Topic: The 2017-2018 Flu Killed 80,000 Americans, But No Hysteria or Shutdown - page 5. (Read 1098 times)
April 14, 2020, 07:29:50 PM
This is way different without a vaccine it will be the human race extinction as we know it. The reason for this is called prevention and slowing down how this invisible virus tried to prey on us visible humans.
April 14, 2020, 07:21:49 PM
I go to the store looking for an item. I can’t find it. I call one of the stockers over, and he goes right to it and says, “Here it is.” Guess what. It was right where I was looking, but I didn't see it. It can happen to anyone. So don't feel bad.
The experts said a bunch of CV deaths in Italy. They said a bunch of CV deaths in the States. Then we found out that the testing was flawed, and that 99% of the deaths in Italy were going to die from something else anyway, and 94% in the USA.
"Oh but this. Oh, but that." The experts lied, or they weren't experts. So get over the fact that we don't have experts for this, or else we have a bunch of liars.
I'm curious about your 99% were going to die anyway claim, but I guess I really don't care because thats absolute nonsense.
So the many thousands of people that have devoted their lives to medicine have all corroborated this elaborate hoax without incentive. I suppose its sort of like that time Firemen decided to convince people fires were real for job security. I honestly hope that you are able to remain so blissfully ignorant about the whole situation, and don't end up having to rely on one of those liars to try to keep you alive.
April 14, 2020, 07:20:15 PM
^^^ Now franky1. Are you always so off topic? Or are you this way only for me? And not only off topic. But just plain off, as well. Of course. "Off" is kinda normal for you, right?
CV is going to dry up and blow away. People will get back to work, and 2wonder why they panicked over it. A few of them will make a big stink about doctors and governments playing with their lives.
CV is going to dry up and blow away. People will get back to work, and 2wonder why they panicked over it. A few of them will make a big stink about doctors and governments playing with their lives.
April 14, 2020, 06:50:59 PM
in badeckers case.
the world knows you can find items at a store
badecker stays at home saying prove the item is there.
badecker stays at home saying prove the store exists
badecker knows if he went to the store he wont look for it. and he wont actually ask for real help
so to badecker grocery stores dont exist
meanwhile the rest of the world gets out their box. and actually goes and finds out.
they dont wait for people to hand it to them and then be told it proves nothing and that the item could have come from anywhere and all the other crap badecker comes out with
the sane solution is badecker gets off his ass and go find out for himself from actual places where he can actually source actual items
the world knows you can find items at a store
badecker stays at home saying prove the item is there.
badecker stays at home saying prove the store exists
badecker knows if he went to the store he wont look for it. and he wont actually ask for real help
so to badecker grocery stores dont exist
meanwhile the rest of the world gets out their box. and actually goes and finds out.
they dont wait for people to hand it to them and then be told it proves nothing and that the item could have come from anywhere and all the other crap badecker comes out with
the sane solution is badecker gets off his ass and go find out for himself from actual places where he can actually source actual items
April 14, 2020, 06:46:37 PM
Look outside your imagination. Nobody has any proof that there is more than a bunch of talk that is not based in fact.
I don't get this whole, "lets not listen to the experts" thing. Letting a mechanic do your dental work while your McDonalds fry cook does your taxes is sort of counter intuitive. The medical tech earning $40k/year and living in a tent to keep their family from exposure I'm sure is lying about what they're seeing to support the... pay cuts they're receiving nationwide.
Doctors don't get a bonus check for working people up into a frenzy, they have absolutely nothing to gain out of this so theres no motive for them to lie.
I go to the store looking for an item. I can’t find it. I call one of the stockers over, and he goes right to it and says, “Here it is.” Guess what. It was right where I was looking, but I didn't see it. It can happen to anyone. So don't feel bad.
The experts said a bunch of CV deaths in Italy. They said a bunch of CV deaths in the States. Then we found out that the testing was flawed, and that 99% of the deaths in Italy were going to die from something else anyway, and 94% in the USA.
"Oh but this. Oh, but that." The experts lied, or they weren't experts. So get over the fact that we don't have experts for this, or else we have a bunch of liars.
You asked. But you didn't have to. It's staring you right in the face.
April 14, 2020, 05:11:57 PM
Look outside your imagination. Nobody has any proof that there is more than a bunch of talk that is not based in fact.
