Why Did A Healthy 16 Year Old Die From Covid

T

TheBeard

Guest
do you know how much healthy 16 year olds die per weak? in the world, or just in europe and america...

do you know 4 sure she was healthy?

do you know amything?

do you know the right context?

can we make conclusions from one case from half a milion of infected people, from 30.000 dead people?

do you know how much 16 year olds died from the common flue/other viruses?

you neee to know all of that to start thinking and then you can ask...

i dont want to be rude, but i think you can now see the answer

Exactly.

What does "healthy" even mean?
Wait, doctors assessed that her state of health was good to go? If doctors say so...
 

Whichway?

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
485
People still die of the flu which could be prevented if we just all stayed in lockdown though? Do you not care about these people who die??

The police are still human stay can spread the virus by stopping and fining people stay are potentially killing people , if you are walking down the street on your own and are stopped by 4 police officers they could spread it.

Well I guess if you are in the USA and you don’t want lockdown because you feel it is a double standard because of how we currently deal with the seasonal flu, then I don’t know what to say? Are you happy with the projected death toll of Covid-19 just for the USA alone if social distancing is not enforced being between 80,000 and 200,000?
 

Jing

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
2,559
Well I guess if you are in the USA and you don’t want lockdown because you feel it is a double standard because of how we currently deal with the seasonal flu, then I don’t know what to say? Are you happy with the projected death toll of Covid-19 just for the USA alone if social distancing is not enforced being between 80,000 and 200,000?
I guess I could say the same to you , are you happy with the yearly death toll of the flu? Lock down is dumb.
 

Whichway?

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
485
I guess I could say the same to you , are you happy with the yearly death toll of the flu? Lock down is dumb.

So the flu which has an infection fatality rate of 0.1% killed approx 34,000 people in the USA in the 2018-19 season. The journal The Lancet currently estimates the IFR of Covid-19 is 0.66%. So if as many people get Coronavirus, as got the flu in 2018-19 which was ~ 35 million people, and its more infectious and more transmissible than the flu, we would expect ~ 231,000 to die from it. That’s just the deaths. Many more would need ICU treatment to recover from it.
 

Jing

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
2,559
So the flu which has an infection fatality rate of 0.1% killed approx 34,000 people in the USA in the 2018-19 season. The journal The Lancet currently estimates the IFR of Covid-19 is 0.66%. So if as many people get Coronavirus, as got the flu in 2018-19 which was ~ 35 million people, and its more infectious and more transmissible than the flu, we would expect ~ 231,000 to die from it. That’s just the deaths. Many more would need ICU treatment to recover from it.
And your point is ?? Death is a death why do you suddenly care now?
 

Whichway?

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
485
And your point is ?? Death is a death why do you suddenly care now?
Because it is too many. And this virus doesn’t just kill the elderly, about which you cannot do much to improve their lives when they become very elderly and frail.
upload_2020-4-2_23-23-58.png



If it infects as many as normally gets the flu, that’s 35,000,000 infected and 231,000 deaths across those age ranges shown above and right.
But this virus is more infective and more transmissible. So if you want business as usual and nothing shut down then the expected deaths in this scenario was 2.2 million.

To me 2.2 million deaths, across those age ranges, so everything can stay open is unacceptable. I realize we disagree on this, but so be it.
 

Jing

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
2,559
Because it is too many. And this virus doesn’t just kill the elderly, about which you cannot do much to improve their lives when they become very elderly and frail.
View attachment 17290


If it infects as many as normally gets the flu, that’s 35,000,000 infected and 231,000 deaths across those age ranges shown above and right.
But this virus is more infective and more transmissible. So if you want business as usual and nothing shut down then the expected deaths in this scenario was 2.2 million.

To me 2.2 million deaths, across those age ranges, so everything can stay open is unacceptable. I realize we disagree on this, but so be it.
Any death is too many what's your point?
 

thomas00

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
872
Because it is too many. And this virus doesn’t just kill the elderly, about which you cannot do much to improve their lives when they become very elderly and frail.
View attachment 17290


If it infects as many as normally gets the flu, that’s 35,000,000 infected and 231,000 deaths across those age ranges shown above and right.
But this virus is more infective and more transmissible. So if you want business as usual and nothing shut down then the expected deaths in this scenario was 2.2 million.

To me 2.2 million deaths, across those age ranges, so everything can stay open is unacceptable. I realize we disagree on this, but so be it.


