COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)

[arg]

Yes, but partially hydrogenated oils are also on their way out, and those are f'n delicious.

If I’m guessing right about what your talking about learn how to bake and use butter and lard. Turns out it’s not as bad for you as the gov’s been telling our mothers and grandmothers. Everything in moderation applies.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Lord Ratner]

52 minutes ago, arg said:

If I’m guessing right about what your talking about learn how to bake and use butter and lard. Turns out it’s not as bad for you as the gov’s been telling our mothers and grandmothers. Everything in moderation applies.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I think we just bought 8 lbs of butter at Costco today. My wife likes to say it helps you maintain a glossy coat 😂🤣.

 

But partially hydrogenated oils are fantastic for making shelf-stable treats, which is why damn near everything had them. Turns out it's one of the few dietary studies that is actually recreateable... PHOs are just bad news.

 

Be that as it may, they are nearly extinct despite then being legal. The market is often capable of doing what done tell us only government can accomplish.

[Sim]

https://rumble.com/vg4inv-michael-yeadon-full-interview-planet-lockdown.html

Quote

 

Interview from April 26, 2021 - by "fake scientist" (as some call anyone that is against CDC/USG) by Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer, where he worked for 16 years.

He outlines his position on the pandemic, the vaccine, the issue of variants, boosters and the loss of our civil liberties.

 

 

[Negatory]

8 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Vaccination for measles unquestionably stops transmission, so in that case herd immunity and mandatory vaccinations is a justified goal. 

Why do I have to protect children? I don’t want that vaccine, why should I have to get it?

[Negatory]

8 hours ago, ViperMan said:

Ok, so in your construction here, you posit a virus that will kill 320M Americans? Meaning it is going to both infect, AND kill EVERYONE? Ok, I can roll with that. Mandates still aren't required. If such a disease arrived on set, you'd have people locking themselves down, and killing each other to get the vaccine. You think you'd need to mandate it at that point? Lol. Move down the continuum from there, and people's collective behavior appropriately balances it all out. No one is "accepting" any excess deaths.

Okay, you’ve added arbitrary constraints to fit your argument. Let’s remove those and get back to the point.

More specifics to the scenario: The virus is latent and asymptomatic for 6-12 months, where it is still transmissible. Then the host experiences a very high death chance over about a month of illness. Based on this, many people claim it’s not even real. The R0 for this disease is similar to Delta, ~5-8. Scientific papers have been watching and writing about this virus in small populations over the last 2 years before it started spreading more and are relatively certain of these characteristics, although they can’t know anything definitively. You’re the president and you get to choose.

Option A: Do something to limit the spread in an attempt to retain American society.

Option B: Maintain liberty for the next 2 years while society likely collapses.

 

This is all just an exercise in proving that black and white stances are asinine. I promise I can give you a scenario that is contrived enough that you have to act. We don’t have to keep going down this path, but we can if you want.

The point is that there actually should be a point where the governments balance of liberty and security require them to focus on security based on those risks. Arguing there is no red line is ridiculous. Arguing where it should be is a much more intelligent discussion.

Edited December 27, 2021 by Negatory

[Negatory]

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

You can't take the minimum percentage for a group of people and cite that as the percentage. The statistic was that people over the age of 70, as a group, experience a 4% fatality rate per year. That means that some significant portion of that group is going to experience a lower fatality rate, well another portion experiences a higher rate. 

 

He didn't say "people above the age of 70 have a rate of death within their one year age range of 4% or greater.

 

People over 70 is the group. You have to take the mortality rate of the whole group.

Using your own citation, at 60 years old you already have a probability of death of 1.1%. so in this case I think you are misreading the statistics.

 

To be clear, death rate for folks at almost any age is significantly greater from COVID than from just being alive. That was the point all along. Throwing a “the death rate over 70 is 4%” actually does nothing. Compare death rate for a 70 year old to mortality risk. Do the same for a 75 year old, an 80 year old. That’s the statistic

[M2]

From Mike Rowe (one of the few celebrities I actually trust!)...

Quote

Had Myself a Covid-Little Christmas…
 

On Christmas Eve, just a few moments before testing positive for COVID, I was thinking about how incredibly lucky I’ve been these last couple years.

 

My good luck began in March of 2020, with a phone call from the president of Discovery.

 

“Wow," I said, "these lockdowns could put a real crimp in your business model."

 

“Tell me about it,” said Nancy. “We’ve shut down production everywhere.”

 

“Well,” I said, “If your desperate, I guess I could host a show from my couch.”

 

“Would you be up for that?” she asked.

 

A few weeks later, The Discovery Channel premiered six episodes of the first Zoom TV show, featuring me interviewing the Captains of The Deadliest Catch. (Never before has the title of a show seemed so terribly apropos.)

 

After that, Facebook took notice and ordered a few virtual episodes of Returning the Favor. The format of that show posed a much bigger challenge, but we figured it out, and managed to deliver 18 new episodes while hunkered in our bunkers. In fact, we won an Emmy for our trouble. At the same time, I expanded my podcast, morphed my speaking business into a series of virtual Fireside Chats, and awarded a million dollars in work ethic scholarships to 134 deserving individuals.

 

My primary feeling during this incredibly uncertain time was one of gratitude. I was grateful for the technology that allowed me to work during a lockdown, and I was grateful for the chance to keep my people employed when so many other small businesses were unable to do so. But, after four months of at-home broadcasting, the bloom wore off the Zoom, as it were, and I became eager to get back to work. And so, I did. By the summer of 2020, Returning the Favor, Six Degrees, and Dirty Jobs had all resumed production. Obviously, we proceeded with caution, and followed all the COVID guidelines at the time. Funny thing, though. Whenever I posted an update about where I was, the reaction on this page was mixed. Many were pleased to see me back out in the world. But many others were not. Here’s a post from a fan named Darlene Gabon, shortly after I shared some photos from a Dirty Jobs shoot back in July of 2020.

 

"Mike. Is it really so important to film a television show in the midst of pandemic? Is it responsible of you to encourage this kind of behavior when infection rates are spiking? With so many new cases every day, aren’t you concerned?"

 

My response to Darlene began with, “Of course I’m concerned, I’m just not petrified.” https://bit.ly/3z0Gk5o. I then went on to explain that I was comfortable working in the age of Covid, because, after a lot of reading and a lot of research, I had come to accept three very simple truths about this disease.

1. COVID will always be with us, in some way, shape or form.
2. Sooner or later, we’re all going to get it.
3. The odds of surviving are nearly 100%.

Well, that went over - as my grandmother used to say - like a fart in church. My attitude was described, in no particular order, as “cavalier,” “uninformed,” “insensitive,” and “selfish.” It didn’t matter that my crew and I all wore masks and socially distanced. It didn’t matter that we were tested every single day. It didn’t matter that we followed all the required safety protocols. The only thing that mattered to my critics was that we weren’t sufficiently afraid, and that our carelessness was endangering the most vulnerable Americans.

 

What followed on this page was a spirited debate about the nature of safety and security, the essentiality of all work, and the fragility of trust in our institutions. Thousands participated, and I must have written over 20,000 words in dozens of exchanges like this one. https://bit.ly/3z0Gk5o . I also shared a few paragraphs from C.S Lewis on “How to Live in the Atomic Age,” and asked readers to replace “The Atomic Age” with “The Age of COVID,” to better understand where I was coming from. https://bit.ly/3szhxE0. Well, that made the angry, even angrier.

 

To my most ardent critics, nothing was persuasive. Any argument that favored a return to normalcy was deemed “premature,” and any reminder of the many unintended consequences of locking down was deemed “reckless.” And that’s when I realized that all my critics had something in common. Aside from their anger, they all believed – sincerely, I think - that COVID could be vanquished. What started as a collective effort to “flatten the curve” and “slow the spread,” had turned into a widely held belief that some combination of government restrictions and behavioral modification would make COVID go away. Or, in the words of our current president, a fervent belief that we could, “shut the virus down.”

 

Much of the division around COVID really comes down to that. If you are among those who believe that COVID can be “shut down” by staying indoors, you’re probably going take a dim view of those who venture outside, for whatever reason. And if you believe that COVID will be with us forever – no matter what we do - you’re probably not going to hide from it; you’re probably going to find a way to live with it.