I don't get this whole, "lets not listen to the experts" thing. Letting a mechanic do your dental work while your McDonalds fry cook does your taxes is sort of counter intuitive. The medical tech earning $40k/year and living in a tent to keep their family from exposure I'm sure is lying about what they're seeing to support the... pay cuts they're receiving nationwide.
Doctors don't get a bonus check for working people up into a frenzy, they have absolutely nothing to gain out of this so theres no motive for them to lie.
April 14, 2020, 03:40:14 PM
Well look at this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54221231. A reasonably coherent post from franky1.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
'There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.' Are you dense? This virus is different and worse because it requires hospitalization if everyone gets infected at once, the healthcare system collapses. How difficult is that?
Are you dense? Show us that anybody is hospitalized from this virus.
All you can show is blab from the media, or from hospital staff, who don't know how to correctly determine if what people have is this virus or that, or something else entirely.
Prove that it is any different than other years.
'All you can show is blab from the media, or from hospital staff' So if I show something from another source, it becomes true?
April 14, 2020, 03:02:31 PM
I think the current conditions are different...
the flu can be controlled but the coronavirus cannot be controlled yet, this virus is a new type, so it is normal for panic to occur, the whole world is affected because of this mass panic, lockdown and distance are the best ways to break this epidemic.
the flu can be controlled but the coronavirus cannot be controlled yet, this virus is a new type, so it is normal for panic to occur, the whole world is affected because of this mass panic, lockdown and distance are the best ways to break this epidemic.
April 14, 2020, 01:57:48 PM
you saying 'come to court'
is not finding proof
because first you got to know who should be coming to court and what they should be coming to court with..
you lack the insight to even know
you dont want proof.
you just want random people to turn up empty handed and wondering why they were called in.. and then because you didnt ask for who/what you are looking for. you will say their empty hands is proof there is no evidence..
yet thats the flaw your trying to abuse. not wanting the to come with evidence to then pretend that proves none exist.
the reason its your flaw. because the evidence does exist and your just trying to use ignorance as a way to stay in your fantasy land.
..
here is a tip
there are M&M meetings .. and no you toddler it is not referring to the candy (try researching its real meaning)
there are inquiries and yes there are peer reviews between actual doctors of a speciality
but before you get that far.. learn the word research.. then do some
lack of research does not mean no proof/research exists. it just means your ignorant and an idiot
is not finding proof
because first you got to know who should be coming to court and what they should be coming to court with..
you lack the insight to even know
you dont want proof.
you just want random people to turn up empty handed and wondering why they were called in.. and then because you didnt ask for who/what you are looking for. you will say their empty hands is proof there is no evidence..
yet thats the flaw your trying to abuse. not wanting the to come with evidence to then pretend that proves none exist.
the reason its your flaw. because the evidence does exist and your just trying to use ignorance as a way to stay in your fantasy land.
..
here is a tip
there are M&M meetings .. and no you toddler it is not referring to the candy (try researching its real meaning)
there are inquiries and yes there are peer reviews between actual doctors of a speciality
but before you get that far.. learn the word research.. then do some
lack of research does not mean no proof/research exists. it just means your ignorant and an idiot
April 14, 2020, 01:44:44 PM
Are you dense? Show us that anybody is hospitalized from this virus.
All you can show is blab from the media, or from hospital staff, who don't know how to correctly determine if what people have is this virus or that, or something else entirely.
Prove that it is any different than other years.
All you can show is blab from the media, or from hospital staff, who don't know how to correctly determine if what people have is this virus or that, or something else entirely.
Prove that it is any different than other years.
look outside your small bookmark list of cult influencer links
you will find data of patients having swabs, bloodsamples tested, xray/ct scans. even the patients relatives.
a hospital is not some magic mystery box of entering it and then just disappearing into nothing
have you really lost that much grip of reality. that you cant even grab at a sane rational thought for how to find proof
Look outside your imagination. Nobody has any proof that there is more than a bunch of talk that is not based in fact.
April 14, 2020, 01:38:35 PM
Are you dense? Show us that anybody is hospitalized from this virus.
All you can show is blab from the media, or from hospital staff, who don't know how to correctly determine if what people have is this virus or that, or something else entirely.
Prove that it is any different than other years.
All you can show is blab from the media, or from hospital staff, who don't know how to correctly determine if what people have is this virus or that, or something else entirely.
