microcosm

HarveyH55 wrote:
At the start, it was possible, that China had it contained, and under control, as they implied. They of course were lying, trying to cover it up. They didn't shut down air travel, for a month or two, after they realized it was a huge problem, and they couldn't contain it. It was middle of cold and flu season, lots of sick travelers, with no clue, they carried a new cold virus around the world. Containment was never a viable option, since there were literally thousands of points of origin, and no way to know who or where. Regardless of when we re-open, there will be some rebound, and we can expect more of the same in the Fall, with cold and flu season. Many of the people who would have caught a cold, and got over it, and immune, were spared this first wave. We can only hope that at least half the population already had it, this time through, and maybe they won't do the lockdown thing again.

keepit wrote: Are states a microcosm of the us?

keepit wrote: 2 months ago (approximately) it was thought that covid would just go away and the us didn't do a shut down. Look what happened then - 55,000 deaths and a million plus cases since then.

keepit wrote:
More semantics arguments ibdm.
The reason for the lockdown is that covid19 is extremely contagious and deadly.
Where do you learn your stuff?
And where did you get your education?

keepit wrote:
More semantics arguments ibdm.

keepit wrote:
The reason for the lockdown is that covid19 is extremely contagious and deadly.

keepit wrote:
Where do you learn your stuff?

keepit wrote:
And where did you get your education?

keepit wrote:
Yes the do numbers do support what i said..

keepit wrote:
Covid 19 has 10 times the case fatality rate of the flu.

keepit wrote:
Forget about the cold.

keepit wrote:
I doubt it has a case fatality rate.

keepit wrote:
The contagiousness is way higher than the flu - there have been 1,000,000 cases in the us in the last 2 months.

keepit wrote:
I don't know how many flu cases in the last 2 months but i would be it is way less.

keepit wrote:
Where do you get your information?

keepit wrote:
Your statements about the cold and the covid19 are totally disconnected from reality.

keepit wrote:
itn,
I could be wrong but i don't know of any pathogen that has more than 10 times the case fatality rate of the flu when you consider large numbers of cases in the us.

keepit wrote:
Ebola maybe, but ebola is way off the charts and doesn't occur in the us very much.

keepit wrote:
Do you? Put your credibility where your big mouth is.

keepit wrote: At best that statement is just semantic arguing (meaningless).

keepit wrote:
itn,
I could be wrong but i don't know of any pathogen that has more than 10 times the case fatality rate of the flu when you consider large numbers of cases in the us. Ebola maybe, but ebola is way off the charts and doesn't occur in the us very much.
Do you? Put your credibility where your big mouth is.

Into the Night wrote:A 0.0000273% death rate is not significantly 'deadly'. Source: CDC

tmiddles wrote: You link doesn't seem to be working ITN. That number does not appear on the CDC website in reference to Covid19:


Also your logic means that hot dogs are more dangerous than machine guns since hot dogs kill more people. By completely ignoring context, time, geography, and if mitigating steps are employed and effective, you come to a hilariously stupid conclusion: dividing the effect by the entire population annually.

IBdaMann wrote:

tmiddles wrote: You link doesn't seem to be working ITN. That number does not appear on the CDC website in reference to Covid19:

Also your logic means that hot dogs are more dangerous than machine guns since hot dogs kill more people. By completely ignoring context, time, geography, and if mitigating steps are employed and effective, you come to a hilariously stupid conclusion: dividing the effect by the entire population annually.

You commitment to nothing ever being known is unstoppable, tmiddles.

.

keepit wrote:
Harvey,
There are 2 problems here. There may not be a very good immunity developed to covid19. That could inhibit the effectiveness of a vaccine. And The damage to the lungs comes from both the virus itself and from the body's own immune response. This also could make a vaccine less effective unless the vaccine can stimulate an immune response which is strong but also doesn't stimulate the part of the immune response that attacks the lungs and potentially other parts of the body. It's complicated.












