Swine Flu With Pandemic Potential Discovered In China G4 EA H1N1

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Sarcasm lad

I understand, but your sarcasm was defeatist. You've pretty much already accepted the premise that there will be a vaccine, that they will try to force it on you, and that you'll prolly take it. Sarcasm or not, if you are thinking along those lines, why not just go volunteer right now? Why wait?
 

Runenight201

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,942
Personally, I think it should be reserved for something like Spanish Flu, where (whatever the cause), all cause mortality increased dramatically, and along with the very high death rate in 20-40 year olds, it's clear something unusual was going on.

This year, outside of the government intervention, media hype, and medical policies put in place to deliberately kill old people, it doesn't appear than anything unusual is going on, certainly in regards to viruses or bacteria. All Cause Mortality is about where it is expected to be when compared with recent years, some estimates are that its about 2% lower. How can you have a pandemic with a lower overall mortality rate?

By some definitions, you can call COVID and SARS and other things pandemics...... but then, you would have several every year, including seasonal flu, tuberculosis, cancer, heart disease, even things like Epstein-Barr, the common cold, and acne could be considered "Pandemics" by certain definitions.

I think you’re being a little too generous with what’s included as pandemic illnesses. I would think it has to be a pathogen transmitted via human interaction. Cancer, acne, and heart disease have to go then. With what’s left, I think we look at the numbers of amount of people infected, not death toll. The death rate for covid is likely a lot smaller than officially listed, especially if accounting for the potential for many more unlisted people who are infected, but that doesn’t make the virus any less contagious or real.

I think we should look at total amount of people infected and ease by which disease is transmitted to determine whether something is a pandemic, and then determine how severe the symptoms are to determine appropriate protocol. Shutdown should only be reserved for something as deadly as let’s say Ebola and as easily spread as covid; that would be a very bad situation indeed. For something like covid, where it’s much less deadly, but still contagious and still a virus nonetheless, we should practice appropriate caution and hygiene protocols, especially if displaying symptoms, but otherwise try and proceed forward with things, because our society won’t function well if we keep forcing businesses to close and otherwise healthy people who have solely been around a post facto covid positive person to self isolate.
 
OP
E

Experienced

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2017
Messages
877
I'm just excited what the elites are planning on.

Screenshot_20200630-234414_Chrome.png
Screenshot_20200630-234430_Chrome.png
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
I think you’re being a little too generous with what’s included as pandemic illnesses. I would think it has to be a pathogen transmitted via human interaction. Cancer, acne, and heart disease have to go then. With what’s left, I think we look at the numbers of amount of people infected, not death toll. The death rate for covid is likely a lot smaller than officially listed, especially if accounting for the potential for many more unlisted people who are infected, but that doesn’t make the virus any less contagious or real.

I said, by certain definitions. Here is the definition from Dictionary.com-

1. (of a disease) prevalent throughout an entire country, continent, or the whole world; epidemic over a large area.

Nothing about a pathogen, or transmitted via human interaction. Cancer, Acne and Heart Disease absolutely fit, by that definition.

I personally stated that it should be limited to something like Spanish Flu.

And if you are going simply by infections, why aren't we raising alarm bells about Epstein-Barr? There are over 200 Million people infected with in the United States alone, by most estimates. The fact that most people don't show any symptoms would be irrelevant.

Ebola wasn't that deadly. It's estimated that less than 20,000 people died from Ebola. In a world of almost 8 billion, that's nothing. People make this mistake all the time, confusing Case Fatality Rate with Infection Fatality Rate. If you compare a professional runner's Marathon time with a couch potato's 50 yard dash time, not knowing the difference, you would conclude the couch potato is so much faster than the professional runner. But this is false, you are comparing two drastically different races.

The point is, twist a definition any way you want. If COVID is a pandemic, we deal with multiple pandemics every single year. Many of which have been going on for decades, or even centuries.

And before Shutdown is used for anything, it should absolutely be proven in a clinical setting on a mass scale, with the results peer reviewed, and also the policy should be sent to an ethical review board. This is fairly standard practice in medicine (even if many of these steps are corrupted along the way). Without that, you have what we're left with now....... A Massive, international epidemiological experiment, where none of the participating members gave any sort of consent, informed or otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Runenight201

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,942
I said, by certain definitions. Here is the definition from Dictionary.com-

1. (of a disease) prevalent throughout an entire country, continent, or the whole world; epidemic over a large area.

Nothing about a pathogen, or transmitted via human interaction. Cancer, Acne and Heart Disease absolutely fit, by that definition.

I personally stated that it should be limited to something like Spanish Flu.

And if you are going simply by infections, why aren't we raising alarm bells about Epstein-Barr? There are over 200 Million people infected with in the United States alone, by most estimates. The fact that most people don't show any symptoms would be irrelevant.

