that important for you to congratulate yourself on a silly pedantic thing that none one else cared about, not the person you were being smug to in the first place, and not to me.
But hey, at least we can agree I'm technically correct.
Fun fact: the CDC readjusted what the 'normal' rate of deaths is to include the years of the pandemic so now it's harder than ever to find hard numbers because "excess deaths" was one of the last ways to get any information at all!
For the love of god: everyone should ignores what the CDC says. You can see for yourself how many people died from Covid under their watch. They have no morals and they made it obvious by downplaying Covid
Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.
Anything that doesn't make an observable, statistically significant difference, has no cause to further impose restriction on how people live their lives
I know I've read reports about the latest variants being much less deadly. I did see one study recently which for patients presenting to hospital covid was a few percentage points more likely to result in death compared to hospitalized flu patients. There were a lot more covid patients though.
Found it:
death rates among people hospitalized for COVID-19 were 17% to 21% in 2020 vs 6% in this study, while death rates for those hospitalized for influenza were 3.8% in 2020 vs 3.7% in this study
I mean, that's one way to look at it. I looked at it as only a couple percent higher death rate than the flu. Either way, a little less than 2x is way better than like 5x worse.
Even if we pedantically accept that 'almost double' is really 'just a few percent higher' while we're looking at a single digit likelihood, 'just a few percent more' than for the flu is a lot more people in overall numbers with something that spreads far quicker than the flu. We could get the death rate of Covid down to ½ the rate for the flu but if infections are more than double (this is just an example, I don't know the actual stats on this one), it still means Covid would be more deadly. Unless I'm missing something obvious.
COVID is basically a year round disease where flu is seasonal. So yeah it's gonna produce about an order of magnitude more death with just a few percent higher death rate.
I'm not sure how severe an effect this would have on the numbers, but the death rate would non-negligibly go down after millions of the most vulnerable people died in the first wave. As well, the newer variants get more contagious and bypass immune responses more easily, and we're taking way fewer precautions as a society. so 6% is a lower percent but still an incredibly high number
I saw it as an evolutionary benefit to be less deadly. The way I'm seeing this, the virus's purpose in life is to spread, so a higher infection and contagious rate with less death rate is ideal from an evolution standpoint.
It's important to note that every state I'm aware of has long ended their testing and reporting, literally doing the Trump thing. So we actually have no idea what the numbers are.
The numbers I've seen are from hospitalized patients, which should still be tracked, and tracked in a similar way to the flu. It doesn't give us the full story for sure, but it gives us something to compare.
Unless the strain is killing a sizable amount of people getting it it'll be hard to get people to wear masks en masse again.
Even if it kills (which it likely will), our track record shows that didn't care enough about that, and in a decreasing manner. So it'll only be worse.
Pretty sure every virus has killed people, from the cold, to flu, and of course covid. It feels like now the death rate for the latest variants of covid are pretty comparable to the flu, the virus has lost a lot of its killing power over time.
deleted by creator
Of course it does, the flu kills millions and leaves even more disabled.
deleted by creator
Again, the flu disables millions every year.
deleted by creator
Mah freedums.. No but we should all be masking. I mask just for air quality reasons.
yes, and we should be masking for that as well. even so, covid is far more insidious because so many of the disabilities it leaves behind are invisible.
False equivalency intensifies
What is false about that statement? Viruses kill, that's not false at all. Just because covid has killed at higher rates doesn't change my statement.
The point is that a virus being deadly is just a fact of all viruses.
You're the living embodiment of this emoji
That is a false equivalency, emphasis equivalency. Spare us your liberal sophistry.
I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency, it is not an apple to orange kind of thing to say all viruses can kill. I'm not denying some kill more than others, but they all kill. If you can't understand this fact, I don't know what to tell you.
You're stating that all viruses kill (which may have some holes in it already) therefore all viruses are technically the same, which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.
If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn't see it. You're just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.
