This dr facci is in deep

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
COVID is 5 to 10 times deadlier for people age 0-45 and 12.5 times deadlier for people 85 and over. That's the basis for taking the current measures
They have no idea if any of the numbers are correct, you realize that right?

Evidence keeps coming out that it's not nearly as deadly as thought.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
So you're okay with 34,000 dead from the flu. Interesting. What's the number where it warrants shutting down the economy like this? 50k? 100k?

What's the number of deaths you're okay with?
If current medical science, treatments and vaccinations still results in deaths it has to be compared to the lives it saves and btw you can't force people to get flu shots. Therefore, think of how many lives might have been saved if more people had got a flu shot.

The numbers surrounding COVID speak for themselves along with the complete lack of any effective counter measures that could have been effective.
Again you keep waaaing about the economic impact . What other way do you think would have been equally or more effective?
Just what the hell difference does an economic recovery make if you're not here to enjoy it. COVID is just as lethal for you as it is anyone unless you're proven to have the antibodies needed to make you immune to it.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Stupidity.
You separate the susceptible, not the masses.
But you have to test them first stupid before you quarantine those effected and if you had been paying attention you would have come to understand that the lack of testing kits and labs to run them in are still woefully inadequate in numbers and accuracy. How much time has FOX News and Sean Hannity been paying to those shortages? Obviously very little or you would have known about them.
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
COVID is just as lethal for you as it is anyone unless you're proven to have the antibodies needed to make you immune to it.
Incorrect.
It is much more lethal for the old and people with respiratory and heart conditions. For a guy who throws out numbers so much I would think you would have known that.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Incorrect.
It is much more lethal for the old and people with respiratory and heart conditions. For a guy who throws out numbers so much I would think you would have known that.
As the numbers, numbers, I'm still waiting for you to disprove show there is a higher rate of mortality for people as they age but as the numbers indicate there isn't a great deal of difference in the level of lethality between the age groups. Look at the numbers a 10x rate for a 45 year old versus a 12.5 for those 85 and over.
So from what I can gather you are under the opinion that a person with naturally occurring heart and respiratory symptoms acquired simply by means of the ageing process should be allowed to die from COVID simply because they happened to be of a certain advanced age when COVID arrived on our shores. Is that what you're trying to say?
Easy for you to say if you're not part of that age group.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
No clue I'm not stupid enough to pay for television so you'll have to fill me in on the entertainment that has clearly rotted your brain.
I see Now given that your only news source is National Enquirer and that's only after your neighbor is done reading his copy and gives it to you there is indeed a shortage of information available to you.
And if you had access to information you would have heard that there is growing data to support the belief that many carriers of COVID were asymptomatic and spread it to others without even knowing that they were carriers .
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
You question contains the answer.
Deflecting to another subject. Typical clucker. Defending China. The current situation with China still comes back to P.L 106-286. Introduced passed and signed into law by Republicans.Defending or not defending it still comes down to the legislation that placed China in it's current position as a major supplier of goods and equipment to the U.S.
 

Fred's Myth

Nonhyphenated American
I see Now given that your only news source is National Enquirer and that's only after your neighbor is done reading his copy and gives it to you there is indeed a shortage of information available to you.
And if you had access to information you would have heard that there is growing data to support the belief that many carriers of COVID were asymptomatic and spread it to others without even knowing that they were carriers .
You do realize that asymptomatic means that the virus had no major effect on those carriers. Meaning that the virus was so ineffective on them they weren't even aware they were contaminated. That would be the majority of those infected.
Covid-19 isn't an automatic death sentence.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
Deflecting to another subject. Typical clucker. Defending China. The current situation with China still comes back to P.L 106-286. Introduced passed and signed into law by Republicans..

It was signed into law in 2000.
The president signed it into law.
The president in 2000 was Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton is not a Republican.

Thanks for playing.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
You do realize that asymptomatic means that the virus had no major effect on those carriers. Meaning that the virus was so ineffective on them they weren't even aware they were contaminated. That would be the majority of those infected.
Covid-19 isn't an automatic death sentence.
That's the point. There is growing evidence that while they experienced none of the symptoms themselves they were still carrying on them the COVID spores and unknowingly passed to another person.

By the way, It just came across the wire that Gilead's experimental COVID vaccine Remdesivir has failed in clinical trials . So there we are. Right back where we started.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
It was signed into law in 2000.
The president signed it into law.
The president in 2000 was Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton is not a Republican.

Thanks for playing.
MFN status was made permanent by George Bush in 2001. Thanks for playing And even if Clinton vetoed the legislation there's nothing to say that it would have been sustained.
 
Top