Prove that it is any different than other years.
look outside your small bookmark list of cult influencer links
you will find data of patients having swabs, bloodsamples tested, xray/ct scans. even the patients relatives.
a hospital is not some magic mystery box of entering it and then just disappearing into nothing
have you really lost that much grip of reality. that you cant even grab at a sane rational thought for how to find proof
April 14, 2020, 01:35:03 PM
the sooner they relax lockdown. the higher the number gets.
do you get that
do you get that
However high it gets it's still not going to be high enough to go crazy with shutdowns like they are doing. Just compare the deaths from covid to some other statistics like:
-deaths from cancer
-lethat traffic accidents
-number of flu cases each year
You'll see that this so called pandemic isn't as bad as they're painting it.
hospitals are well stocked of scalpels and meds to treat large numbers of the normal things.
but the thing is the amount that need breathing equipment like cpapc/bipap/intubated ventilation.. is not enough stock supplies, beds and staff ready to treat large amounts coming in exponentially.
you do know that hospitals are ok with handling a few drug overdoses an evening. but when a whole drug den snorts a bad batch hospitals do go into a 'code black' situation where they cant cope.
now imagine if it wasnt just a smal drug den of a couple dozen drug abusers.
with a total of 100k ICU beds across the entire us. where some are occupied by other incident causes..
suddenly having millions needing it just for a risker variant of a virus. is going to cause problems
yea even if 80k-240k die... guess what that means multiple more still need beds who would survive
April 14, 2020, 01:33:59 PM
You jokers forget to read the OP, where it is shown that the numbers were way too high from the start, and might wind up being less that 2017-18.
The fake CV death numbers will be like candle light against the sun when compared with millions who die because of the economy shutting down.
The fake CV death numbers will be like candle light against the sun when compared with millions who die because of the economy shutting down.
The actual numbers are lower than the confirmed numbers? No way. There's evidence to suggest that coronavirus was propagating throughout the U.S. in Washington weeks, maybe even months, prior to the first confirmed case when a researcher took swaps of flu patients and tested them for coronavirus.
https://www.businessinsider.com/seattle-flu-study-coronavirus-testing-washington-2020-3
Quote
But according to The Times, officials consistently rejected the idea on public health and privacy grounds, even as the spread continued throughout the state. Officials also said the study did not have explicit permission from its subjects to use their samples for coronavirus testing, and the study was not certified for clinical testing.
In late February, Chu began testing the study's participants for coronavirus without government approval, which confirmed at least one positive case, The Times said.
"It must have been here this entire time," Chu told The Times. "It's just everywhere already."
As of Tuesday, Washington has confirmed 267 cases of the virus and 24 deaths. King County, where Seattle is located, has recorded over 190 cases of the virus and 22 of the deaths. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee declared a state of emergency on February 29 to tackle the outbreak.
The Seattle Flu Study is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which announced on Monday that it is supporting at-home coronavirus test kits to those at risk in the Seattle area. The foundation also pledged $100 million last month to fight the coronavirus outbreak.
The FDA and the CDC did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
Dr. Robert Redfield, director of the CDC, told The Times that although there were issues with testing in the beginning, there is still time to curb the outbreak in the US. "It's going to take rigorous, aggressive public health — what I like to say, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle," he said. "That means if you find a new case, you isolate it."
The FDA told The Times that it provided emergency authorization for two lab-developed coronavirus tests within 24 hours of their completed submission, disputing that it has moved too slowly with testing.
In late February, Chu began testing the study's participants for coronavirus without government approval, which confirmed at least one positive case, The Times said.
"It must have been here this entire time," Chu told The Times. "It's just everywhere already."
As of Tuesday, Washington has confirmed 267 cases of the virus and 24 deaths. King County, where Seattle is located, has recorded over 190 cases of the virus and 22 of the deaths. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee declared a state of emergency on February 29 to tackle the outbreak.
The Seattle Flu Study is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which announced on Monday that it is supporting at-home coronavirus test kits to those at risk in the Seattle area. The foundation also pledged $100 million last month to fight the coronavirus outbreak.
The FDA and the CDC did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
Dr. Robert Redfield, director of the CDC, told The Times that although there were issues with testing in the beginning, there is still time to curb the outbreak in the US. "It's going to take rigorous, aggressive public health — what I like to say, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle," he said. "That means if you find a new case, you isolate it."