Yes, I am, and I'm pretty sure that's a fact.
That's not what I'm saying at all, does saying all people die mean all people are the same? Does saying all murders kill mean they are all the same? No, there are obviously differences.
The fact I said isn't about differences in damage, facts don't have to say everything to be facts. My fact also isn't saying or implying that they do the same damage.
Look at the context of who I was responding to. They were basically saying that if it kills we should wear a mask, I pointed out that All viruses kill and we don't wear masks because of those, so just the fact that it kills isn't enough.
And there's the false equivalency that you're trying to banish with sophistry magic.
They said "it kills" in a non-precise pedantically-incorrect way about something that is dangerous and you're doing victory laps congratulating yourself on a
tier "technically correct" masturbatory moment.
Again, I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency, what I am saying isn't that.
Define dangerous, because I wouldn't call current strains of covid dangerous. The hospitalized death rate isn't that far off the flu at this point. It used to be more deadly, but it's just not anymore.
But hey, at least we can agree I'm technically correct.
You're being dense on purpose because it's that important for you to congratulate yourself on a silly pedantic thing that none one else cared about, not the person you were being smug to in the first place, and not to me.
Your self-congratulatory narcissism is noted.
Removed by mod
Fun fact: the CDC readjusted what the 'normal' rate of deaths is to include the years of the pandemic so now it's harder than ever to find hard numbers because "excess deaths" was one of the last ways to get any information at all!
For the love of god: everyone should ignores what the CDC says. You can see for yourself how many people died from Covid under their watch. They have no morals and they made it obvious by downplaying Covid
Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.
Anything that doesn't make an observable, statistically significant difference, has no cause to further impose restriction on how people live their lives
Sharp edges don't happen from demographic trends. This is pure rationalization.
Further than what?? What restrictions??
And what are you implying? Covid has no observable affect on public health? Tell that to the millions of people still getting disabled every year.
I know I've read reports about the latest variants being much less deadly. I did see one study recently which for patients presenting to hospital covid was a few percentage points more likely to result in death compared to hospitalized flu patients. There were a lot more covid patients though.
Found it:
So there is some data backing up the feelings I've gotten from everything I've been hearing and seeing.
Removed by mod
I mean, that's one way to look at it. I looked at it as only a couple percent higher death rate than the flu. Either way, a little less than 2x is way better than like 5x worse.
Removed by mod
Even if we pedantically accept that 'almost double' is really 'just a few percent higher' while we're looking at a single digit likelihood, 'just a few percent more' than for the flu is a lot more people in overall numbers with something that spreads far quicker than the flu. We could get the death rate of Covid down to ½ the rate for the flu but if infections are more than double (this is just an example, I don't know the actual stats on this one), it still means Covid would be more deadly. Unless I'm missing something obvious.
COVID is basically a year round disease where flu is seasonal. So yeah it's gonna produce about an order of magnitude more death with just a few percent higher death rate.
That's how I understood it, too. Turns out it's a difficult thing to comprehend, though.
I'm not sure how severe an effect this would have on the numbers, but the death rate would non-negligibly go down after millions of the most vulnerable people died in the first wave. As well, the newer variants get more contagious and bypass immune responses more easily, and we're taking way fewer precautions as a society. so 6% is a lower percent but still an incredibly high number
I saw it as an evolutionary benefit to be less deadly. The way I'm seeing this, the virus's purpose in life is to spread, so a higher infection and contagious rate with less death rate is ideal from an evolution standpoint.
Ideal for it, not ideal for anyone who enjoys the full function of their mind and circulatory system.
The mind thing isn't a dig at you btw, it's a reference to the brain fog
It's important to note that every state I'm aware of has long ended their testing and reporting, literally doing the Trump thing. So we actually have no idea what the numbers are.
The numbers I've seen are from hospitalized patients, which should still be tracked, and tracked in a similar way to the flu. It doesn't give us the full story for sure, but it gives us something to compare.