The Coronavirus thread

Weren't the chances of getting killed by SarsCov2 less than 2.5% before vaccines? Did it get more deadly, or is the main threat now from a variant which a few months ago had a different name? I think "Delta" is what was the "India" variant. India never got the vaccines, but they took millions of doses of Ivermectin.

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2021/08/07/trust-the-science-4/

"The panic porn media was running non-stop horror stories about India and the bodies piling up in the streets back in May. At that time less than 4% of the Indian population had been vaxxed. Even today it is only 7% of their 1.3 billion people. The talking heads, and Fauci, all pointed to India as a humanitarian tragedy in the making – using it as their fear tactic for getting the jab. But their narrative fell apart in a matter of weeks and you no longer hear about India on the nightly news.

That’s because cases crashed by 90% in the two months from the peak in May. And guess what? It happened with no vaccine rollout. They did send tens of millions of doses of ivermectin out to the population. "

Quote: petroglyph

Are any of the riders in the van that went to the hospital still in the hospital, or is eveyone kind of getting over it?

Everyone is out now, but they all went through hell. Every one of them except my wife says it was the sickest they have ever ever been. My wife was actually really really sick in March 2020 and she had every symptom of covid including extreme fatigue. She's thinking she might have had covid in March of 2020 and that's why she didn't get that sick this time.

Quote: AZDuffman

I keep hearing that number and keep finding it hard to believe. There are also other conditions they keep finding out. Lower testosterone is a factor. Being obese. Blood type other than O. So many things.

Like being blond and recently having a flat tire on your car. The list is endless

Quote: Tanko

The Pfizer vaccine might possibly be just 39% effective against the Delta variant, but it is 88% effective against hospitalizations and 91% effective against severe disease, according to Israel’s health ministry.

"99% of COVID deaths are now of unvaccinated people, experts say"

Additionally:

Pfizer CEO says third Covid vaccine dose likely needed within 12 months

Take the Covid quiz: https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/

And the story that goes along with it: https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/an-open-letter-to-the-person-who-gave-me-covid/

Quote: petroglyph

Take the Covid quiz: https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/

And the story that goes along with it: https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/an-open-letter-to-the-person-who-gave-me-covid/

Based on what EB's saying about his family, I imagine they want to also thank everyone for getting covid.

Quote: petroglyph

Take the Covid quiz: https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/

And the story that goes along with it: https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/an-open-letter-to-the-person-who-gave-me-covid/

That article is fantastic.

Quote: Mission146

That article is fantastic.

3 points, curious whether it was written after the vaccines or before.

Second point. The same virus he had in his body may have then spread to kill an unsuspecting person. How is that like, choosing to do a more risky activity like bare handed rock climbing or similar activity where you only risking your own life? I say it's different.

Third point - If you fire a gun recklessly in a crowd, the shots may kill several people. But even worse case scenario there's still going to be an upper limit of wounded and dead. This virus is a multiplying risk. It's spreading to countries which don't even have access to a vaccine yet.

The letter is dated at the start. Aug 10/21

The charts quiz high lights in a more effective way what I was showing in an earlier post that the states are mostly in the same range of cases regardless of what they did to combat Covid.

Quote: rxwine

3 points, curious whether it was written after the vaccines or before.

Second point. The same virus he had in his body may have then spread to kill an unsuspecting person. How is that like, choosing to do a more risky activity like bare handed rock climbing or similar activity where you only risking your own life? I say it's different.

Third point - If you fire a gun recklessly in a crowd, the shots may kill several people. But even worse case scenario there's still going to be an upper limit of wounded and dead. This virus is a multiplying risk. It's spreading to countries which don't even have access to a vaccine yet.

1.) It's dated August 10th, 2021, so I'm guessing after. On the other hand, there are no mentions (that I could see) of the vaccine actually in the article, so I don't know. It's hard to tell, but I don't know why anyone would sit on the article for six months or more.

2.) I guess it's different in that sense, but that's true of any number of activities. When you drive, you theoretically risk not only your life, but those of other drivers on the road as well as pedestrians. If you have sex with a particular person and then go on to have sex with a different person (whatever length of time) and didn't get an STD test after the previous person, then you are theoretically directly risking the life of the next person.

Healthcare professionals operate in an environment that includes deliberate exposure to viruses, but then they go out and live their day-to-day lives when they are not working. They could spread something to an unsuspecting person at any time, in fact, we saw exactly that with the nursing home cases in the early stages of Covid-19 because those patients were especially vulnerable.

There's no evidence to suggest that life comes with anything less than a 100% probability of death.

That being the case, any person is free to determine his/her own risk-tolerance. Some people do bare-handed rock climbing; I wouldn't, but that's more out of concern for serious injury than it is out of concern for death.

During this Covid-19, people have the right to do their own CBA and determine what is best for them. Fortunately, we live in such a highly developed society that, if a person is able to get a job working exclusively from home, then that person almost never has to leave the house if they don't want to. A person could choose to hunker down inside the house, have all food and essentials delivered and almost never come into contact with anyone.

At this time, those leaving the house do so taking a risk that wasn't there before---more so for unvaccinated people, as it seems to turn out. It's for each person to decide whether or not the risk of where they are going is worth it. If you decide not, then that's fine. Some people will try to avoid leaving at all costs. Some people will go to some places and not others. Some people will travel long distances and others won't. Some people (my camp) aren't really compelled to let Covid change anything that they would normally be doing---demands of a particular business or Government entity aside.

Anyway, everyone should be, 'Suspecting,' as you use the word and make their decisions accordingly. If you have the capacity and ability to hunker down, then hunker down...anyone going to a casino in Las Vegas is an idiot if they didn't know they were taking a risk of some sort. I'm not saying that GOING makes them an idiot, but what would make them an idiot is if they thought that there was a zero chance of getting the virus in a Vegas casino---which I am sure nobody thinks, at least, very few people.

This whole thing is a great test of voluntarism and free association. It's interesting to me that some people are so concerned that they don't think others should have the right to freely associate where they may wish.

3.) I certainly haven't gone to any other countries. If they want to keep the virus out, or keep more of it from coming in, then they are free to decide to restrict travel to/from those countries, if they wish. I'm pretty sure the cat is out of the bag either way, though.

Imagine that you're some eighty-something year old guy who lived alone during Covid---imagine this guy hunkered down in his house and not visiting his kids, r what have you, either out of terror or out of some misguided notion that he should actually feel compelled to listen to guidance not to go out of state. This guy does this for whatever period of time, then WHAM, heart attack out of nowhere. He's dead. Now, what did he avoid seeing his family for?

I agree with the sentiment of the article: If you (general 'you,' not you personally) spend every minute in fear of a death that is inevitable anyway, and try to mitigate every possible risk down to nothing, then you'll forget to actually live.