B
buffalo
Guest
The date is important.
- Status
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
This is a misunderstanding of co-morbidity. It does not mean that they would likely have died at that time even without covid. It means that in their weakened condition, the other disease can more easily end their life. It is the simultaneous presence of both diseases that brings about the death that would likely not have happened with just one of those diseases.LeafByNiggle:
Generally, even if re-infected symptoms are even milder than first time.
You do realize that 97% of infected people have no symptoms or are mild, stay home, and recover. It is now being realized people of brown color have a higher incidence and co-morbidity is an issue. People dying may have died from their conditions whether or not they have covid.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
My immunity statement was specifically about whether we can expect immunity from those who tested positive on this particular antibody test.
B
buffalo
Guest
My bottom line point is this.
Superimpose the graphs they have been showing you with one with a much higher infection with the peak in mid Feb.
Superimpose the graphs they have been showing you with one with a much higher infection with the peak in mid Feb.
B
buffalo
Guest
We can go around and around on this. I picked up the immunity concern and countered with Fauci’s statement.
B
buffalo
Guest
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
My bottom line is this:
Who cares?
How does any of this affect policy for things like testing, or shutdown, or social distancing, etc.?
B
buffalo
Guest
OK. Social distancing - remember they always pitch slow the spread, not stop it, to avoid overrunning healthcare. They know eventually it has or will spread deep until herd immunity starts blocking new infections. If the antibody data shows 100 million people already had it they pose no threat. If it shows 200 million, herd immunity is already here or very close.
I am all for antibody testing. I have been calling for this for quite a while as it will give us more useful data. I am making the point covid tests gave us faulty data and poor decisions were made.
All those asymptomatic people - do you think they didn’t pass it?
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
They did not say “slow the spread, but don’t stop it.” They said “slow the spread” because it would have been silly to say “stop the spread” because they knew that was not practical. It was not an acknowledgement that everyone was going to get it. Slowing the spread buys time for development of a treatment or maybe even a vaccine. Or maybe the virus is just going to mutate to a less lethal form. We don’t know.LeafByNiggle:
OK. Social distancing - remember they always pitch slow the spread, not stop it, to avoid overrunning healthcare.
But if that happens in August, that is a lot better than it happening in June, especially if an effective treatment is found in July.
It is unlikely for either of those numbers to be true, because if they were, we would already be seeing more of a bending of the curve.
Based on the number of dead, I doubt that we over-reacted. Perhaps the reactions could have been more finely-tuned, but that is a lot easier to do with hindsight than it is in the heat of the crisis.
It is well-known that they did. The exact extent to which they passed it on is not known.
B
buffalo
Guest
Depends on the graph and where t=0 is and antibody test data.
Right, we do not know the depth of the spread and had been my point and why the death rate % is flat out wrong.
Making decisions based on a faulty death rate is my position, is foolish.
You advocate economy should be shutdown until Aug?
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
Exactly. …
- Status