4 ms·

You're welcome to post the other pandemics that occurred in 2020 through 2022. Flu was practically wiped out for example. COVID19 was more fit, and many people

You're welcome to post the other pandemics that occurred in 2020 through 2022. Flu was practically wiped out for example. COVID19 was more fit, and many people were taking precautions (ie: masks) that also hampered the spread of Flu. If mRNA vaccines really inhibited general immune response to other viruses / bacteria, it should be demonstrable. Just line up the number of people who died / got sick of non-COVID19 diseases in 2020 through 2022 and compare them to the COVID19 vaccine patients, stratified for age/sex/race.

zionic 4y ago
>Just line up the number of people who died / got sick of non-COVID19 diseases in 2020 This is _extremely_ difficult to do, as a mix of both incentive structures and poor policy lead to any death with a positive PCR test being counted as a COVID death. It's practically impossible now to go back and figure out how many were _actually_ "killed by COVID" vs "died _with_ COVID".
- peter422 4y ago
  Most people who had covid and died probably wouldn’t have died so quickly if they didn’t have covid. Why you do the mental gymnastics to pretend this isn’t true is so baffling.
  - spookthesunset 4y ago
    I’m sure George Floyd would have lived a little longer if he wasn’t Covid positive when he died. It doesn’t matter anyway. The data required to support our mitigations stopped mattering a long long time ago. ..Sometime back when the “4% kill rate” predicted by the imperial college paper turned out to be very very wrong and when all those temporary military hospital things got closed because they weren’t being used. That might have been a good time to reevaluate what the fuck we were doing but instead of celebrating the fact that Covid wasn’t nearly as bad as predicted we just doubled down for a year and a half more instead. Honestly it’s best to just take the numbers at face value and assume any overcount is balanced by undercounts.
    - peter422 4y ago
      I said most, not all. If 95% of people died from covid, and 5% died with covid, then basically for all intents and purposes and how we use this data, the distinction is irrelevant.
      - spookthesunset 4y ago
        I agree. I just take the numbers at face value. Trying to suggest they are under or over counted is a fools errand. It will take decades of distance from this event for cooler heads to tally up what really happened.
    - dragontamer 4y ago
      > I’m sure George Floyd would have lived a little longer if he wasn’t Covid positive when he died. George Floyd tested positive for COVID19 before he died, but its not listed in his cause of death. Is that really the best counterexample you've got of an improper death certificate? https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/711012da318e4964ace94ebccc4cbedf/1000.jpeg https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/711012da318e49... There's not even any COVID19 listed on here.
  - autoexec 4y ago
    You're right. At one point I read it was as high as 10 years that the average person who died of covid could have otherwise lived on for. I suspect that number has changed a few times over the pandemic, but even a few years more years with a loved one is priceless, losing anything close to a decade would be a massive loss.
- jat850 4y ago
  > It's practically impossible now to go back and figure out how many were _actually_ "killed by COVID" vs "died _with_ COVID". No, it's not. Which is why some health regions are going back and doing exactly this, to reflect the distinction.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- dragontamer 4y ago
  > It's practically impossible now to go back and figure out how many were _actually_ "killed by COVID" vs "died _with_ COVID". Have you ever read a death certificate? They don't even read "killed by COVID19". The direct cause of death is _NEVER_ COVID19. https://dphhs.mt.gov/vitalrecords/certificationofcovid-19 https://dphhs.mt.gov/vitalrecords/certificationofcovid-19 COVID19 doesn't even play a role until 2 or 3 lines later. Doctors write down "Killed by X" which was caused by "Y" which was caused by "Z". COVID19 is never "X", its always Y, Z, or later. --------- Because we have these statistics, we can correlate "X" causes. If "X" is "blunt force trauma to the head", it is unlikely that "Y" or "Z" will be COVID19. But don't take my word for it. There's plenty of death certificates, and such data has been coallated together. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e2.htm See Table 2 in this list, as an example. You can see that the immediate cause of death for most COVID19 patients is Pneumonia, unspecified (J18.9), followed by Acute respiratory failure (J96.0). Which of these ICD codes do you think is being misclassified as a COVID19 death? Please be specific. Any such large scale misclassification would be obviously in the data here.
logic_beats_pro 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Teever 4y ago
  That only makes sense if people were wearing masks to combat the flu before covid started and then Republicans stopped wearing them to spite covid mitigation efforts but that's not the case. From my understanding the flu is less contagious than covid so any efforts we were taking to stamp out covid that were holding covid in check would have stamped out the flu.
- peter422 4y ago
  Not how communicable diseases work. If enough people in the population take certain precautions, and those precautions limit the spread of disease, then there is some sweet spot between the virus’ contagiousness and number of people who take precautions that will cause the virus to not spread.
- edmundsauto 4y ago
  Some people wore masks some of the time, varying by seasonality, weighted regionally by the dominant political ideology of the area. My understanding is that masks were more effective against the flu than covid because Covid can spread in finer particles than the flu, which makes masks more effective in fighting the flu. > people with the flu were testing positive for COVID and health authorities were counting flu cases as COVID. We know this happens, the critical missing part of your argument is your estimate of frequency. If your theory were true, the precipitous drop in flu cases indicates that almost everyone with the flu also had Covid. That doesn't pass the smell test to me - I feel confident we would have heard if there were that high a correlation, given all the research going on at the time.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  Okay. Take any COVID-19 test kit and see if someone sick with the flu tests positive with them. There is a simple thing called science. COVID-19 test kits are literally free. It wouldn't even be a hard test to do. EDIT: In fact, most COVID19 test kits come with their documentation, showing how well they test vs the Flu (guess what? Most of them don't detect the flu at all) See BinaxNow's test kit documentation, page 3: https://www.fda.gov/media/147254/download https://www.fda.gov/media/147254/download > No cross-reactivity or interference was seen with the following microorganisms when tested at the concentration presented in the table below Meanwhile, Flu type B/Yamagata has gone extinct, proving the point I made earlier.

