5 ms·

Perhaps the corona virus is asymptomatic for some people (as is known to be), and the effects they are feeling are from the flu. How many people get a false po

Perhaps the corona virus is asymptomatic for some people (as is known to be), and the effects they are feeling are from the flu. How many people get a false positive (or true positive that would otherwise be asymptomatic) while also being positive for the flu? Maybe corona virus is an enabler of some other disease, like a particularly virulent flu or some other respiratory infection. This questions are inconvenient, so they'll go unasked by the media, let alone answered.

alpaca128 5y ago
> This questions are inconvenient, so they'll go unasked by the media, let alone answered. Literally an infinite number of questions go unasked by the media. Often because they're a pointless waste of time. I'd say if leading virologists around the world looked at it in a lab and agree it's not some mystery illness, most media will go with that. At least the reputable ones not fishing for cheap attention from paranoid conspiracy theorists.
- linuxftw 5y ago
  Leading virologists said not to give people anti-inflammatories at the beginning of the pandemic and probably killed a bunch of people. > At least the reputable ones not fishing for cheap attention from paranoid conspiracy theorists. We're not talking about paranoid conspiracy theories here, we're talking about the inexplicable disappearance of influenza globally, when it should have the same transmission characteristics as corona virus. Corona might spread more rapidly, but it should spread in the same manner. It's entirely possible that the bulk of people with symptoms actually have a concurrent infection (eg, the flu). We already know the vast, vast majority of deaths have a 'comorbidity.'
  - space_fountain 5y ago
    > when it should have the same transmission characteristics as corona virus. Corona might spread more rapidly, but it should spread in the same manner. That's just like not true. Different diseases spread differently. It seems like covid will spread better through smaller droplets for example. And even if it were you just said that covid spreads easier. Disease transmission isn't linear so if interventions were enough to dip Flu's reproduction rate below 1 we'd see more or less what we've seen. Very little spread. Even if we ignore all of that and pretend you're right and really this year of horror has just been Flu cases, the health care system almost collapse in Italy, NYC, LA, and now India is still a huge deal. Hugely more people are dying this year than do in an average year. People died, literally dies in all of these places because they weren't able to get into a hospital. I don't care if it was actually covid (it was) or not killing them
    - linuxftw 5y ago
      > the health care system almost collapse in Italy, NYC, LA, and now India is still a huge deal. This I can agree with. But our way of dealing with the problem hasn't solved that going forward whatsoever. Are we going to ignore the fact that NYC has been shutting down hospitals for decades[1]? > Hugely more people are dying this year than do in an average year. Not according to the numbers I've seen. > People died, literally dies in all of these places because they weren't able to get into a hospital. What are the death rates for people in hospitals compared to people dying with covid outside of hospitals? What interventions are hospitals providing to most patients that are conclusively saving their lives? At first, it was ventilators, but that has quietly become not recommend for most patients. I happen to be close friends with someone that worked on the covid floor in a major regional hospital. Most people in the hospital were being treated for pneumonia, some of them were on supplemental oxygen. The hospital was never overrun, only a small portion was dedicated as a covid wing. My friend never contracted covid, nor did anyone else they worked with. 1: https://indypendent.org/2014/04/nycs-vanishing-hospitals/ https://indypendent.org/2014/04/nycs-vanishing-hospitals/
space_fountain 5y ago
I mean the first one is possible. I think it has been thought of though, we do random testing sometimes and at least some covid samples are also tested for flu. The second just seems wrong. Like it could have been true a year ago, but it really would be known by now and there really isn't any reason it would be inconvenient for any sort of narrative. Diseases that weaken your immune system enough for some other disease to be killing loads of people are still worrying and big deals. We would still be calling for lock downs regardless of if covid is directly or indirectly causing extra deaths
- linuxftw 5y ago
  > Diseases that weaken your immune system Why are some people to be weakened and not others? Maybe that's what we should be investigating.
maxerickson 5y ago
There's lots and lots of samples being tested for flu. Is the theory then that there is some bias where the hidden cases don't get tested for flu at all and only mistakes are sent for testing? https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm It says right on the page that Covid makes the data difficult to interpret, the thing I'm pointing to is the 900,000 samples tested.

