You guys do understand that people with unhealthy compromised immune systems are the ones dying from this right? People in there 70's and up, with diabetes and asthma? Alzheimer's and Dementia?
90% of us are on the sauce, our immune systems are much stronger than the average person.
Vitamin c, zinc and echinacea. Practice good hygiene and we'll be fine.
So, um, you do realize that androgens increase your risk of catching and dying from covid, right? Men in general are more vulnerable to the disease, and there are strong links between androgens and ACE receptor activity, and these links have played out in Covid patients.
Also, this disease kills people through cytokine storms - which are closely linked with glucose management, and 70% of Americans are overweight, 40% are outright obese and this doesn't include people who are normal weight and have other co-morbidities? Yes, the elderly are at the greatest overall risk of dying - not sure in which world that isn't true - but probably a strong 80% or more of the US population has co-morbidities that are linked with poor outcomes for Covid. In other words, the "at risk" group is somewhat of a miscalculation.
Good hygiene is the best defense. It is wise to take vitamin C and zinc. I would add in that there is a strong correlation proposed between Vitamin D insufficiency and having a severe or deadly outcome from Covid.
Also, it's ironic that most people seem to not care about the elderly because they are close to dying anyway - but the fact is that you can look at relative risk of death from Covid - comparing it to your chance of dying from other causes, and in some comparisons the greatest increases are in the 45-55 age group, with significant increases in the 35-45 age group. Is it a major concern? It's not doomsday for a 40 year old, but it's not to be taken as lightly as some people expect.
Not trying to go too far into the fear side of things - but I really believe most people have and continue to under-value the risk here.
That's not the death rate, unless you have already found a way to falsify the antibody tests run by the scientists at Stanford, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and John Ionnaidis. If the death rate was 6%, my country would be done, but it's not done. Not at all. It's not anywhere near 6%. The number of infected is way higher than confirmed cases- the asymptomatic and the mildly symptomatic. That pushes the case mortality rate down. How low? We need more antibody studies for that. They are just now starting to run that in my country, just now. After 50 days of Lockdown, some genius decided that it would be a good idea to figure out the case mortality rate. Phew! Could have been worse! AND all this incompetence has forced me to read up on how we deal with epidemics. That's a bit ridiculous, I mean govt's are supposed to be ****, but at this rate we all will have to be divine polyglots to get anything to work.
Also, I know those studies are preliminary, but it's a start. I am waiting for more studies and results as well.
The majority of fatalities are in the Old and the infirm,and they should be protected, just like the Flu really. This data is borne out globally. A blanket quarantine is ludicrous, after the data was out. In my opinion, once the data had become clear, the continuation of blanket quarantines the world over was purely political. What for? I don't know and I don't care. **** them for doing that. That's all.
All the mask wearing, glove wringing, and especially the extremely unscientific and nonsensical "regulations" for businesses (and Gyms) has really been crawling up my skin, like the Linkin Park song. And by the way, I am super happy the Virus appears to not be as dangerous as we thought it was. I didn't want to die. BUT, you must have noticed this as well. Now that people are "Afraid" for their lives, they will accept anything. Most won't look for any data, they are glued to their doomporn News shows. It's a bit pathetic.
I am not sure what reality you are living in - but I hope you are happy there. One thing - it's 6% in the US, not globally. Sorry for being US-centric. As I stated above, the US is kind of primed to do poorly with this, we have a less healthy population than many of the other countries that are seeing this.
Having said that, in regard to the anti-body studies, I am not sure what you would need to "falsify" these studies, which are making unreasonable claims. I mean, getting your test group by advertising a perceived incentive on Facebook is just the beginning of the flaws with that study. And the other studies didn't even attempt to get peer review - they went straight to the newspapers, which makes them news articles and not studies. And of course that doesn't even get into the data that suggests the anti-body tests return a number of false positives that alone would make the conclusions of the Stanford study highly questionable.
Regardless, you're choosing to place a high value on a study of roughly 3500 people who were less than randomly chosen from the population and you're placing that over a data set of over 1 million confirmed cases?
Further, think about the dramatic headlines from the Stanford study - "Covid infections could be 50-80X higher than we realize". Think about this from ANY logical angle. Do you really think that, in the US we have had over 110,000 infections at this point and only 1.5% of those people have shown up in the hospital? Do you REALLY believe that only 1.5-3% of the people who get this virus get sick enough to even go to the hospital and the other 97% is just asymptomatic? If so, what evidence are your really basing it on beyond a study that offered free Covid testing on Facebook to attract participants?
And even if it is 50,000,000 Americans that have been infected - That is just 0.17% death rate (about 84,000 Americans have died). Do you know any medical professionals? Ask them how many flu deaths they've seen in their career. Then ask them how many Covid deaths they've seen in the last 2 months. Then ask them if they think it's reasonable that this is just 70% more deadly than the flu. And if it is just 70% more deadly, how did the US achieve these numbers in just 2-3 months that go beyond the record setting flu season of 2018?
Now, the original reports out of China, if you want to trust any of that, claimed that 80% of the people who get it are not being reported. This, actually, could be reasonable. The CDC suspects a good 60% of flu cases go unreported - so we're not outside of the realm of possibility here. But we aren't saying, "Well, that 0.1% flu death rate isn't real because we didn't count all of the people who have it." Should we just ignore the data we have because we know it is imperfect and start jumping into unscientific studies that make unreasonable claims that don't at all align with reality because it helps us feel like the environment should adapt to us rather than we should adapt to the environment?
The fact of the matter is that 3 weeks ago, when the US death rates were in the 50,000's I was having this same debate with people who believed the US would have less than 100,000 deaths from this over the next year - using similar arguments to what you're using. Back then the confirmed data showed a 5% death rate and now it is at 6%. Our testing is improving, albeit still not enough - and we're getting a higher rate, not a lower one. We are now coming up on 85,000 deaths and the first wave isn't even over.
Countries like Sweden that everyone likes to point out for not having a lock down, have confirmed case death rates over 12%.
The data isn't getting better over time, it's getting worse.
americanguncraft.com