Ebola wasn't that deadly. It's estimated that less than 20,000 people died from Ebola. In a world of almost 8 billion, that's nothing. People make this mistake all the time, confusing Case Fatality Rate with Infection Fatality Rate. If you compare a professional runner's Marathon time with a couch potato's 50 yard dash time, not knowing the difference, you would conclude the couch potato is so much faster than the professional runner. But this is false, you are comparing two drastically different races.

The point is, twist a definition any way you want. If COVID is a pandemic, we deal with multiple pandemics every single year. Many of which have been going on for decades, or even centuries.

And before Shutdown is used for anything, it should absolutely be proven in a clinical setting on a mass scale, with the results peer reviewed, and also the policy should be sent to an ethical review board. This is fairly standard practice in medicine (even if many of these steps are corrupted along the way). Without that, you have what we're left with now....... A Massive, international epidemiological experiment, where none of the participating members gave any sort of consent, informed or otherwise.

I would disagree with that definition of pandemic then, and prefer it to include the transmission via human-human contact. Ah, i just looked it up and epidemic is more aptly put! So you could label any disease pervasive throughout society as a pandemic, but what covid really is is an epidemic, which includes the rapid transmission between humans.

The average case Fatality Rate for Ebola (from WHO) is 50%... if that was combined with COVID that would mean at least 1 million dead using official numbers and many, many more using unofficial numbers. Ebola must not have been very contagious if only 20,000 people died from it. I listed Ebola because it is a disease with a high case fatality rate.

The difference with Epstein-Barr is that it must not be that dangerous or disruptive of a disease if 2/3rds of the population has it.... like i said, our appropriate response has to be in proportion to the severity of the disease. Ebola/covid mix? We’re probably shutting everything down. That would be a truly disastrous and costly epidemic. Epstein-Barr? I don’t think we have much too worry about (but I have no idea what the hell that is so I could be completely wrong)
 
Last edited:

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
The average case Fatality Rate for Ebola (from WHO) is 50%... if that was combined with COVID that would mean at least 1 million dead using official numbers and many, many more using unofficial numbers. Ebola must not have been very contagious if only 20,000 people died from it. I listed Ebola because it is a disease with a high case fatality rate.

Well, the problem here is that you believe that WHO must be correct in their fatality rate in Ebola. They could very well be incorrect. It's more likely that they are. If it's anything, it's a calculation. How did they calculate it? Case Fatality Rate. Again, you can't compare that to IFR. You also accept that it would maintain that fatality rate over a larger population, and various seasons, like this Case Fatality Rate calculated by an organization is similar to a sales goal that a virus must hit.

In addition to this, you are also assuming that Ebola or COVID were actually the causes of deaths in the cases which they were reported to be. Or that Ebola or COVID were every properly isolated and purified in the first place. You conclude that Ebola must not be very contagious....... but what if it is? What if it's a virus that's been around for centuries, that over 95% of the world's population has, and most simply express no symptoms?

There's also a deeper assumption that a virus (or other germ) only came into existence briefly before being discovered by humans. But, that's not the case at all.
 

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
Look at who basically owns Euronews, Naguib Sawiris, an Egyptian billionaire who is part of the world the World Economic forum, it's not hard to see why his subsidiary would publish such slanted "science" that tries to present China in a very poor light. And here is what the owner said about China previously: Egyptian billionaire praises Trump for standing up to China on trade. It's no wonder they publish such anti-China propaganda. Of course both the US and Chinese governments are trying to push the blame on each other for the virus, that is what Ray's May newsletter talked about as well.
 
Last edited:

Runenight201

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,942
Well, the problem here is that you believe that WHO must be correct in their fatality rate in Ebola. They could very well be incorrect. It's more likely that they are. If it's anything, it's a calculation. How did they calculate it? Case Fatality Rate. Again, you can't compare that to IFR. You also accept that it would maintain that fatality rate over a larger population, and various seasons, like this Case Fatality Rate calculated by an organization is similar to a sales goal that a virus must hit.

In addition to this, you are also assuming that Ebola or COVID were actually the causes of deaths in the cases which they were reported to be. Or that Ebola or COVID were every properly isolated and purified in the first place. You conclude that Ebola must not be very contagious....... but what if it is? What if it's a virus that's been around for centuries, that over 95% of the world's population has, and most simply express no symptoms?

There's also a deeper assumption that a virus (or other germ) only came into existence briefly before being discovered by humans. But, that's not the case at all.

Could you explain to me the difference between CFR and IFR?

I think you’re getting caught up in the details. My point is that if there is a highly contagious deadly pathogen then we should treat it so, and if there isn’t then we should treat it differently. I get that data can be highly politicized to fit agendas, but at the end of the day there are viruses that people are getting, and it’s impacting their lives in very negative ways. And we should develop solutions that mitigate that risk while also allowing us to function as a society.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Could you explain to me the difference between CFR and IFR?