The FDA told The Times that it provided emergency authorization for two lab-developed coronavirus tests within 24 hours of their completed submission, disputing that it has moved too slowly with testing.
TL;DR - Researcher had tested flu swaps originally gathered for an influenza study that turned out to test positive for corona weeks prior to the massive surge in cases in Washington.
So, shutting down the economy was necessary to stop the spread but prolonging the shutdown economy is not a good move. Opening up as soon as possible with young and healthy people returning to the workforce is what should happen first. People most vulnerable should continue to stay isolated.
The media lies. Doctors lie, as can be seen about their figures of accidental deaths through negligence in hospitals all the time.
Got proof? Get some experts on the stand under oath with penalty for lying to be 2- years to execution. Maybe we will start to get a little truth, that way.
April 14, 2020, 01:31:05 PM
Well look at this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54221231. A reasonably coherent post from franky1.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
'There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.' Are you dense? This virus is different and worse because it requires hospitalization if everyone gets infected at once, the healthcare system collapses. How difficult is that?
Are you dense? Show us that anybody is hospitalized from this virus.
All you can show is blab from the media, or from hospital staff, who don't know how to correctly determine if what people have is this virus or that, or something else entirely.
Prove that it is any different than other years.
April 14, 2020, 01:21:51 PM
Well look at this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54221231. A reasonably coherent post from franky1.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
'There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.' Are you dense? This virus is different and worse because it requires hospitalization if everyone gets infected at once, the healthcare system collapses. How difficult is that?
April 14, 2020, 01:20:19 PM
You jokers forget to read the OP, where it is shown that the numbers were way too high from the start, and might wind up being less that 2017-18.
The fake CV death numbers will be like candle light against the sun when compared with millions who die because of the economy shutting down.
The fake CV death numbers will be like candle light against the sun when compared with millions who die because of the economy shutting down.
The actual numbers are lower than the confirmed numbers? No way. There's evidence to suggest that coronavirus was propagating throughout the U.S. in Washington weeks, maybe even months, prior to the first confirmed case when a researcher took swaps of flu patients and tested them for coronavirus.
https://www.businessinsider.com/seattle-flu-study-coronavirus-testing-washington-2020-3
Quote
But according to The Times, officials consistently rejected the idea on public health and privacy grounds, even as the spread continued throughout the state. Officials also said the study did not have explicit permission from its subjects to use their samples for coronavirus testing, and the study was not certified for clinical testing.
In late February, Chu began testing the study's participants for coronavirus without government approval, which confirmed at least one positive case, The Times said.
"It must have been here this entire time," Chu told The Times. "It's just everywhere already."
As of Tuesday, Washington has confirmed 267 cases of the virus and 24 deaths. King County, where Seattle is located, has recorded over 190 cases of the virus and 22 of the deaths. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee declared a state of emergency on February 29 to tackle the outbreak.
The Seattle Flu Study is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which announced on Monday that it is supporting at-home coronavirus test kits to those at risk in the Seattle area. The foundation also pledged $100 million last month to fight the coronavirus outbreak.
The FDA and the CDC did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
Dr. Robert Redfield, director of the CDC, told The Times that although there were issues with testing in the beginning, there is still time to curb the outbreak in the US. "It's going to take rigorous, aggressive public health — what I like to say, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle," he said. "That means if you find a new case, you isolate it."
The FDA told The Times that it provided emergency authorization for two lab-developed coronavirus tests within 24 hours of their completed submission, disputing that it has moved too slowly with testing.
In late February, Chu began testing the study's participants for coronavirus without government approval, which confirmed at least one positive case, The Times said.
"It must have been here this entire time," Chu told The Times. "It's just everywhere already."
As of Tuesday, Washington has confirmed 267 cases of the virus and 24 deaths. King County, where Seattle is located, has recorded over 190 cases of the virus and 22 of the deaths. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee declared a state of emergency on February 29 to tackle the outbreak.
The Seattle Flu Study is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which announced on Monday that it is supporting at-home coronavirus test kits to those at risk in the Seattle area. The foundation also pledged $100 million last month to fight the coronavirus outbreak.
The FDA and the CDC did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
Dr. Robert Redfield, director of the CDC, told The Times that although there were issues with testing in the beginning, there is still time to curb the outbreak in the US. "It's going to take rigorous, aggressive public health — what I like to say, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle, block and tackle," he said. "That means if you find a new case, you isolate it."
