What is more harmful to a person? A virus without symptoms or one with severe symptoms that could lead to death? My point is the flu is probably more harmful to a wider range of people than this has been. Including otherwise healthy people as well as young people. The more people who are asymptomatic the more we should build herd immunity and let this run its course. You don’t wanna do that with influenza cause the symptoms can be pretty severe.
Take a look at this chart quantifying the infection fatality rate for the Dutch population based on age bracket. The data were calculated from an antibody test of 4,000 blood donors conducted by Dutch blood bank Sanquin to see how many have been infected for the purpose of donating blood plasma to those currently suffering from the virus. The data were presented to the Dutch House of Representatives in mid-April by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM).
Based on this serology test, they were able to determine that 3% of the population (at the time) were infected and were therefore able to divide the numerator of those who died of COVID-19 by the extrapolated denominator of those who were likely infected and break out the infection fatality rate by age group.
Study this chart for a few minutes and take in all the data – from the asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic rates to the hospital and fatality rates divided by age. You have to get to the 50-59 age group just to reach a 0.1% fatality rate, the level often cited as the overall death rate for the seasonal flu. Those are all lower oddsthan an individual has of dying in a giving year of any cause and in the case of an average 50-year-old, five times lower.
They didn’t test kids under 20, but their fatality rate is likely near zero.
While the Netherlands is an entirely different country, it has actually experienced a 30% higher death rate per capita than America. So the numbers are likely not any higher here for those under 70, especially because the macro serology tests showing a 0.2% fatality rate (but grossly distorted by the death rate of those over 80), as well as what we are seeing in prisons and ships in younger populations, seems to harmonize with this data. A brand-new study from France also shows very similar estimates of fatality rates, at least for those under 60.
If anything, those who are sicker tend to stay away from blood donation, so it could be that infection rate was even higher than this sample suggests, thereby driving down the fatality rate even lower.
Moreover, several weeks later, another research group in the Netherlands did a second serology test that broke down even more groups and came up with almost identical results:
As you can see, the death rate doesn’t even climb above .1% until you reach over 70, with a steep and dangerous growth of risk over 75 and 80. However, it’s important to remember that even those death rates might need to be cut in half for those outside nursing homes, given that half the deaths in most countries are in senior care facilities.
I’m not talking about you specifically, but you do keep comparing this to the flu. The asymptomatic argument has been the primary argument that opposes masks and quarantine because with asymptomatic cases, the death rate becomes lower. Without them, it becomes higher, so you can’t argue that this is comparable to the flu while also asserting speculation of the legitimacy of asymptomatic cases.
I have read many books going back a hundred years on the subject. Masks are a genuine way to protect yourself, so the fact that this is being blurred in order to appear defiant towards the elite, suggests that people are losing touch with reality a little bit.
Meanwhile those scientists are putting their lives on the line for numpties who would rather look after themselves than anyone else.
There is a wealth of information about asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission of the virus.
Do you work in the medical profession?
Have you heard of peer evaluation and how it is used to corroborate evidence? Do you know why it is so important that experiments can be repeated, corroborated, evaluated and expanded by peers?
Personally, I’m happy to lose some freedom or privacy. It’s a small price to pay when people around me are losing their lives.
I think we should leave everything on the table. But I think masks should be optional (not mandatory) in public settings. I think we should consider who is most vulnerable. Whether we can build immunity. And question why the response to swine flu where majority of deaths were healthy and young were not met with similar precautions in 09 despite the fact that there was not a vaccine nor any effective treatments.
Also, if the Obama administration knew early on that the annual flu vaccine was not effective against this new H1N1 pandemic, why didn't it more conclusively track each and every case while shutting everything down, the way we've done in response to COVID-19?
All this despite the fact that the first known case of this new and deadly H1N1 strain was initially reported all the way back in April of 2009. Shortly after, approximately 11 days later, the Obama administration declared the outbreak a pubIic emergency, without any of the mandated precautionary measures we are currently engaged in. It wasn't until October 23 of 2009 that President Barack Obama declared the H1N1 swine flu a national emergency, again without all the heightened response and prevention measures.
So we should just let the over-70s die then?
Those are great arguments for people to wear masks. Now with that information it should be left up to individual discretion and not mandated. A technocratic and scientistic ruling elite mandating the same remedy for all people and all situations is a sign of the future. That is the only principle I’m debating not the efficacy of masks.
people literally dying of natural causes is not worth sacrificing the rights and freedoms of the entire world. If you accept that it is, there will be no end to how far that is pushed. I don't believe anyone that says these two things are related or correspondent. Same with the airports before, you can search my bag and scan my body 1 million times, it wont stop terrorism. You giving up your rights does not correspond to keeping people safe or alive, and we shouldnt try to mix these two concepts.