I think you’re getting caught up in the details. My point is that if there is a highly contagious deadly pathogen then we should treat it so, and if there isn’t then we should treat it differently. I get that data can be highly politicized to fit agendas, but at the end of the day there are viruses that people are getting, and it’s impacting their lives in very negative ways. And we should develop solutions that mitigate that risk while also allowing us to function as a society.

Case Fatality Rate is if you have 200 confirmed cases and 20 deaths, you can have a 10% CFR. If you assume you only found 10% of cases, that's were you get IFR. In this case, the IFR is 1% If you don't know this, you can make assumptions like "Ebola is highly deadly." But that's literally only supported by one metric, and not a very good one. Going to another metric, like death rate per thousand (say, at a country or city level) abolishes that notion.

The details are important. People not being able to distinguish between CFR and IFR assumed, at the beginning of COVID, they compared that COVID CFR to Flu IFR, and assumed it was 20x more deadly. Which was false. It also leads you to believe that something like a "highly contagious deadly pathogen" could exist. Maybe it could. But so could Bigfoot. Problem is, there really isn't proof for either.

As to your point "there are viruses that people are getting, and it’s impacting their lives in very negative ways," prove it. And get very specific about the ways it's negatively affecting their lives.

I think you are too caught up in generalities. You can say a large portion of the population has diabetes, so generally, it might be a good policy to force people to take insulin shots. It might seem like a "generally" good idea, but you are going to cause a lot more problems with that idea, while at the same time, missing people who might need insulin shots.
 

Runenight201

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,942
Case Fatality Rate is if you have 200 confirmed cases and 20 deaths, you can have a 10% CFR. If you assume you only found 10% of cases, that's were you get IFR. In this case, the IFR is 1% If you don't know this, you can make assumptions like "Ebola is highly deadly." But that's literally only supported by one metric, and not a very good one. Going to another metric, like death rate per thousand (say, at a country or city level) abolishes that notion.

The details are important. People not being able to distinguish between CFR and IFR assumed, at the beginning of COVID, they compared that COVID CFR to Flu IFR, and assumed it was 20x more deadly. Which was false. It also leads you to believe that something like a "highly contagious deadly pathogen" could exist. Maybe it could. But so could Bigfoot. Problem is, there really isn't proof for either.

As to your point "there are viruses that people are getting, and it’s impacting their lives in very negative ways," prove it. And get very specific about the ways it's negatively affecting their lives.

I think you are too caught up in generalities. You can say a large portion of the population has diabetes, so generally, it might be a good policy to force people to take insulin shots. It might seem like a "generally" good idea, but you are going to cause a lot more problems with that idea, while at the same time, missing people who might need insulin shots.

How many people do you believe have covid 19?
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
How many people do you believe have covid 19?

I don't think COVID has ever been properly isolated and purified, which means all the tests and all the stats are useless. If it's anything, it's a common cold and flu bug (just like other corona viruses are thought to be), and I think it swept thru the general population over the winter, going with that assumption.

If it doesn't actually exist (and again, the proper procedures don't appear to have been done, please link any papers that have seen that have purified and isolated the virus)...... zero people.

If it does, I will go with the idea of about 10% of the colds and flus were caused by COVID this year, which is right in the area that Wolfgang Wodarg suggested. Since the WHO estimates 1 billion people get the flu every year worldwide....... 100 Million or so, in that case.
 

Runenight201

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,942
I don't think COVID has ever been properly isolated and purified, which means all the tests and all the stats are useless. If it's anything, it's a common cold and flu bug (just like other corona viruses are thought to be), and I think it swept thru the general population over the winter, going with that assumption.

If it doesn't actually exist (and again, the proper procedures don't appear to have been done, please link any papers that have seen that have purified and isolated the virus)...... zero people.

If it does, I will go with the idea of about 10% of the colds and flus were caused by COVID this year, which is right in the area that Wolfgang Wodarg suggested. Since the WHO estimates 1 billion people get the flu every year worldwide....... 100 Million or so, in that case.

That’s a lot of people. Idk why you say it’s not real, are you suggesting they are literally making up all the test results? Cuz I’ll tell you one thing, my parents and I tested positive for covid, and we’re definitely sick, so even if it’s not “covid”, we were definitely infected with something.

The US had ~45 million infected with influenza in the 2017-2018 season. If covid is another virus that matches those rates, were looking at 90 million for 2020 of people getting sick in the US, or about 25% of the population, not including all the other illnesses we already deal with as a population. That to me will seriously disrupt how a society functions, even if we were to take no restrictive measures what so ever.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
That’s a lot of people. Idk why you say it’s not real, are you suggesting they are literally making up all the test results? Cuz I’ll tell you one thing, my parents and I tested positive for covid, and we’re definitely sick, so even if it’s not “covid”, we were definitely infected with something.