The FDA told The Times that it provided emergency authorization for two lab-developed coronavirus tests within 24 hours of their completed submission, disputing that it has moved too slowly with testing.
TL;DR - Researcher had tested flu swaps originally gathered for an influenza study that turned out to test positive for corona weeks prior to the massive surge in cases in Washington.
So, shutting down the economy was necessary to stop the spread but prolonging the shutdown economy is not a good move. Opening up as soon as possible with young and healthy people returning to the workforce is what should happen first. People most vulnerable should continue to stay isolated.
April 14, 2020, 12:21:55 PM
Well look at this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54221231. A reasonably coherent post from franky1.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
Regarding what you said in your post, the 60,000 number is a reduced number that Fauci was pushed into, because he couldn't continue to hide the truth. There were too many discrepancies to his earlier report.
So, what is he still hiding? He dumped down from whatever the high number was, to the 60,000. So, how do we know that this isn't a lie as well?
You are talking through your hat when you say that this projected number is what there would be with lockdowns. What I mean is, somebody in Fauci's position is smart enough to check his numbers before he starts talking the first time. He is smart enough to do this. What that means is that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to cause panic.
Do you really think that Fauci is suddenly trying to stop the medical panic he invoked the first time? Use your head. He couldn't get away with it the first time, but maybe he can get away with some of it the second time, if he lies about the pandemic some more, and simply reduces his numbers.
The pandemic is a lie. Fauci has to protect himself, both from the people if they catch his lie, and from his real bosses in the medical if he tells the truth. His only recourse is to reduce the numbers.
There isn't any pandemic that is greater than any other year. At worst it is only different.
BTW, if you look at the first article in the OP, you will find so many flaws in the pandemic that the lockdowns and shutdowns are totally useless in themselves... except if your plan is to throw the world into turmoil over nothing.
April 14, 2020, 12:13:21 PM
the sooner they relax lockdown. the higher the number gets.
do you get that
do you get that
However high it gets it's still not going to be high enough to go crazy with shutdowns like they are doing. Just compare the deaths from covid to some other statistics like:
-deaths from cancer
-lethat traffic accidents
-number of flu cases each year
You'll see that this so called pandemic isn't as bad as they're painting it.
April 14, 2020, 12:01:46 PM
in the OP(original post) you linked an article about the 240k first expected death count. which then reduced to 60k due to evaluating how the isolation would change things.
your latest post didnt link the OP but your own rant from a totally different topic
this topic is about the 2017-18 flu killed 80k
and the OP post had an article about the first evaluation without isolation of 240k. which then got reduced to 60k due to how the isolation would factor in..
what you need to learn is not only to stick to a narrative. but also to know which topic your talking about
in this topic you mentioned i didnt read the op. i replied to your moronic post by explaining what the numbers in the OP mean.
and you went on a moron divert to start talking about a post in another topic.
do you have any clue how to read yourself.
the 60k is not number of expected death under normal lifelstyle population.
do you get that
the 60k is the death minimum expectation with lockdown inplace.
the sooner they relax lockdown. the higher the number gets.
do you get that
your latest post didnt link the OP but your own rant from a totally different topic
this topic is about the 2017-18 flu killed 80k
and the OP post had an article about the first evaluation without isolation of 240k. which then got reduced to 60k due to how the isolation would factor in..
what you need to learn is not only to stick to a narrative. but also to know which topic your talking about
in this topic you mentioned i didnt read the op. i replied to your moronic post by explaining what the numbers in the OP mean.
and you went on a moron divert to start talking about a post in another topic.
do you have any clue how to read yourself.
the 60k is not number of expected death under normal lifelstyle population.
do you get that
the 60k is the death minimum expectation with lockdown inplace.
the sooner they relax lockdown. the higher the number gets.
do you get that
April 14, 2020, 11:37:52 AM
240k estimate reduced to 60k due to the lockdown
the lockdown did not save 180k. it delayed them getting it.
if the lockdown is relaxed the numbers go up
maybe if you done some research and maths you would know this
the lockdown did not save 180k. it delayed them getting it.
if the lockdown is relaxed the numbers go up
maybe if you done some research and maths you would know this
I knew it. You haven't stopped your advertising of unknowns. Didn't you read my post at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54220938 ?
What? You read it? It's just like I said there. You continue to report fake news. And you aren't even embarrassed about the lies you spin.
Jump to: