Why Does Communist China Have One of the Lowest COVID Rates?

[hoosierdoc]

Let me try to clarify my question....Do you have an opinion on whether or not stats regarding this latest virus have been manipulated for political purposes?

Absolutely they have. I believe the feds and liberal states want to use covid to massively expand their power and keep everyone terrified forever.

Look at this pic. It seemingly supports the idea that the people being admitted for CoVID are mainly unvaccinated. But it started tracking Jan 1. That's sketchy since zero people were fully vaccinated by Jan 1. Well, maybe the study participants.

If they want to show honest results, track it starting one month after people as young as thirty were eligible for vaccination. This would give enough time for them to get two shots and be "fully vaccinated". To start Jan 1 will skew the data significantly towards showing more unvax admissions.

To be fair, it should probably show daya from June through today. If you manipulate your data or are too stupid to realize your graph is cherry picked fake data, you lose credibility in my eyes.

 

[BigRed]

Absolutely they have. I believe the feds and liberal states want to use covid to massively expand their power and keep everyone terrified forever.

Look at this pic. It seemingly supports the idea that the people being admitted for CoVID are mainly unvaccinated. But it started tracking Jan 1. That's sketchy since zero people were fully vaccinated by Jan 1. Well, maybe the study participants.

If they want to show honest results, track it starting one month after people as young as thirty were eligible for vaccination. This would give enough time for them to get two shots and be "fully vaccinated". To start Jan 1 will skew the data significantly towards showing more unvax admissions.

To be fair, it should probably show daya from June through today. If you manipulate your data or are too stupid to realize your graph is cherry picked fake data, you lose credibility in my eyes.

What is the mortality rate of humans?

 

[hoosierdoc]

What is the mortality rate of humans?

100%

 

[BigRed]

100%

Indeed.

 

[Denny347]

Nonetheless, his death was classified as "due to covid".

Rigid reporting system and obfuscation both lead to an inflation of the numbers. That is my observation and the point of this example.

It is not good.

ETA: Is it true that over 98% of covid cases are not deadly?

I think it's closer to 96-97% but yes. However, there is a range in effects. Like I said earlier, I have 3 friends that were in the ICU at the same time, intubated, from COVID. They all are recovering, so not deadly. However, I've never seen another "non-deadly" virus do that. Another co-workers wife has lungs that turned to "leather". She will either need a double lung transplant for she will not survive, not looking hopeful. If she gets a transplant, then she will fit into the "survives" category. I think the better statistic is, "Of those who contract COVID, how many have minor reactions?" That will likely be around 75% I think.

 

[mbills2223]

I think it's closer to 96-97% but yes. However, there is a range in effects. Like I said earlier, I have 3 friends that were in the ICU at the same time, intubated, from COVID. They all are recovering, so not deadly. However, I've never seen another "non-deadly" virus do that. Another co-workers wife has lungs that turned to "leather". She will either need a double lung transplant for she will not survive, not looking hopeful. If she gets a transplant, then she will fit into the "survives" category. I think the better statistic is, "Of those who contract COVID, how many have minor reactions?" That will likely be around 75% I think.

That's a good point. Hoosierdoc could speak to it much better than I can, but I'm not aware of many other pathogens that are so capable of causing permanent lung damage (among other potential long lasting effects).

 

[KLB]

Is that ACTUALLY true or does it just SEEM that way? RSV is sending people to the hospital and is huge problem right now. How would we know that unless they were testing them for it. People are getting test for lots of things, it just doesn't make the news.

How about SARS, SARS2, H1N1, H3N2, etc etc

We know because the .gov isn't paying to have people tested for all of those other things.

How much $ has been wasted testing people for covid? Mbills and his positivity rate shows what an absolute waste of money it is. Over 90% of tests are negative. Of the positive results, most of those people were sick and just needed to stay home.

 

[mbills2223]

How about SARS, SARS2, H1N1, H3N2, etc etc

We know because the .gov isn't paying to have people tested for all of those other things.

How much $ has been wasted testing people for covid? Mbills and his positivity rate shows what an absolute waste of money it is. Over 90% of tests are negative. Of the positive results, most of those people were sick and just needed to stay home.
View attachment 159222

Do you know how much a COVID test actually cost? Yes, I can't argue that .gov is spending massive amounts of money, but I can't agree that testing is a waste. During a pandemic, if symptoms are present it is appropriate to get tested. I'm not sure why you seem so bothered by the positivity rate stat either...it's just another data point. I'm not being a smartass, I genuinely want to understand that viewpoint.

 

[Denny347]

How about SARS, SARS2, H1N1, H3N2, etc etc

We know because the .gov isn't paying to have people tested for all of those other things.

How much $ has been wasted testing people for covid? Mbills and his positivity rate shows what an absolute waste of money it is. Over 90% of tests are negative. Of the positive results, most of those people were sick and just needed to stay home.
View attachment 159222

Had H1N1, it SUCKED. Did we have a similar hospitalization rate with them as we do SARS-CoV-2? Are you saying that if we tested for those on your list, we would find that those in the hospital would test + for those rather than test + for SARS-Cov-2?

 

[KLB]

Do you know how much a COVID test actually cost? Yes, I can't argue that .gov is spending massive amounts of money, but I can't agree that testing is a waste. During a pandemic, if symptoms are present it is appropriate to get tested. I'm not sure why you seem so bothered by the positivity rate stat either...it's just another data point. I'm not being a smartass, I genuinely want to understand that viewpoint.

Because it is pushed as if it mean s something.

If more people test positive this week than last week, does it mean there are more people with covid? No. It means a larger percentage of those that were tested tested positive. This is an exaggeration, but if week 1, 1000 people are tested and 50 test positive, you have a 5% positivity rate. Week 2, 100 people are tested and 10 test positive, 10% positivity rate. This is then pushed as things are getting worse, as the positivity rate is higher.

It looks like there are on average around 1-1.5 million tests done daily in this country. Generally the positivity rate is less than 10%.

With over 90% being negative, the vast vast majority of people never should have been tested to begin with. That makes it a colossal waste of money. Of those ones that tested positive, how many needed to be tested? If you are sick and do not need to go to the hospital, what is the benefit of being tested? People with colds get tested for covid. People with stomach flu get tested for covid. People with allergies..... If someone is at the hospital testing may make sense, outside of that, I don't see it.

 

[femurphy77]

How about SARS, SARS2, H1N1, H3N2, etc etc

We know because the .gov isn't paying to have people tested for all of those other things.

How much $ has been wasted testing people for covid? Mbills and his positivity rate shows what an absolute waste of money it is. Over 90% of tests are negative. Of the positive results, most of those people were sick and just needed to stay home.
View attachment 159222

I tested positive and was absolutely asympomatic, my wife tested negative 3 times, was fairly ill although not to the point of taking her to the hospital and gave blood several months later only to be told she had a high level of the antibodies in her blood. Throw a dart at the board. . . . .

 

[KLB]

Here's a recap.

It much akin to HIV. You are HIV+ and at some point it becomes full blown AIDS. When you die from AIDS, it's because it created the conditions that allowed other infections to kill you. You had AIDS and died from pneumonia. The pneumonia could only have killed you because your autoimmune system was so compromised by AIDS. Our Aunt just died from COVID. She had COPD and lung cancer. She had been on O2 for quite a few years. She contracted COVID and straight to the hospital she went. It didn't take long for her body/lungs to be overwhelmed by the viral infection and she died as a result. Did the underlying COPD kill her? Likely. However, the virus set the conditions for her COPD to kill her.

There are a lot of viruses that can do that to people. There is only one that everyone that goes to the hospital or dies is tested for.

Had H1N1, it SUCKED. Did we have a similar hospitalization rate with them as we do SARS-CoV-2? Are you saying that if we tested for those on your list, we would find that those in the hospital would test + for those rather than test + for SARS-Cov-2?

That is not what I said at all. Pretty amazing how little of the others we've seen in the last year though.

Why is Covid is the only virus people are tested for?

 

[hoosierdoc]

Here's a recap.



That is not what I said at all. Pretty amazing how little of the others we've seen in the last year though.

Why is Covid is the only virus people are tested for?

It's not. It is the major virus circulating now. You don't go looking for zebras at a horse farm when you hear a hoof go by.

If not Covid and not bacterial pneumonia, there is zero utility in testing for a viral panel that costs thousands of dollars. It has zero clinical impact. I have seen quite a few people get RVPs (respiratory viral panel) sent when covid screen is negative. But never seen that make any difference

 

[spencer rifle]

Some tests are purposefully wasted. At SWMBO's previous job, all her co-workers were antivaxxers. She was the only one who took the jab, back in April. They were undergoing frenzies of fear and revulsion and insisted she get a test, though she had no symptoms. She had to work with these people, so she got the test. Waste of time and tax money.

 

[KLB]

It's not. It is the major virus circulating now. You don't go looking for zebras at a horse farm when you hear a hoof go by.

If not Covid and not bacterial pneumonia, there is zero utility in testing for a viral panel that costs thousands of dollars. It has zero clinical impact. I have seen quite a few people get RVPs (respiratory viral panel) sent when covid screen is negative. But never seen that make any difference

Does the presence of Covid mean a patient is given a different course of treatment?

 

[hoosierdoc]

Does the presence of Covid mean a patient is given a different course of treatment?

Absolutely. I'm not sure how effective any of it is, but it is certainly treated differently.

 

[Denny347]

It's not. It is the major virus circulating now. You don't go looking for zebras at a horse farm when you hear a hoof go by.

If not Covid and not bacterial pneumonia, there is zero utility in testing for a viral panel that costs thousands of dollars. It has zero clinical impact. I have seen quite a few people get RVPs (respiratory viral panel) sent when covid screen is negative. But never seen that make any difference

Absolutely. I'm not sure how effective any of it is, but it is certainly treated differently.

THANK YOU for your insight!!!

 

[mmpsteve]

Absolutely. I'm not sure how effective any of it is, but it is certainly treated differently.

Doc, you may have mentioned already and I missed it, but are you using monoclonal antibodies for treatment? (if I'm even saying it right)

.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Doc, you may have mentioned already and I missed it, but are you using monoclonal antibodies for treatment? (if I'm even saying it right)

.

Yes, if "at risk" for severe disease and less than 10 days of symtpoms. Seems to help a lot.

Seems stupid that not indicated if they need supplemental oxygen or admission. Those seem like the ideal patients to get it

 

[mbills2223]

Yes, if "at risk" for severe disease and less than 10 days of symtpoms. Seems to help a lot.

Seems stupid that not indicated if they need supplemental oxygen or admission. Those seem like the ideal patients to get it

Wondered about that too, but haven't explored it too much since I obviously am not dealing with antibodies at the local pharmacy