7 ms·

If covid was 100 times worse then the flu for kids we would see 40,000 to 80,000 pediatric deaths for 2020. We see about 266 which is comparable for the 180-400

If covid was 100 times worse then the flu for kids we would see 40,000 to 80,000 pediatric deaths for 2020. We see about 266 which is comparable for the 180-400 for the years I cited. The new test knows the difference between flu and covid, which is why the CDC recalled the old and instituted a new that did better. However, you can’t go back in time and fix the old tests. Re-read the article to comprehend it better. You are getting hung up in the artifact for 2020, where unlike previous years there were 1 pediatric death case categorized as flu instead of 180-400 like in the years I mentioned due to the old pcr covid test not knowing the difference. It’s not hard to do a Google search on this to see that your pediatric flu death data for 2020 is not representative when compared to a normal year.

lern_too_spel 5y ago
What part of the article should I reread? This part? > Did previous PCR tests confuse COVID-19 cases for influenza cases? > Not at all. Or is it this part? > Dr. Broadhurst says, "The PCR test is validated against many different coronaviruses and common respiratory viruses, including influenza so that it would not give false-positive results." Maybe you're referring to this part? > How do we know COVID-19 cases aren't actually influenza? > Every PCR test must be validated, meaning checked for its sensitivity and specificity. The Nebraska Medicine PCR test has been extensively vetted with multiple ways of validation. > Dr. Broadhurst explains, "At the beginning of the pandemic, we went through a very rigorous process. That includes demonstrating the specificity of the test to exclude anything that may cause a false positive." Or perhaps you mean this part? > Researchers also looked through large databases of viral genetic sequences – the building blocks of a virus. That way, they ensured the PCR test only picked up a piece unique to SARS-CoV-2 and not another coronavirus or influenza. I don't know how many ways your article needs to tell you you're wrong before you'll believe it, except that it's larger than four. Once you understand that, your entire argument that Covid is less dangerous for kids than the flu falls apart. The reason there was only one flu death is due to masking, social distancing, and lockdowns. In that same setting, Covid caused hundreds of deaths.
- asabjorn 5y ago
  Yes, I am incorrect with that article so when determining covid pediatric severity vs normal flu year let's just go ahead and assume all 400 pediatric covid deaths over 1.5 years are correctly classified. You are incorrect on pediatric flu deaths in a normal year being around 1. See this link to the CDC [1] about the 2019-2020 season: "total number of flu deaths in kids reported to CDC for that season to 199." which is not around 1. 199 deaths for 1 year is not hundreds of times smaller than 400 covid deaths over 1.5 years (averaged 266 over 1 year). When will you admit you are wrong on covid being “hundreds of times more lethal for children than the flu”? [1] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/spotlights/2020-2021/pediatric-flu-deaths-reach-new-high.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/spotlights/2020-2021/pediatric-flu-d...
  - lern_too_spel 5y ago
    I never claimed that pediatric flu deaths in a normal year is around one. I have repeatedly stated that pediatric flu deaths after mitigations to reduce spread of infectious respiratory diseases were in place was 1, while pediatric Covid deaths under the same conditions were hundreds of times higher. This is why my very first comment called out your misleading comparison of flu deaths before mitigations vs. Covid deaths after mitigations. Would you like me to quote all the examples? We could expect the number of pediatric Covid deaths to be higher still without those mitigations.
    - asabjorn 5y ago
      > This is why my very first comment called out your misleading comparison of flu deaths before mitigations vs. Covid deaths after mitigations. We are talking about how severe covid is for children. A comparison to a normal flu year is very relevant, because people in a normal year is not worried about the flu for children. When are you going to admit pediatric flu deaths in a normal year is around 190 and not 1? Yes, you can lock a kid inside to avoid the flu and car accidents. But that is not a way to live and not worth the reward in mitigating a low risk. > We could expect the number of pediatric Covid deaths to be higher still without those mitigations. A lot of kids already had covid due to how infectious it is. How much more severe than 400 deaths amongst 73 million US kids over 1.5 years do you claim it would be and on what grounds? 20 or 20k more deaths? Your proposed policy of vaccinating kids severely increase young kids risk for severe conditions such as heart issues including stroke and long term risks are unknown. How do you know the reward outweigh the risk of vaccinating kids that are at low risk for covid?