 

Obviously, a breakthrough case was not the Christmas present I was hoping for, but I’m not surprised to get one. I knew this was coming – I just didn’t know when. It is ironic, though. After 18 months of constant air travel, myriad hotel rooms, and countless Uber rides, COVID finally caught up with me in my own zip code, courtesy of a neighbor with a dry cough and a runny nose. Which are pretty much the only symptoms vexing me now. Would it be worse had I not been vaccinated? Probably. From what I’ve read, the vaccines lessen the effects a great deal, but I can’t prove it. All I can say for sure, is that back in 2020, prior to the vaccines, every intrusion into our lives was described as “temporary,” and every shutdown justified by the existence of a “national emergency.”

 

Fair enough. 2020 was a scary time. Back in those days, people were washing their fruit with bleach, washing their hands round the clock, and being told that masks were a waste of time. Things are very different now. The vaccines, while not the preventative we’d hoped for, seem pretty effective at keeping the infected out of the hospitals. And Omicron is a far cry from Alpha. More infectious, yes, but way less severe. The current seven-day death rate is 2.6 out of 100,000. That’s .00026%, a more than 50% improvement over this week a year ago.

 

https://bit.ly/3mVj4kv Also, we now have access to all sorts of new and very effective therapeutics. In other words, we’re in a much better place than we were in 2020. We’re just not acting like it.

 

As I type this, universities and school districts are once again closing their doors. Businesses are sending their people home. I just heard the President telling all Americans – even those who are vaccinated and boosted - to keep masking indefinitely - along with schoolchildren! Dr. Fauci now says he supports masks on airplanes “forever.” And the Today Show, which I was supposed to appear on in person next week, just informed me they want to do it on Zoom instead – like it was July of 2020.

 

Obviously, I’m not a doctor or an expert – I’m just another guy with COVID, sharing some thoughts on the defining issue of the year. And my thoughts are these: We must move forward. We must navigate beyond denial, bargaining, anger, and depression, to accept the simple fact that COVID is here to stay.

 

That shouldn’t frighten us. It should empower us. It should inspire us to live bravely, but rationally. It should compel us to protect the most vulnerable, while keeping our country open. To do otherwise is to live in the past. A past where we've seen over and over again, that “temporary restrictions” are never temporary, and “national emergencies” are never ending. Enough with 2020. Enough with 2021. Here’s to 2022 - a year with less to fear.

 

Mike

 

PS. It’s impossible in posts like these, to not point out the screamingly obvious. Of course, I’m sad for all those who have lost loved ones to this completely avoidable plague. Their deaths are tragic, and quite possibly, criminal. You have my deepest sympathy. I am also very worried for my elderly parents, my friends in various stages of cancer treatment, the obese, and all those who are immunocompromised. But none of that changes the fact that COVID is here to stay, and life must go on.

 

PPS. I’ll keep you posted as to how this thing progresses. So far, it feels like a mild cold.

 

PPPS. Is it gauche to remind you that Dirty Jobs is back with new episodes, 1/2/22, only on Discovery? That’s a Sunday, by the way, at 8pm. If so, never mind. If not, I’ll also mention the premiere is preceded by a 12-hour marathon of me getting dirty, oftentimes behind a mask…

 

[Lord Ratner]

On 12/25/2021 at 8:16 PM, VMFA187 said:

The annual mortality of people over 70 is > 4%.

That's what he said. Add up the number of people over 70 and compare it to the number over 70 who died. It's more than 4% each year.

 

On 12/25/2021 at 7:14 PM, Negatory said:

Is a 1-2% risk of mortality for those over 60 okay?

This is what you said. Yes. It's ok because the default is well above 1-2% already. And it's also ok because people die. They die from diseases, they die from heart failure, cancer, car accidents, and all manner of normal ways to die. None of those things, including COVID, are going away soon. 

 

You've failed to distinguish how COVID, especially post-vaccine availability, is different from the many things we simply accept. 

 

I think Mike Rowe is on to something. Too many people are expecting some sort of victory. I suspect the fact we sacrificed and suffered so much has only made the expectation greater, but we're way past the end of the tale. People have always had a difficult relationship with death and loss, and COVID just feeds into our disposition to want to blame death on *something.*

 

Old and unhealthy people die. Some young and healthy ones occasionally. Now they die of COVID too.

Edited December 27, 2021 by Lord Ratner

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, Negatory said:

Why do I have to protect children? I don’t want that vaccine, why should I have to get it?

Not sure who you're arguing with, but I'm not against all mandates.

 

If you get vaccinated, you're protected against COVID. And vaccination does not affect the transmissibility of the disease to those who cannot be vaccinated, so the vaccine serves *only* to protect those who receive it. No mandate.