Harvey,
There are 2 problem

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:A 0.0000273% death rate is not significantly 'deadly'. Source: CDC

You link doesn't seem to be working ITN. That number does not appear on the CDC website in reference to Covid19:
Search of CDC site on Google for 0.0000273

tmiddles wrote:
Also your logic means that hot dogs are more dangerous than machine guns since hot dogs kill more people.

tmiddles wrote:
By completely ignoring context, time, geography, and if mitigating steps are employed and effective, you come to a hilariously stupid conclusion: dividing the effect by the entire population annually.

tmiddles wrote:
Covid-19 is the most deadly virus to hit the world in some time.

tmiddles wrote:
If you'd like to actually debate that mantra boy let's go. But I expect you'll duck out as usual under your RQAA blanky.

keepit wrote:
It's starting to feel like a third world country around here. Maybe it's just me.

Into the Night wrote:

tmiddles wrote:That number does not appear on the CDC website

You have to do some math, ....

Into the Night wrote:
Hot dogs ARE more dangerous than machine guns.

Into the Night wrote:...geography makes no difference, and the 'mitigating steps' do not stop a virus.

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

tmiddles wrote:That number does not appear on the CDC website

You have to do some math, ....

So what are you actually using from the CDC website?
You misrepresented that it was their conclusion but it seems it's yours. Using what exactly from the CDC?

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
Hot dogs ARE more dangerous than machine guns.

Now THAT is consistent with everything else you say ITN.

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:...geography makes no difference, and the 'mitigating steps' do not stop a virus.

So in late December someone in Brooklyn was just as likely to get Covid-19 as someone in Wuhan?

Into the Night wrote:
You said it yourself. Hot dogs kill more people than machine guns. You wish to deny your own statement??

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
You said it yourself. Hot dogs kill more people than machine guns. You wish to deny your own statement??

Just a great example of how stupid you can be if you disregard context.

Into the Night wrote:
There is no context ....

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
There is no context ....

There is always context for everything and without exception.

A machine gun is always more dangerous than a hot dog. Even unloaded.

tmiddles wrote:
The only reason hot dogs kill more people is for the same reason they kill more people than nuclear weapons do.

tmiddles wrote:
Oh and nuclear weapons are ALSO more dangerous than hot dogs.

Into the Night wrote:Hot dogs are still more dangerous. No one has used a nuclear weapon in 55 years.

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:Hot dogs are still more dangerous. No one has used a nuclear weapon in 55 years.

So ITN you are saying Hot Dogs are more dangerous than nuclear weapons?

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:Hot dogs are still more dangerous. No one has used a nuclear weapon in 55 years.

So ITN you are saying Hot Dogs are more dangerous than nuclear weapons?

IBdaMann wrote:

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:Hot dogs are still more dangerous. No one has used a nuclear weapon in 55 years.

So ITN you are saying Hot Dogs are more dangerous than nuclear weapons?

I haven't checked the stats. How many people have choked on nuclear weapons? What country has had the most hospitalizations per capita from overeating/binging nuclear weapons?


.

tmiddles wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:Hot dogs are still more dangerous. No one has used a nuclear weapon in 55 years.

So ITN you are saying Hot Dogs are more dangerous than nuclear weapons?

I haven't checked the stats. How many people have choked on nuclear weapons? What country has had the most hospitalizations per capita from overeating/binging nuclear weapons?


.

So you are saying that, to your thinking, hot dogs are more dangerous than nuclear weapons?

Sounds like it. You are very fond of claiming that I misinterpret your meaning so clarify as needed.

tmiddles wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:Hot dogs are still more dangerous. No one has used a nuclear weapon in 55 years.

So ITN you are saying Hot Dogs are more dangerous than nuclear weapons?

I haven't checked the stats. How many people have choked on nuclear weapons? What country has had the most hospitalizations per capita from overeating/binging nuclear weapons?


.

So you are saying that, to your thinking, hot dogs are more dangerous than nuclear weapons?

Sounds like it. You are very fond of claiming that I misinterpret your meaning so clarify as needed.