Even if it kills (which it likely will), our track record shows that didn’t care enough about that, and in a decreasing manner. So it’ll only be worse.
Pretty sure every virus has killed people, from the cold, to flu, and of course covid. It feels like now the death rate for the latest variants of covid are pretty comparable to the flu, the virus has lost a lot of its killing power over time.
As someone who wound up with chronic fatigue syndrome after getting covid, thank you for this. This piece of shit virus is worse than most people want to admit.
the sheer number of Covid infections has made long Covid into a global crisis
amazing that you recognize the existence of not only long Covid, but other post-viral illnesses, and think it gives weight to your “Covid is no big deal” argument
Yeah, I misspoke in my initial comment. I was under the impression the percentage was lower, but I looked it up and it’s about the same (based on the first thing I read)
So to me there’s two conclusions: Covid, which infects people at a much higher rate and for which the vaccine is not really that effective, is a bigger problem since it will end up giving a larger number of people long Covid. The flu is not infecting people twice a year (or more), and it’s possible to go years without catching the flu, even without masks
Or, what I think is the correct conclusion, we should be taking flu more seriously. We saw how little flu there was during the years of the highest mask compliance. Very weird to say “oh we’ve always had post-viral illness, let’s just have even more.” How about we actually take public health seriously for once?
yes, and we should be masking for that as well. even so, covid is far more insidious because so many of the disabilities it leaves behind are invisible.
I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency, it is not an apple to orange kind of thing to say all viruses can kill. I’m not denying some kill more than others, but they all kill. If you can’t understand this fact, I don’t know what to tell you.
I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency
You’re stating that all viruses kill (which may have some holes in it already) therefore all viruses are technically the same, which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.
If you can’t understand this fact, I don’t know what to tell you.
If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn’t see it. You’re just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.
That’s not what I’m saying at all, does saying all people die mean all people are the same? Does saying all murders kill mean they are all the same? No, there are obviously differences.
which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.
The fact I said isn’t about differences in damage, facts don’t have to say everything to be facts. My fact also isn’t saying or implying that they do the same damage.
If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn’t see it. You’re just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.
Look at the context of who I was responding to. They were basically saying that if it kills we should wear a mask, I pointed out that All viruses kill and we don’t wear masks because of those, so just the fact that it kills isn’t enough.
Fun fact: the CDC readjusted what the ‘normal’ rate of deaths is to include the years of the pandemic so now it’s harder than ever to find hard numbers because “excess deaths” was one of the last ways to get any information at all!
For the love of god: everyone should ignores what the CDC says. You can see for yourself how many people died from Covid under their watch. They have no morals and they made it obvious by downplaying Covid
Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.
Anything that doesn’t make an observable, statistically significant difference, has no cause to further impose restriction on how people live their lives
I know I’ve read reports about the latest variants being much less deadly. I did see one study recently which for patients presenting to hospital covid was a few percentage points more likely to result in death compared to hospitalized flu patients. There were a lot more covid patients though.
Found it:
death rates among people hospitalized for COVID-19 were 17% to 21% in 2020 vs 6% in this study, while death rates for those hospitalized for influenza were 3.8% in 2020 vs 3.7% in this study
I mean, that’s one way to look at it. I looked at it as only a couple percent higher death rate than the flu. Either way, a little less than 2x is way better than like 5x worse.
Even if we pedantically accept that ‘almost double’ is really ‘just a few percent higher’ while we’re looking at a single digit likelihood, ‘just a few percent more’ than for the flu is a lot more people in overall numbers with something that spreads far quicker than the flu. We could get the death rate of Covid down to ½ the rate for the flu but if infections are more than double (this is just an example, I don’t know the actual stats on this one), it still means Covid would be more deadly. Unless I’m missing something obvious.
I’m not sure how severe an effect this would have on the numbers, but the death rate would non-negligibly go down after millions of the most vulnerable people died in the first wave. As well, the newer variants get more contagious and bypass immune responses more easily, and we’re taking way fewer precautions as a society. so 6% is a lower percent but still an incredibly high number
I saw it as an evolutionary benefit to be less deadly. The way I’m seeing this, the virus’s purpose in life is to spread, so a higher infection and contagious rate with less death rate is ideal from an evolution standpoint.
There’s one crucial thing you overlooked in this: in 2020, most people hadn’t been infected, and hadn’t gotten the vaccine (because there was no vaccine until December,and even then it was in extremely short supply). Now, most people have some sort of immunity, be it from vaccine or from a prior infection. That definitely skews the hospitalization numbers downward. You can’t compare then and now, unfortunately, since there’s no real community that hasn’t been vaccinated and hasn’t caught it - and so you can’t compare their numbers.
That’s fair, but I think you can still compare it to the flu, which is not that far off from covid percentage wise. At this point both the flu and covid should be at an equal level of people having vaccines and natural antibodies, right? Even if you go with covid being about twice as deadly as the flu, twice as deadly as almost nothing is still almost nothing.
It’s important to note that every state I’m aware of has long ended their testing and reporting, literally doing the Trump thing. So we actually have no idea what the numbers are.