When did I ever deny that people get sick? Or that people die? People get sick and die every day, and have been all my life, and for centuries and centuries before I was even born. About 56 Million people die every year. You don't need to make up some "novel" virus to explain why people get sick.

Okay, so some sort of "test" is all you need to believe in COVID 19 (well, that and six months of wall to wall propaganda). I said that I don't think they ever properly isolated and purified the virus. Meaning that it never satisfied even one of Koch's postulates. Which would mean every single test and diagnosis isn't based on anything. And therefore, it might not exist. When they do a PCR test, for example, they could be identifying other viruses or DNA fragments or exomes or something else that isn't COVID. And false positives happen all the time. If you're a man, and take a pregnancy test, and it comes back positive....... do you REALLY think you're pregnant?
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
The US had ~45 million infected with influenza in the 2017-2018 season. If covid is another virus that matches those rates, were looking at 90 million for 2020 of people getting sick in the US, or about 25% of the population, not including all the other illnesses we already deal with as a population. That to me will seriously disrupt how a society functions, even if we were to take no restrictive measures what so ever.

First of all....... your math is off. Why would it be 90 Million? Why do only ever assume there is "one" virus going around? There are at least 302,000 viruses going around at any time, and likely millions more undetected.

Even if is..... 90 million people coming down with a cough and a sore throat for a couple days would not "seriously disrupt society." That would be 90 million people taking a couple days off of work, and maybe resting.

That would be a lot less disruptive that putting 40-60 Million people out of work for at least 60-120 days, and destroying hundreds of thousands of businesses (which are not coming back), pumping non stop fear porn, causing a dramatic rise in suicides, and probably causing an upcoming famine (or some sort of shortage in food).
 

Runenight201

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,942
When did I ever deny that people get sick? Or that people die? People get sick and die every day, and have been all my life, and for centuries and centuries before I was even born. About 56 Million people die every year. You don't need to make up some "novel" virus to explain why people get sick.

Okay, so some sort of "test" is all you need to believe in COVID 19 (well, that and six months of wall to wall propaganda). I said that I don't think they ever properly isolated and purified the virus. Meaning that it never satisfied even one of Koch's postulates. Which would mean every single test and diagnosis isn't based on anything. And therefore, it might not exist. When they do a PCR test, for example, they could be identifying other viruses or DNA fragments or exomes or something else that isn't COVID. And false positives happen all the time. If you're a man, and take a pregnancy test, and it comes back positive....... do you REALLY think you're pregnant?

I would think I’m pregnant if I start feeling a baby growing inside of me :)

I don’t think the tests are made up or that Coronavirus itself is something to not worry about, unless of course one is splendid health and/or has the metabolism for easily dealing with viruses. Since most of us Americans aren’t, well then the coronavirus is very unpleasant and we should take steps to make it not so!
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
I don’t think the tests are made up or that Coronavirus itself is something to not worry about, unless of course one is splendid health and/or has the metabolism for easily dealing with viruses. Since most of us Americans aren’t, well then the coronavirus is very unpleasant and we should take steps to make it not so!

Well, feel free to believe whatever you want to believe. If you trust the tests (despite the fact that they even say they aren't for diagnostic use), good for you. If you are worried about 1 particular corona virus (but not the at least 7 other corona viruses that have been circulating for decades), good for you.

What about the 302,000 viruses that are out there, and have been out there for at least the past 10 years? Worried about them too? You've been dealing with viruses every single day you have been alive on this planet. What changed about 1 particular one on December 1st, 2019?
 

Runenight201

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,942
Well, feel free to believe whatever you want to believe. If you trust the tests (despite the fact that they even say they aren't for diagnostic use), good for you. If you are worried about 1 particular corona virus (but not the at least 7 other corona viruses that have been circulating for decades), good for you.

What about the 302,000 viruses that are out there, and have been out there for at least the past 10 years? Worried about them too? You've been dealing with viruses every single day you have been alive on this planet. What changed about 1 particular one on December 1st, 2019?

Well I got sick with one and then realized how much they suck. How stripped of my health I become and how inactive I must be. Perhaps any illness should be a wake up call to the individual that they are not in the best health. But you are right, there shouldn’t be anything to worry about so long as one is in prime health!
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Well I got sick with one and then realized how much they suck. How stripped of my health I become and how inactive I must be. Perhaps any illness should be a wake up call to the individual that they are not in the best health. But you are right, there shouldn’t be anything to worry about so long as one is in prime health!

How do you know it was a virus? Maybe it was bacteria, or fungi, or mold. Those are all microbes than can cause sickness. Maybe is wasn't any of those. Maybe it was bad food, or some toxic chemical in your house. Bleach? Some sort of disinfectant? Maybe it was air pollution? Stress? A bad drug, a bad supplement?

Might have been any of those.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom