Did you consider that "last year" was an exceptionally high flu death rate year?
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html
Did you? Or did you assume that every year is just the same like on a fucking railroad?
How many mistakes such as this one have you missed, before telling everybody everything is just fine covid doesn't even exist?
Hm?
Did you consider the fact that regular flu symptoms just go away, and that covid symptoms might very well stay forever?
Did you? "Just the flu!"
Yeah
Reading the you gave me:
2018-2019...Estimated deaths: 34k
It seems about within the norm, compared to the figures above for previous years. Only exception would be pussy-ass 2011-2012 flu. Why be so condescending when you're going to throw out such questionable arguments? It just makes it looks like you're using your haughty tone as cover for a weak position.
>The virus is real, in fact my family had it and we all recovered, I am 68. I have some friends who had to be hospitalized and vented and survived.
>One guy in his late 40's died as the result of a heart attack just as they were releasing him. None of the hospitals down here in my part of So IL are using Hydroxichloriquine treatment as far as I know.
>My wife's friends mother had it....and died yesterday. 99 years old, overweight and with diabetes, but all the news state she died from Covid.
>Bizzarro World for sure.....I don't think anyone knows WTF they are doing as far as treatment. Seems to take some folks down early on....and they don't recover well.
https://poal.co/s/News/227308/2b1aea07-5605-41d6-8cb0-62c7c4069afc#cmnts
You should explain yourself before we continue. It's not productive to argue with someone who isn't offering evidence of their claims in good faith.
Yeah, and what do you read for 2017-2018? 61k (average estimate)
And what do you read at the bottom of the table?
>Estimates from the 2017-2018, 2018-2019, and 2019-2020 seasons are preliminary and may change as data are finalized.
Again
You don't know
You're betting, and it has no consequences for you, until now
You would be putting your savings on the table you would be much less keen on drawing definitive conclusions based on uncertain information
Imagine the following: You tell everybody around you covid doesn't even exist, it's a big nothing, the jews etc. And people around you are convinced. And then, one of your relatives gets it, and shit happens
...
Do you realize the implications? You aren't just going to look like a fool forever, everything EVERY CLAIM you attached to that bogus information you gave your relatives will be discarded as "yeah but that's coming from the loon who told us it was nothing"
the figures i linked are estimates and therefore you don't know that 2018-2019 wasn't an extremely deadly flu year
lol you're the one who linked these data. By the same token if the data are unreliable then you can't use them to make the claim you were trying to make.
What kind of argumentation style is this? You assert a claim and then give a link to back it up. (>Did you consider that "last year" was an exceptionally high flu death rate year?). But when the data don't bear that out you claim that the data are unreliable and therefore my pointing out the obvious contradiction isn't valid?
Before we even continue down this rabbit hole, will you explain why you used this tactic? I am thunderstruck.
(post is archived)