The numbers I’ve seen are from hospitalized patients, which should still be tracked, and tracked in a similar way to the flu. It doesn’t give us the full story for sure, but it gives us something to compare.
Unfortunately, the myth that virii become weaker over time is a long standing misconception, and the anti-vax people pushed it because it fit their narrative.
These articles discuss it with immunologists & doctors & geneticists, though, so it seems that it’s a known truth and so, like gravity, isn’t extensively studied. Instead, they’re focusing on actual prevention via better vaccines and personal behavior/responsibility.
To summarize the NPR one, and correct me if I am wrong, but they are confirming that the current variants are weaker, but that we shouldn’t take that to mean the next variants will follow the same trend?
Kind of. It’s not that it’s weaker, it’s that it’s route into cells is less damaging, and so it’s less “severe” , though the article contradicts itself on that particular word.
FTA:
“ this alternative entryway likely causes less damage inside the lungs”
“Omicron may be a small step back in severity. But it’s probably more severe on its own than the original version of the virus,”
Before omicron came along, SARS-CoV-2 was actually evolving to be more severe, says Bhattacharyya, of Harvard Medical School. “We’re looking at a virus that’s gotten progressively more severe over time,” he says.
Viruses tend to mutate to be more contagious and less lethal, it’s just how natural selection/evolution works. The strains most likely to survive will be the ones that don’t kill their hosts before they can do so.
Unless the strain is killing a sizable amount of people getting it it’ll be hard to get people to wear masks en masse again.
Even if it kills (which it likely will), our track record shows that didn’t care enough about that, and in a decreasing manner. So it’ll only be worse.
Pretty sure every virus has killed people, from the cold, to flu, and of course covid. It feels like now the death rate for the latest variants of covid are pretty comparable to the flu, the virus has lost a lot of its killing power over time.
Except the flu does not regularly disable those who it infects
As someone who wound up with chronic fatigue syndrome after getting covid, thank you for this. This piece of shit virus is worse than most people want to admit.
Of course it does, the flu kills millions and leaves even more disabled.
the sheer number of Covid infections has made long Covid into a global crisis
amazing that you recognize the existence of not only long Covid, but other post-viral illnesses, and think it gives weight to your “Covid is no big deal” argument
Again, the flu disables millions every year.
Yeah, I misspoke in my initial comment. I was under the impression the percentage was lower, but I looked it up and it’s about the same (based on the first thing I read)
So to me there’s two conclusions: Covid, which infects people at a much higher rate and for which the vaccine is not really that effective, is a bigger problem since it will end up giving a larger number of people long Covid. The flu is not infecting people twice a year (or more), and it’s possible to go years without catching the flu, even without masks
Or, what I think is the correct conclusion, we should be taking flu more seriously. We saw how little flu there was during the years of the highest mask compliance. Very weird to say “oh we’ve always had post-viral illness, let’s just have even more.” How about we actually take public health seriously for once?
Mah freedums… No but we should all be masking. I mask just for air quality reasons.
yes, and we should be masking for that as well. even so, covid is far more insidious because so many of the disabilities it leaves behind are invisible.
False equivalency intensifies
What is false about that statement? Viruses kill, that’s not false at all. Just because covid has killed at higher rates doesn’t change my statement.
The point is that a virus being deadly is just a fact of all viruses.
You’re the living embodiment of this emoji
That is a false equivalency, emphasis equivalency. Spare us your liberal sophistry.
I think you need to look up the definition of false equivalency, it is not an apple to orange kind of thing to say all viruses can kill. I’m not denying some kill more than others, but they all kill. If you can’t understand this fact, I don’t know what to tell you.
You’re stating that all viruses kill (which may have some holes in it already) therefore all viruses are technically the same, which ignores the differences in damage they do to people.
If you had any actual point to make with your pedantic bullshit, I didn’t see it. You’re just textually masturbating as far as I can tell.
Yes, I am, and I’m pretty sure that’s a fact.
That’s not what I’m saying at all, does saying all people die mean all people are the same? Does saying all murders kill mean they are all the same? No, there are obviously differences.
The fact I said isn’t about differences in damage, facts don’t have to say everything to be facts. My fact also isn’t saying or implying that they do the same damage.
Look at the context of who I was responding to. They were basically saying that if it kills we should wear a mask, I pointed out that All viruses kill and we don’t wear masks because of those, so just the fact that it kills isn’t enough.
Death rates aren’t a feeling. I want some hard numbers.
I feel like we just don’t care if we live or die anymore.
Fun fact: the CDC readjusted what the ‘normal’ rate of deaths is to include the years of the pandemic so now it’s harder than ever to find hard numbers because “excess deaths” was one of the last ways to get any information at all!
For the love of god: everyone should ignores what the CDC says. You can see for yourself how many people died from Covid under their watch. They have no morals and they made it obvious by downplaying Covid
Plus a world wide fast aging population would increase the death background number even if nothing else happens.
Anything that doesn’t make an observable, statistically significant difference, has no cause to further impose restriction on how people live their lives
Sharp edges don’t happen from demographic trends. This is pure rationalization.
Further than what?? What restrictions??
And what are you implying? Covid has no observable affect on public health? Tell that to the millions of people still getting disabled every year.
