3 ms·

50,000 deaths... out of how many infected? 50% rate AT LEAST based on research out of Iceland. Backed up by research out of Stanford and New York. Are you goi

50,000 deaths... out of how many infected? 50% rate AT LEAST based on research out of Iceland. Backed up by research out of Stanford and New York. Are you going to claim that the massive number of people who show no symptoms is fake? Perhaps conventiently? 50,000 means nothing unless you add the number infect to get fatality rate. REAL rate. which is trending under 1% and approaching the flu fatality rate. https://reason.com/2020/04/09/preliminary-german-study-shows-a-covid-19-infection-fatality-rate-of-about-0-4-percent/ https://reason.com/2020/04/09/preliminary-german-study-shows... > Over the last two weeks, German virologists tested nearly 80 percent of the population of Gangelt for antibodies that indicate whether they'd been infected by the coronavirus. Around 15 percent had been infected, allowing them to calculate a COVID-19 infection fatality rate of about 0.37 percent. The researchers also concluded that people who recover from the infection are immune to reinfection, at least for a while. Added to that is more information from New York that puts the fatality rate there at roughly the same rate. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-new-york-update.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-new-... > It would also mean that the fatality rate from the virus was relatively low, about 0.5 percent, Mr. Cuomo said.

noarchy 6y ago
You went through way too much effort only to miss the point to which I replied (which was your own comment). I specifically mentioned that covid fatalities in the US appear to exceed that of the flu. That was my point. I said absolutely nothing about death rates.
- wernercd 6y ago
  My point is about rates... COVID is less lethal than the Flu even if it's temporarily causing more damage because it's new. You said nothing about death rates? I did... the rates are very important when it comes to decisions about whether or not we should lose our collective shit over it or not. Something that's more communicable than others but less lethal than the flu? We can't contain it and shutting the country down is going to destroy more lives and cause more damage than COVID. My original post was that COVID is less lethal. And it is turning out, that with more information coming out each day, this is true. My definition of Less lethal = deaths / infection count. I'd also add that it's hard to take current COVID death counts serious when hospitals across the country get paid more for COVID cases. It's hard to not see hospitals that are hurting for money turn down 30% more money for the same cases.

noarchy 6y ago

You went through way too much effort only to miss the point to which I replied (which was your own comment). I specifically mentioned that covid fatalities in the US appear to exceed that of the flu. That was my point. I said absolutely nothing about death rates.

wernercd 6y ago
My point is about rates... COVID is less lethal than the Flu even if it's temporarily causing more damage because it's new. You said nothing about death rates? I did... the rates are very important when it comes to decisions about whether or not we should lose our collective shit over it or not. Something that's more communicable than others but less lethal than the flu? We can't contain it and shutting the country down is going to destroy more lives and cause more damage than COVID. My original post was that COVID is less lethal. And it is turning out, that with more information coming out each day, this is true. My definition of Less lethal = deaths / infection count. I'd also add that it's hard to take current COVID death counts serious when hospitals across the country get paid more for COVID cases. It's hard to not see hospitals that are hurting for money turn down 30% more money for the same cases.