alpaca128 5y ago

> This questions are inconvenient, so they'll go unasked by the media, let alone answered. Literally an infinite number of questions go unasked by the media. Often because they're a pointless waste of time. I'd say if leading virologists around the world looked at it in a lab and agree it's not some mystery illness, most media will go with that. At least the reputable ones not fishing for cheap attention from paranoid conspiracy theorists.

linuxftw 5y ago
Leading virologists said not to give people anti-inflammatories at the beginning of the pandemic and probably killed a bunch of people. > At least the reputable ones not fishing for cheap attention from paranoid conspiracy theorists. We're not talking about paranoid conspiracy theories here, we're talking about the inexplicable disappearance of influenza globally, when it should have the same transmission characteristics as corona virus. Corona might spread more rapidly, but it should spread in the same manner. It's entirely possible that the bulk of people with symptoms actually have a concurrent infection (eg, the flu). We already know the vast, vast majority of deaths have a 'comorbidity.'
- space_fountain 5y ago
  > when it should have the same transmission characteristics as corona virus. Corona might spread more rapidly, but it should spread in the same manner. That's just like not true. Different diseases spread differently. It seems like covid will spread better through smaller droplets for example. And even if it were you just said that covid spreads easier. Disease transmission isn't linear so if interventions were enough to dip Flu's reproduction rate below 1 we'd see more or less what we've seen. Very little spread. Even if we ignore all of that and pretend you're right and really this year of horror has just been Flu cases, the health care system almost collapse in Italy, NYC, LA, and now India is still a huge deal. Hugely more people are dying this year than do in an average year. People died, literally dies in all of these places because they weren't able to get into a hospital. I don't care if it was actually covid (it was) or not killing them
  - linuxftw 5y ago
    > the health care system almost collapse in Italy, NYC, LA, and now India is still a huge deal. This I can agree with. But our way of dealing with the problem hasn't solved that going forward whatsoever. Are we going to ignore the fact that NYC has been shutting down hospitals for decades[1]? > Hugely more people are dying this year than do in an average year. Not according to the numbers I've seen. > People died, literally dies in all of these places because they weren't able to get into a hospital. What are the death rates for people in hospitals compared to people dying with covid outside of hospitals? What interventions are hospitals providing to most patients that are conclusively saving their lives? At first, it was ventilators, but that has quietly become not recommend for most patients. I happen to be close friends with someone that worked on the covid floor in a major regional hospital. Most people in the hospital were being treated for pneumonia, some of them were on supplemental oxygen. The hospital was never overrun, only a small portion was dedicated as a covid wing. My friend never contracted covid, nor did anyone else they worked with. 1: https://indypendent.org/2014/04/nycs-vanishing-hospitals/ https://indypendent.org/2014/04/nycs-vanishing-hospitals/

space_fountain 5y ago

I mean the first one is possible. I think it has been thought of though, we do random testing sometimes and at least some covid samples are also tested for flu. The second just seems wrong. Like it could have been true a year ago, but it really would be known by now and there really isn't any reason it would be inconvenient for any sort of narrative. Diseases that weaken your immune system enough for some other disease to be killing loads of people are still worrying and big deals. We would still be calling for lock downs regardless of if covid is directly or indirectly causing extra deaths

linuxftw 5y ago
> Diseases that weaken your immune system Why are some people to be weakened and not others? Maybe that's what we should be investigating.

maxerickson 5y ago

There's lots and lots of samples being tested for flu. Is the theory then that there is some bias where the hidden cases don't get tested for flu at all and only mistakes are sent for testing? https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm It says right on the page that Covid makes the data difficult to interpret, the thing I'm pointing to is the 900,000 samples tested.