 

That is not the case with other diseases that require vaccine mandates.

 

Here's another example. The should be no mandate for the rabies vaccine. No one who lacks the ability to get the rabies vaccine is endangered by others who can get the vaccine, but choose not to.

 

Haven't we beaten this horse corpse already?

[arg]

6 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

I think we just bought 8 lbs of butter at Costco today. My wife likes to say it helps you maintain a glossy coat 😂🤣.

 

But partially hydrogenated oils are fantastic for making shelf-stable treats, which is why damn near everything had them. Turns out it's one of the few dietary studies that is actually recreateable... PHOs are just bad news.

 

Be that as it may, they are nearly extinct despite then being legal. The market is often capable of doing what done tell us only government can accomplish.

Try making your own butter, its pretty dang good. Lots of videos on how to do it. 

It might be cool to watch your wife make it like this.

 

[pawnman]

8 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

 

If you get vaccinated, you're protected against COVID. And vaccination does not affect the transmissibility of the disease to those who cannot be vaccinated

Please, for the love of God, stop with this false nonsense. If you want to argue on the merits, please do  but the vaccines lower the chances you get it. If you don't get it, you can't spread it.

No vaccine stops transmission to unvaccinated people...that's why California had an outbreak of measles not that long ago.

The Covid vaccines are about as effective at stopping Covid as flu vaccines are for stopping flu, and we in the military line up every year for the flu vaccine...which is an even LOWER risk category than Covid.

Edited December 27, 2021 by pawnman

[Lord Ratner]

42 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Please, for the love of God, stop with this false nonsense. If you want to argue on the merits, please do  but the vaccines lower the chances you get it. If you don't get it, you can't spread it.

No vaccine stops transmission to unvaccinated people...that's why California had an outbreak of measles not that long ago.

The Covid vaccines are about as effective at stopping Covid as flu vaccines are for stopping flu, and we in the military line up every year for the flu vaccine...which is an even LOWER risk category than Covid.

Look at the rates, you walnut. It's not stopping the spread. It's not even slowing it down any more. I know at this point you're so committed to your position that it's nearly impossible to entertain something different, but a small percentage change in transmission rates of one of the most transmissible diseases we've ever experienced does not matter. It. Does. Not. Matter. 

 

For all the talk of black and white thinking, it's incredible how black and white your thinking is. For example, both measles and covid experience breakthrough infections. Except with measles the breakthrough infections are so rare that it becomes national news. Further, many of the measles incidents have been directly related to a reduction in vaccination rates against measles. So clearly, the measles vaccine has a massive and meaningful impact on transmission.

 

COVID, however, does not. That you can't see the difference demonstrates your lack of critical thinking, not a lack of empathy in others. Negatory put the math out already, but I don't suspect you'll give that anymore weight than you give anything else that disrupts your narrative, but a highly transmissible disease requires more than a low-double-digit reduction in transmission to make a meaningful impact. And if it doesn't make a meaningful impact, then it shouldn't be mandated by the government. 

 

When you're deciding to compel people to do something they don't want to do, the bar is very high. Not because of any sort of ethics either, but because the outcome is incredibly predictable, as we have seen here. 

 

People like you, with a barely hidden disdain for people who don't think like themselves, are always lamenting the failings of other humans. Great, maybe in another couple hundred years we'll overcome those. But refusing to adapt your strategy to the very real and very normal "failings" of the species, as it stands today, is a time-tested recipe for disaster. 

[pawnman]

9 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Look at the rates, you walnut. It's not stopping the spread. It's not even slowing it down any more. I know at this point you're so committed to your position that it's nearly impossible to entertain something different, but a small percentage change in transmission rates of one of the most transmissible diseases we've ever experienced does not matter. It. Does. Not. Matter. 

 

For all the talk of black and white thinking, it's incredible how black and white your thinking is. For example, both measles and covid experience breakthrough infections. Except with measles the breakthrough infections are so rare that it becomes national news. Further, many of the measles incidents have been directly related to a reduction in vaccination rates against measles. So clearly, the measles vaccine has a massive and meaningful impact on transmission.

 

COVID, however, does not. That you can't see the difference demonstrates your lack of critical thinking, not a lack of empathy in others. Negatory put the math out already, but I don't suspect you'll give that anymore weight than you give anything else that disrupts your narrative, but a highly transmissible disease requires more than a low-double-digit reduction in transmission to make a meaningful impact. And if it doesn't make a meaningful impact, then it shouldn't be mandated by the government. 