I know I’ve read reports about the latest variants being much less deadly. I did see one study recently which for patients presenting to hospital covid was a few percentage points more likely to result in death compared to hospitalized flu patients. There were a lot more covid patients though.
Found it:
So there is some data backing up the feelings I’ve gotten from everything I’ve been hearing and seeing.
So that’s almost twice as bad as the flu.
I mean, that’s one way to look at it. I looked at it as only a couple percent higher death rate than the flu. Either way, a little less than 2x is way better than like 5x worse.
Obviously it’s better than before, but it’s also worth keeping in mind these deaths are in addition to the flu.
Also, there are good and bad flu seasons. I see no reason for COVID to not be the same.
Even if we pedantically accept that ‘almost double’ is really ‘just a few percent higher’ while we’re looking at a single digit likelihood, ‘just a few percent more’ than for the flu is a lot more people in overall numbers with something that spreads far quicker than the flu. We could get the death rate of Covid down to ½ the rate for the flu but if infections are more than double (this is just an example, I don’t know the actual stats on this one), it still means Covid would be more deadly. Unless I’m missing something obvious.
I’m not sure how severe an effect this would have on the numbers, but the death rate would non-negligibly go down after millions of the most vulnerable people died in the first wave. As well, the newer variants get more contagious and bypass immune responses more easily, and we’re taking way fewer precautions as a society. so 6% is a lower percent but still an incredibly high number
I saw it as an evolutionary benefit to be less deadly. The way I’m seeing this, the virus’s purpose in life is to spread, so a higher infection and contagious rate with less death rate is ideal from an evolution standpoint.
Ideal for it, not ideal for anyone who enjoys the full function of their mind and circulatory system.
The mind thing isn’t a dig at you btw, it’s a reference to the brain fog
There’s one crucial thing you overlooked in this: in 2020, most people hadn’t been infected, and hadn’t gotten the vaccine (because there was no vaccine until December,and even then it was in extremely short supply). Now, most people have some sort of immunity, be it from vaccine or from a prior infection. That definitely skews the hospitalization numbers downward. You can’t compare then and now, unfortunately, since there’s no real community that hasn’t been vaccinated and hasn’t caught it - and so you can’t compare their numbers.
That’s fair, but I think you can still compare it to the flu, which is not that far off from covid percentage wise. At this point both the flu and covid should be at an equal level of people having vaccines and natural antibodies, right? Even if you go with covid being about twice as deadly as the flu, twice as deadly as almost nothing is still almost nothing.
I’m sure “almost nothing” is quite comforting for the families of the 1.1 million Americans who died.
I’m sorry, but people die of lots of different things all the time, it sucks but it’s a part of life
Hundreds of thousands of Americans will die this year from COVID. Sure, almost nothing. Just a 9/11 every two weeks or so.
Thousands die every day from tons of other stuff also, just a part of life.
It’s important to note that every state I’m aware of has long ended their testing and reporting, literally doing the Trump thing. So we actually have no idea what the numbers are.
The numbers I’ve seen are from hospitalized patients, which should still be tracked, and tracked in a similar way to the flu. It doesn’t give us the full story for sure, but it gives us something to compare.
I’ve you’ve been vaxxed, or had a previous infection, or get some paxlovid… yes. If not, no, not really any better. It hasn’t gotten weaker.
Do you have any studies or research to suggest covid hasn’t gotten weaker?
Unfortunately, the myth that virii become weaker over time is a long standing misconception, and the anti-vax people pushed it because it fit their narrative.
These articles discuss it with immunologists & doctors & geneticists, though, so it seems that it’s a known truth and so, like gravity, isn’t extensively studied. Instead, they’re focusing on actual prevention via better vaccines and personal behavior/responsibility.
Hope this helps!
Https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/01/14/1072504127/fact-check-the-theory-that-sars-cov-2-is-becoming-milder
https://abc7ny.com/covid-update-pandemic-do-viruses-get-weaker-as-they-evolve-omicron-variant/11463220/
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-not-mutating-to-be-weaker-over-time-genetics-2020-7
https://en.as.com/en/2022/02/07/latest_news/1644263846_400285.html (note that this site is a Spanish-language sports site, but it was nice to find this there)
Thanks for the links!
To summarize the NPR one, and correct me if I am wrong, but they are confirming that the current variants are weaker, but that we shouldn’t take that to mean the next variants will follow the same trend?
Kind of. It’s not that it’s weaker, it’s that it’s route into cells is less damaging, and so it’s less “severe” , though the article contradicts itself on that particular word.
FTA: “ this alternative entryway likely causes less damage inside the lungs”
“Omicron may be a small step back in severity. But it’s probably more severe on its own than the original version of the virus,”
Before omicron came along, SARS-CoV-2 was actually evolving to be more severe, says Bhattacharyya, of Harvard Medical School. “We’re looking at a virus that’s gotten progressively more severe over time,” he says.
Viruses tend to mutate to be more contagious and less lethal, it’s just how natural selection/evolution works. The strains most likely to survive will be the ones that don’t kill their hosts before they can do so.
That’s false. Show me your research.
Alright, here you go.