zionic 4y ago

>Just line up the number of people who died / got sick of non-COVID19 diseases in 2020 This is _extremely_ difficult to do, as a mix of both incentive structures and poor policy lead to any death with a positive PCR test being counted as a COVID death. It's practically impossible now to go back and figure out how many were _actually_ "killed by COVID" vs "died _with_ COVID".

peter422 4y ago
Most people who had covid and died probably wouldn’t have died so quickly if they didn’t have covid. Why you do the mental gymnastics to pretend this isn’t true is so baffling.
- spookthesunset 4y ago
  I’m sure George Floyd would have lived a little longer if he wasn’t Covid positive when he died. It doesn’t matter anyway. The data required to support our mitigations stopped mattering a long long time ago. ..Sometime back when the “4% kill rate” predicted by the imperial college paper turned out to be very very wrong and when all those temporary military hospital things got closed because they weren’t being used. That might have been a good time to reevaluate what the fuck we were doing but instead of celebrating the fact that Covid wasn’t nearly as bad as predicted we just doubled down for a year and a half more instead. Honestly it’s best to just take the numbers at face value and assume any overcount is balanced by undercounts.
  - peter422 4y ago
    I said most, not all. If 95% of people died from covid, and 5% died with covid, then basically for all intents and purposes and how we use this data, the distinction is irrelevant.
    - spookthesunset 4y ago
      I agree. I just take the numbers at face value. Trying to suggest they are under or over counted is a fools errand. It will take decades of distance from this event for cooler heads to tally up what really happened.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    > I’m sure George Floyd would have lived a little longer if he wasn’t Covid positive when he died. George Floyd tested positive for COVID19 before he died, but its not listed in his cause of death. Is that really the best counterexample you've got of an improper death certificate? https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/711012da318e4964ace94ebccc4cbedf/1000.jpeg https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/711012da318e49... There's not even any COVID19 listed on here.
- autoexec 4y ago
  You're right. At one point I read it was as high as 10 years that the average person who died of covid could have otherwise lived on for. I suspect that number has changed a few times over the pandemic, but even a few years more years with a loved one is priceless, losing anything close to a decade would be a massive loss.
jat850 4y ago
> It's practically impossible now to go back and figure out how many were _actually_ "killed by COVID" vs "died _with_ COVID". No, it's not. Which is why some health regions are going back and doing exactly this, to reflect the distinction.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dragontamer 4y ago
> It's practically impossible now to go back and figure out how many were _actually_ "killed by COVID" vs "died _with_ COVID". Have you ever read a death certificate? They don't even read "killed by COVID19". The direct cause of death is _NEVER_ COVID19. https://dphhs.mt.gov/vitalrecords/certificationofcovid-19 https://dphhs.mt.gov/vitalrecords/certificationofcovid-19 COVID19 doesn't even play a role until 2 or 3 lines later. Doctors write down "Killed by X" which was caused by "Y" which was caused by "Z". COVID19 is never "X", its always Y, Z, or later. --------- Because we have these statistics, we can correlate "X" causes. If "X" is "blunt force trauma to the head", it is unlikely that "Y" or "Z" will be COVID19. But don't take my word for it. There's plenty of death certificates, and such data has been coallated together. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e2.htm See Table 2 in this list, as an example. You can see that the immediate cause of death for most COVID19 patients is Pneumonia, unspecified (J18.9), followed by Acute respiratory failure (J96.0). Which of these ICD codes do you think is being misclassified as a COVID19 death? Please be specific. Any such large scale misclassification would be obviously in the data here.

logic_beats_pro 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Teever 4y ago
That only makes sense if people were wearing masks to combat the flu before covid started and then Republicans stopped wearing them to spite covid mitigation efforts but that's not the case. From my understanding the flu is less contagious than covid so any efforts we were taking to stamp out covid that were holding covid in check would have stamped out the flu.
peter422 4y ago
Not how communicable diseases work. If enough people in the population take certain precautions, and those precautions limit the spread of disease, then there is some sweet spot between the virus’ contagiousness and number of people who take precautions that will cause the virus to not spread.
edmundsauto 4y ago
Some people wore masks some of the time, varying by seasonality, weighted regionally by the dominant political ideology of the area. My understanding is that masks were more effective against the flu than covid because Covid can spread in finer particles than the flu, which makes masks more effective in fighting the flu. > people with the flu were testing positive for COVID and health authorities were counting flu cases as COVID. We know this happens, the critical missing part of your argument is your estimate of frequency. If your theory were true, the precipitous drop in flu cases indicates that almost everyone with the flu also had Covid. That doesn't pass the smell test to me - I feel confident we would have heard if there were that high a correlation, given all the research going on at the time.
dragontamer 4y ago
Okay. Take any COVID-19 test kit and see if someone sick with the flu tests positive with them. There is a simple thing called science. COVID-19 test kits are literally free. It wouldn't even be a hard test to do. EDIT: In fact, most COVID19 test kits come with their documentation, showing how well they test vs the Flu (guess what? Most of them don't detect the flu at all) See BinaxNow's test kit documentation, page 3: https://www.fda.gov/media/147254/download https://www.fda.gov/media/147254/download > No cross-reactivity or interference was seen with the following microorganisms when tested at the concentration presented in the table below Meanwhile, Flu type B/Yamagata has gone extinct, proving the point I made earlier.