 

When you're deciding to compel people to do something they don't want to do, the bar is very high. Not because of any sort of ethics either, but because the outcome is incredibly predictable, as we have seen here. 

 

People like you, with a barely hidden disdain for people who don't think like themselves, are always lamenting the failings of other humans. Great, maybe in another couple hundred years we'll overcome those. But refusing to adapt your strategy to the very real and very normal "failings" of the species, as it stands today, is a time-tested recipe for disaster. 

The small changes would make a difference if ignorant assholes would stop making "I refuse to get vaccinated" their whole personality. 

You know why breakthrough infections are rare for measles? Because the vaccination rate is really close to 100%. You know why Covid continues to spread? Because we're nowhere near 100%.

Edited December 27, 2021 by pawnman

[SurelySerious]

The small changes would make a difference if ignorant assholes would stop making "I refuse to get vaccinated" their whole personality. 
You know why breakthrough infections are rare for measles? Because the vaccination rate is really close to 100%. You know why Covid continues to spread? Because we're nowhere near 100%.

No, these vaccines simply aren’t the silver bullet you were led to believe. In the President’s own words from the other day, over 200M are “fully vaccinated” and we have the same case loads and deaths we did a year ago when he claimed he had a plan to stop COVID. It’s all just hollow promises, and it’s unfortunate for everyone.

[pawnman]

13 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

No, these vaccines simply aren’t the silver bullet you were led to believe. In the President’s own words from the other day, over 200M are “fully vaccinated” and we have the same case loads and deaths we did a year ago when he claimed he had a plan to stop COVID. It’s all just hollow promises, and it’s unfortunate for everyone.

So 100 million are unvaccinated, while we've removed all social distancing and most places have removed mask mandates, and we're supposed to view the rise in infections as a failure of the vaccines? 

[SurelySerious]

So 100 million are unvaccinated, while we've removed all social distancing and most places have removed mask mandates, and we're supposed to view the rise in infections as a failure of the vaccines? 

Yes. Time to move on, sorry you were misled.

[Lord Ratner]

28 minutes ago, pawnman said:

The small changes would make a difference if ignorant assholes would stop making "I refuse to get vaccinated" their whole personality. 

You know why breakthrough infections are rare for measles? Because the vaccination rate is really close to 100%. You know why Covid continues to spread? Because we're nowhere near 100%.

Well, at least we now have concrete evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.

[lloyd christmas]

53 minutes ago, pawnman said:

The small changes would make a difference if ignorant assholes would stop making "I refuse to get vaccinated" their whole personality. 

I can’t believe I’m going to weigh in on this topic at this point.  But, I’ve got time as I sit here dealing with my breakthrough case of COVID.  I’m vaccinated and I ended up in the ER.  It sucked.  

To me, this whole argument comes down to basic problem solving skills.  There has to be a starting point and some understanding based on common sense and predictability based on human nature.  My dad used to say “what, so what and now what”.  That approach isn’t based on emotion or fear.  It’s just a matter of fact approach to a problem.

One of the most basic things you would think policy makers would understand at the start is that not everyone will get the vaccine.  They just won’t.  And it doesn’t matter why.  There is absolutely no point in calling people “ignorant assholes” or threatening people with a “winter of death” or whatever the divisive language is. 

I understand moving the goal line.  That’s really all we’ve seen since this started.  But, I don’t understand moving the starting line.  

Edited December 27, 2021 by lloyd christmas

[pawnman]

I think we're going to have to resign ourselves to living with Covid forever because people are simply unwilling to do anything to mitigate it.

People who happily do things to mitigate smaller risks balk at doing anything for Covid. Because somehow they've made Covid response a political issue instead of a public health issue.

It's sad that a bunch of whiny assholes are going to be able to hold the rest of the country hostage, but here we are.

At least you assholes won't be in yhe military.

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, pawnman said:

I think we're going to have to resign ourselves to living with Covid forever because people are simply unwilling to do anything to mitigate it.

And this fits nicely into the article by Mike Rowe. Cynical politicians seeing leverage in every crisis somehow convinced you and a significant number of Americans that this virus would go away if we just did what they told us to.

