3 ms·
Yeah except it's not an exceptionally bad disease. For a person who is not in a risk group, it's the same thing as the flu.
by jseban 5y ago
Yeah except it's not an exceptionally bad disease. For a person who is not in a risk group, it's the same thing as the flu.
- rbanffy 5y ago> it's the same thing as the flu. Not at all. How many people experience long-term crippling effects from the flu? BTW, the care we are taking has reduced the number of flu cases too. And even if it were just a flu for you, there’s a 3% chance each person you infect will die a horrible death after a month of agony.
- jseban 5y ago3%? I'd take that risk any day, even if I was in a risk group. Who want destroy society over that, only a lunatic
- rbanffy 5y agoGreat. If you want to take that risk, self infect and isolate. You have no right to make this choice for others by willingly being a host that can infect others.
- worik 5y agoSteady on. Hyperbole does not behove you. Nobody is destroying society. Nobody here is a lunatic. 3% is too high.
- jseban 5y agoNo hyperbole needed, lunacy is already the "new normal". Supporting a lockdown against the flu would give you at least the diagnosis of hypochondria, aspberger syndrome and paranoid delusions.
- rimliu 5y agoYes, not at all. For young kids flu is way worse.
- rbanffy 5y agoIt's good, then, that the measures we took to contain COVID also reduced the incidence of influenza. COVID is still new, while flu has been with us for millenia. Give it time and opportunities and it'll perfect itself.