Have you read any of the discussions on this forum regarding the mortality rate in the last week or so?

Or seen and read the handful of doctors and researchers challenging common assumptions about the data?
 

Whichway?

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
485
Have you read any of the discussions on this forum regarding the mortality rate in the last week or so?

Or seen and read the handful of doctors and researchers challenging common assumptions about the data?

I’ve seen a couple of the threads. A fatality rate of 0.66% is conservative and has been revised down from 4% that was stated early in the pandemic. Also this rate will vary depending on your access to ICU beds. The US has approx 100,000 ICU beds. If you get 35,000,000 infected as you do with the flu and 25% are serious and 25% of the serious cases require ICU and ventilators that is over 2 million requiring ICU. Then doctors have to make a decision about who gets ICU and who doesn’t. In that case I would expect the fatality rate to increase.
 

RealNeat

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
2,345
Location
HI
I’ve seen a couple of the threads. A fatality rate of 0.66% is conservative and has been revised down from 4% that was stated early in the pandemic. Also this rate will vary depending on your access to ICU beds. The US has approx 100,000 ICU beds. If you get 35,000,000 infected as you do with the flu and 25% are serious and 25% of the serious cases require ICU and ventilators that is over 2 million requiring ICU. Then doctors have to make a decision about who gets ICU and who doesn’t. In that case I would expect the fatality rate to increase.

Have you listened to any of Ray Peats recent podcasts, especially the most recent one on Politics and Science? You are buying "official" numbers hook line and sinker, that might be a place to investigate first. Also do explain the oddities that took place before any of this happened, like the multiple clues Bill Gates gave to an event such as this?
 

nwo2012

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
1,107
Have you listened to any of Ray Peats recent podcasts, especially the most recent one on Politics and Science? You are buying "official" numbers hook line and sinker, that might be a place to investigate first. Also do explain the oddities that took place before any of this happened, like the multiple clues Bill Gates gave to an event such as this?

You are talking to one that is brainwashed and believes everything the 'authorities state. Waste of typing tbh.
In fact, fake virus aside, even if it existed the death rate would probably be 20-40 times lower since there would be that factor of number of people actually infected since only a small sample of predominantly those showing symptoms are tested.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2018
Messages
1,237
You are talking to one that is brainwashed and believes everything the 'authorities state. Waste of typing tbh.
Or could even be a paid troll.
 

Whichway?

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
485
Have you listened to any of Ray Peats recent podcasts, especially the most recent one on Politics and Science? You are buying "official" numbers hook line and sinker, that might be a place to investigate first. Also do explain the oddities that took place before any of this happened, like the multiple clues Bill Gates gave to an event such as this?

Thanks for the post. I'll give the podcast a listen. Corona virus is typically used in modelling as SARS is also in the corona family, and so it and MERS have the most recent data associated with it. Biologists have known pandemics were coming and that it was only a matter of time. History tells us this.

You are talking to one that is brainwashed and believes everything the 'authorities state. Waste of typing tbh.
In fact, fake virus aside, even if it existed the death rate would probably be 20-40 times lower since there would be that factor of number of people actually infected since only a small sample of predominantly those showing symptoms are tested.

Or could even be a paid troll.

What do you know about me? Nothing. You two jump to conclusions too quickly and with a complete lack of data. Explains your paranoid take on the world.
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
960
It seems like the most beneficial aspects of the lockdown have been a reduction in pollution caused by reduction in unnecessary labor.

This shows us it's totally possible to deal with pollution by simply reducing labor hours.

All of these fancy plans relying on green energy and increasing employment, like the green new deal, pale in comparison to simply shutting down unnecessary businesses in terms of beneficial effects on pollution. And it hasn't been a return to the stone age either.
 

nwo2012

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
1,107
Thanks for the post. I'll give the podcast a listen. Corona virus is typically used in modelling as SARS is also in the corona family, and so it and MERS have the most recent data associated with it. Biologists have known pandemics were coming and that it was only a matter of time. History tells us this.





What do you know about me? Nothing. You two jump to conclusions too quickly and with a complete lack of data. Explains your paranoid take on the world.

If paranoid=not brainwashed I'll take it. You on the other hand have a brain that sparkles from being thoroughly washed.
 

Whichway?

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
485
If paranoid=not brainwashed I'll take it. You on the other hand have a brain that sparkles from being thoroughly washed.