 

Anyone with an even passing understanding of coronaviruses back in March of 2020 knew that this wasn't going to happen. There's no putting the genie back in the bottle, there never was.

 

But, if you earnestly believe that there was a way to "erase" covid, it is suddenly much more understandable as to why you would be so openly hostile to anyone who disagrees with you.

 

But you're not going to find any reputable sources in the scientific community who even remotely suggested the possibility of covid going away. A lot of us just realized that fact much earlier than you did.

Edited December 27, 2021 by Lord Ratner

[SurelySerious]

I think we're going to have to resign ourselves to living with Covid forever because people are simply unwilling to do anything to mitigate it.
People who happily do things to mitigate smaller risks balk at doing anything for Covid. Because somehow they've made Covid response a political issue instead of a public health issue.
It's sad that a bunch of whiny assholes are going to be able to hold the rest of the country hostage, but here we are.
At least you assholes won't be in yhe military.

You would be living with covid whether people “did things to mitigate it” or not. Do you not understand this disease? It’s not polio, it’s like the flu. It will mutate and it will be around and it will keep killing people because the vaccines for it aren’t like MMR or Polio or name your static virus you won’t get with a proper vaccination. Quit being so thick with your religion of covid vaccination.

[Negatory]

On 12/25/2021 at 5:14 PM, Negatory said:

Are you good with a 5-15% mortality risk for a highly contagious disease for those over the age of 70ish?

To be pedantic, because you are, this is what I said. Don’t misquote me when it’s literally the next sentence. We’ve been talking about those over 70 100% of the time, which I have consistently used 5-15% for.

14 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

This is what you said. Yes. It's ok because the default is well above 1-2% already

 

[Lord Ratner]

22 minutes ago, Negatory said:

To be pedantic, because you are, this is what I said. Don’t misquote me when it’s literally the next sentence. We’ve been talking about those over 70 100% of the time, which I have consistently used 5-15% for.

 

Those are two very different statements. You started your paragraph with "annual mortality." 5 to 15% mortality rate is for those who get it. Not for the entire population. Yet the 1% of everybody dying from it was very much referencing the entire elderly population. And VMFA was responding to the latter statistic, not the former, which is why I didn't waste time with the 15% statistic. It's not what we were talking about.

 

The 1% statistic is best compared to the 4% of the entire population over 70 that dies every year. 

 

The 5 to 15% statistic is best compared to other maladies that affect old people and how fatal they are. You might be surprised by just how fragile old people are, otherwise I'm not sure why you'd be bringing this up at all.

 

You already posted the actuarial tables, so I'm not exactly sure why I have to explain them to you. They demonstrate quite clearly that old people, unsurprisingly, die at very high numbers. 

 

They are going to continue to die from covid. And pneumonia. And the flu. And heart disease. And falling in the bathtub. I'm not "good with" any of those things, but I'm also not going to start pretending like mortality is something new and terrifying just because we have one more way to die added to the list.

 

Further, since your point is basically "are we going to do anything to protect the old people?!" The simple response is yes, we're going to develop a vaccine and make it free for everyone. And for the millionth time, since neither the vaccine nor the ridiculous cloth masks everybody is walking around in do anything to *meaningfully* affect the transmission of *this specific* disease, developing the vaccine and making it available is the best they're going to get. And like every generation before them and every generation that will follow, they'll just go on knowing that being old is a terminal condition.

Edited December 27, 2021 by Lord Ratner

[Negatory]

Doubling down? If your argument is those over 60 have a death rate of 4%, then sure. Is that your argument?

How can he possibly be referring to those over 60 - or how can that possibly be what we are talking about - when his literal quote was “The annual mortality of people over 70 is > 4%.”

Edited December 27, 2021 by Negatory

[Negatory]

How about we dismount from this semantics based argument where we are nitpicking words.

This is what matters. The estimated mortality for those of any age from COVID is higher than it is from normal causes for almost every age. Usually by a significant margin. And the hospitalization rate of almost every demographic is extremely significant. Even folks in their 30s olds are hospitalized at a 2-5% rate, with those in their 60s+ hitting 15-30%.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/covid-pandemic-mortality-risk-estimator

Just saying that folks die anyways doesn't discount the fact that getting this disease will personally increase an individual's odds of dying by a significant factor, especially for older Americans. Are we really still arguing that? Excess deaths in America right now are estimated at about 1.0M.