KillerFrog InD KitchenSink
Active Member
I'm having flashbacks to 6th grade where you have to correct misspellings and punctuate. (no offense intended, just had to read it five times, lol)
COVID-19 Threads
- Thread starter TxFrog1999
- Start date
Yes, that is what I'm suggesting. But you'd have to also assume the Spanish Flu was impacting elderly people, and not primarily young adults like it was.
Had what happened in March 2020 had instead happened in March 1920 I don't think we would have noticed it. I mean, sure, we keep track of everything and there is news that sensationalizes everything and so on and so forth, but just from a going about your life standpoint, I don't think anyone would have noticed a dang thing.
There have been about 500,000 deaths in this country in people under the age of 75 over the past 2.5 years, so let's just say 250,000 per year as I know there have been peaks and valleys to the death count. 250,000 is about 1 in 1,200 people in that age group per year that was dying. That's just not very many, considering about 11 out of 1,200 people die each year. Take whatever odds you have of dying in any particular year and increase it by 10%, and that's about what happened to your odds during the past couple years. It's just not something from a statistical standpoint that even registers.
froginmn
Full Member
The statement that getting vaccinated protects the community. Trying to draw a weak connection to, "well, there's potentially less strain on the hospital system" is apologizing for a fundamentally bogus assertion.
Zubaz
Member
Dude, I don't think we would have.
I know we wouldn't have acted like complete idiots about it, chief.
Zubaz
Member
Simultaniously arguing that we would have been completely oblivious to a sudden 40% spike in excess deaths, but also that we wouldn't have been "complete idiots" seems a bit oxymoronic, personally. But we know where each other stands on this.
How would we know about a sudden 40% spike in excess deaths (for a very short period of time btw) if there were no TV, no twitter, no CDC keeping track of every single statistic.
And it keeps being ignored, but there is a HUGE difference in Spanish Flu mostly affecting 20-40 year olds at a 2X rate than COVID affecting mostly 75 year-olds. Raw numbers without context don't tell the story. And a 40% spike in a very small number is still a very small number.
AroundWorldFrog
Full Member
We've had something like 2M encounters at the southern border of people in the last year that aren't vaxxed yet we won't let unvaxxed people in our country legally. I would suggest that is acting like complete idiots.
Last edited:
Eight
Member
don't let the shackles of conformity bind you sink
Zubaz
Member
I don't think "a year" is a very short period of time, personally. I believe annual excess mortality in the US for 2020 settled somewhere around 20-30%. For 2021, it was lower, but still in the high teens as I recall. That is absolutely not a small jump, nor was it short term.
We didn't have TV or the internet, but we did used to have Newspapers with near universal circulation, as well as Radio. Word would have gotten out same as it did for the pandemic that did occur in the teens.
A spike in mortality of that size is not a very small number.
385,000 COVID deaths reported for 2020. And about the same for 2021. About 2,900,000 people are expected to die each year, so that's about 13% higher, not 20-30%.
To the extent excess mortality was higher than that, it was mostly because of the idiotic things we were doing.
13% is absolutely a small number. I think I saw where it basically takes us back to the mortality rate we had in the mid-90's. I don't remember that a time of widespread death and anguish, do you? And it's temporary anyway. Absolutely not something to jack up the country like we have over.
And I'll say it again because it almost never gets mentioned but it's a critical piece in all this. The MEDIAN age of a COVID victim is over 75 years old, barely below average life expectancy.
Zubaz
Member
I question this conclusion, but we aren't likely to agree here.
I definitely disagree with this, 13% excess mortality in a given year is a significant jump.
AroundWorldFrog
Full Member
Most with multiple comorbidities.
No, it doesn’t. Show us the data if you think it’s there. I’d love to see it. It probably did help some pre-omicron, but not enough to make up for all the deaths caused by the vaccine. In other words, there has never been any proof that these “vaccines“ lower all cause mortality, either pre-or post omicron. But there is very good evidence that the “vaccines” have increased overall mortality by at least 10 or 15% which is a massive number. Which means that the “vaccines” have been an unmitigated disaster for public health. I don’t know how you can defend this.
The Covid death numbers put up by the government are bogus. Especially when you consider that proper early treatment with ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, monoclonal, antibodies, etc. would’ve cut the mortality rate probably by 80 or 90%. This was a manufactured pandemic that didn’t have to be.
HFrog1999
Member
CDC director slammed for calling "racist" Tuskegee study a "sacrifice"
A critic said that Rochelle Walensky reframed the "infamously unethical and racist medical experiment" as "some sort of noble sacrifice."
www.newsweek.com
froginmn
Full Member
Wait, what? I missed this part of your comment. Since Omicron, how does me getting vaccinated help you?
KillerFrog InD KitchenSink
Active Member
I can see your point that that seems like an inconsistency. I think now that we are in the endemic phase, it is akin as to why I think it is important for everyone to get the flu vaccine. More immunity out there at a minimum means less severe cases and less time off which means less of an impact of flu/Covid season on healthcare and our community. We have this awesome immune system that we can prime and that helps everyone directly or indirectly as part of a strategy to mitigate the impact of the respiratory infection season. But I do think post omicron there is not a good argument for doing anything more than encouraging the vaccine, especially given the distrust and skepticism out there.
froginmn
Full Member
Maybe I misunderstood your phrasing. You're saying there isn't much argument in favor of my vaccination protecting others?
KillerFrog InD KitchenSink
Active Member
I guess I’m making the distinction of the role of the vaccine in the pre-omicron phase, when the majority of people had 0 immunity and now when nearly everyone has some. In the pre-omicron phase I think the “protect others” was huge since so many immune naive people were out there. Now it is more about mitigating the morbidity of the season akin to how we use the flu vaccine.