lern_too_spel 5y ago

What part of the article should I reread? This part? > Did previous PCR tests confuse COVID-19 cases for influenza cases? > Not at all. Or is it this part? > Dr. Broadhurst says, "The PCR test is validated against many different coronaviruses and common respiratory viruses, including influenza so that it would not give false-positive results." Maybe you're referring to this part? > How do we know COVID-19 cases aren't actually influenza? > Every PCR test must be validated, meaning checked for its sensitivity and specificity. The Nebraska Medicine PCR test has been extensively vetted with multiple ways of validation. > Dr. Broadhurst explains, "At the beginning of the pandemic, we went through a very rigorous process. That includes demonstrating the specificity of the test to exclude anything that may cause a false positive." Or perhaps you mean this part? > Researchers also looked through large databases of viral genetic sequences – the building blocks of a virus. That way, they ensured the PCR test only picked up a piece unique to SARS-CoV-2 and not another coronavirus or influenza. I don't know how many ways your article needs to tell you you're wrong before you'll believe it, except that it's larger than four. Once you understand that, your entire argument that Covid is less dangerous for kids than the flu falls apart. The reason there was only one flu death is due to masking, social distancing, and lockdowns. In that same setting, Covid caused hundreds of deaths.

asabjorn 5y ago
Yes, I am incorrect with that article so when determining covid pediatric severity vs normal flu year let's just go ahead and assume all 400 pediatric covid deaths over 1.5 years are correctly classified. You are incorrect on pediatric flu deaths in a normal year being around 1. See this link to the CDC [1] about the 2019-2020 season: "total number of flu deaths in kids reported to CDC for that season to 199." which is not around 1. 199 deaths for 1 year is not hundreds of times smaller than 400 covid deaths over 1.5 years (averaged 266 over 1 year). When will you admit you are wrong on covid being “hundreds of times more lethal for children than the flu”? [1] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/spotlights/2020-2021/pediatric-flu-deaths-reach-new-high.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/spotlights/2020-2021/pediatric-flu-d...
- lern_too_spel 5y ago
  I never claimed that pediatric flu deaths in a normal year is around one. I have repeatedly stated that pediatric flu deaths after mitigations to reduce spread of infectious respiratory diseases were in place was 1, while pediatric Covid deaths under the same conditions were hundreds of times higher. This is why my very first comment called out your misleading comparison of flu deaths before mitigations vs. Covid deaths after mitigations. Would you like me to quote all the examples? We could expect the number of pediatric Covid deaths to be higher still without those mitigations.
  - asabjorn 5y ago
    > This is why my very first comment called out your misleading comparison of flu deaths before mitigations vs. Covid deaths after mitigations. We are talking about how severe covid is for children. A comparison to a normal flu year is very relevant, because people in a normal year is not worried about the flu for children. When are you going to admit pediatric flu deaths in a normal year is around 190 and not 1? Yes, you can lock a kid inside to avoid the flu and car accidents. But that is not a way to live and not worth the reward in mitigating a low risk. > We could expect the number of pediatric Covid deaths to be higher still without those mitigations. A lot of kids already had covid due to how infectious it is. How much more severe than 400 deaths amongst 73 million US kids over 1.5 years do you claim it would be and on what grounds? 20 or 20k more deaths? Your proposed policy of vaccinating kids severely increase young kids risk for severe conditions such as heart issues including stroke and long term risks are unknown. How do you know the reward outweigh the risk of vaccinating kids that are at low risk for covid?