As you said why waste your typing on me? Why not go off and prove your amazing hypothesis that viruses don't exist and win the Nobel Prize.

Also in your post above your sentence about fatalities being 20-40X lower does not read well. Maybe your brain needs a clean? You need to work on your thinking and communication skills. FYI only approx 25% of Covid-19 infected don't show symptoms. If that rate of asymptomatic carriers was 70-80%, then the fatality rate from this disease might need to be revised right down. Right now that fatality rate as best we can estimate is around 0.6% compared to the seasonal flu at 0.1%, so 6x more deadly.
 
Last edited:

Nigel Blake

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
50
As you said why waste your typing on me? Why not go off and prove your amazing hypothesis that viruses don't exist and win the Nobel Prize.

Also in your post above your sentence about fatalities being 20-40X lower does not read well. Maybe your brain needs a clean? You need to work on your thinking and communication skills. FYI only approx 25% of Covid-19 infected don't show symptoms. If that rate of asymptomatic carriers was 70-80%, then the fatality rate from this disease might need to be revised right down. Right now that fatality rate as best we can estimate is around 0.6% compared to the seasonal flu at 0.1%, so 6x more deadly.

Who gives a damn about the Noble Prize? No one who actually going against mainstream scientific rhetoric is ever going to get a Noble Prize unless it somehow benefits the agenda. Please get it through your mind that the scientific community isn't full of people who just tell how the world is to their best capabilities but is in fact filled with people who want power, prestige, and wealth who are often used for or directly part of some narrative.

The "death rate" for the flu, covid-19, and practically all viruses is dubious since those who died often have other diagnosed health conditions and likely have undiagnosed health conditions considering common medical doctors are not very well verse in nutrition and likely would label someone with hormone imbalances as healthy. Basically, it can't be proven whether or not the viruses are the cause of death or even a significant factor and not whatever cause those other health conditions.....
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
960
If paranoid=not brainwashed I'll take it. You on the other hand have a brain that sparkles from being thoroughly washed.
Seems a bit rude and a terrible argument to just accuse people of being brainwashed instead of engaging calmly w their arguments

Who gives a damn about the Noble Prize? No one who actually going against mainstream scientific rhetoric is ever going to get a Noble Prize unless it somehow benefits the agenda. Please get it through your mind that the scientific community isn't full of people who just tell how the world is to their best capabilities but is in fact filled with people who want power, prestige, and wealth who are often used for or directly part of some narrative.

Didn't albert szent-gyorgyi, who Ray respects greatly, get a nobel prize for discovering the kreb's cycle? this is very one dimensional criticisim. We all know science is subject to laws of political economy like any other discipline, and influenced by money, but that doesn't mean every single thing scientists say or do is automatically wrong
 

Giraffe

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
3,730
It seems like the most beneficial aspects of the lockdown have been a reduction in pollution caused by reduction in unnecessary labor.

This shows us it's totally possible to deal with pollution by simply reducing labor hours.

All of these fancy plans relying on green energy and increasing employment, like the green new deal, pale in comparison to simply shutting down unnecessary businesses in terms of beneficial effects on pollution. And it hasn't been a return to the stone age either.
What's this to do with the topic of this thread? And why do you post it twice?

And why these double posts?

Homeless In The Southwest. Assistance Needed
Bag Breathing Helps Flu; Ventilators And Oxygen Probably Kill


Briefly Mold Exposure: How To Detox?
Supplements To Improve And Strengthen Capillary Walls? POTS, IIH, Dysautonomia


Particles March 2019 Excellent
Particles In Context, March 2019 Newsletter


Ketotifen (where To Buy Online?)
Ketotifen May Treat Hashimoto's


Got An "Extreme Emergency: STAY HOME" Text Yesterday; Today I See Jets Spraying A Thick White Thing
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...ter-relocating-va-co.27950/page-2#post-512726


https://raypeatforum.com/community/...outhwest-assistance-needed.32244/#post-487161
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...hance-fungal-pathogenicity.29997/#post-470090

and more ...
 

Jing

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
2,559
Seems a bit rude and a terrible argument to just accuse people of being brainwashed instead of engaging calmly w their arguments
It's not rude calling someone brainwashed when they are , everyone who wants lockdown are brainwashed they just follow anything the government say, I guarantee you anything if we were just told this virus is going around no one would of said for lockdown the only reason everyone is calling for total lockdown is because the government have gave people the idea and told them to lockdown .
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom