The data is worthless. All of it. Every country, state, county, city, hospital, etc has their own criteria, plus political pressures. You can't just throw dissimilar numbers at each other.
Additionally, CDC moved away from requiring positive COVID tests and mixes "probable" (which is a very vague criteria) with positive. On top of that, they are mixing antibody and PCR tests, calling positives on them the exact same.
Not to mention that the numbers can be wildly influenced by undertiminable factors. Because we didn't shut down everything which leaves the burden of quarantining on unchecked people to not go into grocery stores and the few still crowded places.
Both things are true though. I'm firmly against the lockdowns and everything else because they're useless. Deaths are down, because the wuflu isn't that bad. It'll end up being just as bad as the normal flu, at least if cuomo et al wouldn't have killed people in nursing homes, but here we are...
I'm also going to call out the left as hypocritical faggots for bitching at everyone about 'saving grandma' but yet protests and riots for a meth head who died of a heart attack due to drug use are fine? Fuck that bullshit.
I post this not because I believe it, but because there's mention of the flu's IFR.
.1%.
This is going to end up with the same IFR, once we get even more tests done, and find out tons more people have it, and it's not that bad.
Note, excess deaths now are the harvesting effect, and due to cuomo et all killing 50k people from sending infected into nursing homes intentionally.
Lastly, antibody testing is only effective if antibodies are present, the limit for the wuflu appears to be 6 weeks, give or take. So if I had it 2 months ago, say, I wouldn't show positive even though I had it and got over it.
No, the wuflu panic is insane for anyone who does more than a modicum of reasearch.
Just saying, to get 130k dead with a .1% IFR, it would mean ~35% of the US has already had it. I just don't see it. Also, 130k is pretty lowball compared to the overall excess mortality in the recent time frame. I think we'll be lucky to see it settle at .5, with ~.7-1 being more likely. If your right, we should see herd immunity in a couple months, though. So there's that.
NYC had 20% with antibodes early may, which obviously wasn't counting people who had it but didn't have antibodies, which apparently last 6 ish weeks.
So yeah, I can easily see it, in places that got it and didn't over react. In the south and midwest, we'll get there quick if we don't act retarded and lock down over people being irrational.
The data is worthless. All of it. Every country, state, county, city, hospital, etc has their own criteria, plus political pressures. You can't just throw dissimilar numbers at each other.
They don't want good data, they want to be mad.
Additionally, CDC moved away from requiring positive COVID tests and mixes "probable" (which is a very vague criteria) with positive. On top of that, they are mixing antibody and PCR tests, calling positives on them the exact same.
All this started early June.
Not to mention that the numbers can be wildly influenced by undertiminable factors. Because we didn't shut down everything which leaves the burden of quarantining on unchecked people to not go into grocery stores and the few still crowded places.
Both things are true though. I'm firmly against the lockdowns and everything else because they're useless. Deaths are down, because the wuflu isn't that bad. It'll end up being just as bad as the normal flu, at least if cuomo et al wouldn't have killed people in nursing homes, but here we are...
I'm also going to call out the left as hypocritical faggots for bitching at everyone about 'saving grandma' but yet protests and riots for a meth head who died of a heart attack due to drug use are fine? Fuck that bullshit.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
Deadlier than the flu, certainly. Also, the best chance we've ever had to keep social security solvent.
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-covid-19-isnt-the-flu
I post this not because I believe it, but because there's mention of the flu's IFR.
.1%.
This is going to end up with the same IFR, once we get even more tests done, and find out tons more people have it, and it's not that bad.
Note, excess deaths now are the harvesting effect, and due to cuomo et all killing 50k people from sending infected into nursing homes intentionally.
Lastly, antibody testing is only effective if antibodies are present, the limit for the wuflu appears to be 6 weeks, give or take. So if I had it 2 months ago, say, I wouldn't show positive even though I had it and got over it.
No, the wuflu panic is insane for anyone who does more than a modicum of reasearch.
It's not. It's already killed 4 times the amount a normal flu season does, despite lockdowns and shit.
We want it to be, because muh freedom from masks and to grill n sheeit, but it's worse than the flu, that's pretty certain.
Because cuomo et al killed 50k people, but sure.
It won't be worse than the flu, in the end. This just spreads more. That's why we use the IFR.
Just saying, to get 130k dead with a .1% IFR, it would mean ~35% of the US has already had it. I just don't see it. Also, 130k is pretty lowball compared to the overall excess mortality in the recent time frame. I think we'll be lucky to see it settle at .5, with ~.7-1 being more likely. If your right, we should see herd immunity in a couple months, though. So there's that.
NYC had 20% with antibodes early may, which obviously wasn't counting people who had it but didn't have antibodies, which apparently last 6 ish weeks.
So yeah, I can easily see it, in places that got it and didn't over react. In the south and midwest, we'll get there quick if we don't act retarded and lock down over people being irrational.
Hate facts.
:pogfish: totally ready to see this reported in the media. Any day now