Skip to content
  • Indra Kaw

    Very globalist.

  • NPC the Clown

    Meanwhile Israel and North Korea are peering from the mountain tops and snickering.

    • Wait till the Norks don’t get their quarterly grain shipment.

    • eternalweasel

      The ultraorthadox jews are spreading it through israel.

      • Jaqen H’ghar

        Dare I say, based?

      • Albionic American

        These living fossils have no business calling white people the obsolete holdovers from the past who don’t belong in the modern world.

    • Twilk9

      Assuming North Korea isnt devastated by it already

    • Hammerstrike

      http://archive.is/Zs9VC
      Israeli scientists: ‘In a few weeks, we will have coronavirus vaccine’
      28th February 2020!
      http://archive.is/VltQb
      15th of March, the Jpost repeats the claim but leaves out the date it was initially made…

  • CMK

    The threat of this disease is overblown.

    • Twilk9

      Why?

    • Shay Vicemerski

      what do you mean?

      • CMK

        The average age of death of this disease is just about the same as the average life expectancy in both the United States and Italy. Only the old and those who have compromised immune systems already are under threat to die by this disease; the vast majority of people are not at risk of dying or even having serious complications; even according to the mainstream, the vast majority of cases are mild. The threat of the disease is overblown; it’s no different from other breakouts that have happened in the past, and the reactions of the governments around the world to it are completely unnecessary. This unnecessary lockdown will cause more damage than the disease itself.

        • Twilk9

          Ok, a counterpoint:

          The flu, at its deadliest and in recent history, killed only about 200 people a day in the entire US.

          Covid 19 has killed more than that in NYC alone, already, today. As of now, for today, the number dead is just under 650 in the US.

          And this is with lockdowns and quarantines instituted, and covid relatively hyperconcentrated. None of which the flu had to contend with.

          • CMK

            I didn’t compare the virus with the flu, but by doing so you prove an important point. I understand that COVID-19 is more dangerous than the yearly flu. We have outbreaks all the time in the United States: consider the Swine Flu, the Asian Flu, and the Bird Flu. These were all more deadly than the flu that we see every year, and that’s why they get attention. But we did not engage in these measures, although people of course were cautious of catching the disease and some places (again, some, not all or even close to most) were quarantined, and everything ended up being perfectly fine. Once again, this is overblown.

            In the 2017-2018 flu season, 80,000 people in the United States died; assuming that the flu season lasts from October to the end of March, that about 440 people day; of course, some were much higher than others, but that’s if the same number of people died every day. For fun, look at how the 2017-2018 flu season was covered in the news, and compare it to how COVID-19 is being covered.

            You must address my point that the average age of death from this disease is about the same as the life expectancy in the United States. The vast majority of the population is not under threat from this disease, and so it makes no sense to quarantine the entire population especially since the effects of the quarantine, millions of lost jobs and the destruction of the economy, will be worse than some people dying.

            Now, I’m sure that you are unaware of the fact that even governor Cuomo himself has admitted that social distancing probably doesn’t work, because you may not have mentioned the effects of social distancing without at least making reference to this; but yet, Cuomo has said this. https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/gov-cuomo-questions-comprehensive-lockdown-strategy/

            I don’t take what he says seriously, but you might. I suggest you read the article, but in any case consider this: people are leaving their houses and going to grocery stores that are now packed with people, much more packed now than most places that they would even go to on a daily basis under normal circumstances. They then come home to their families. How many people in each of those stores do you think has the virus? The virus is still being spread and probably even at the same rate, because people have to go to these stores to buy food.

          • Twilk9

            Incorrect on several counts: the swine flu wasn’t nearly as deadly as the regular flu by a long margin, avian flu had incredibly low morbidity, and flu deaths for 2017-2018 (the most lethal year in recent history) was about 61,000. Assuming that ALL DEATHS (unlikely) happened in the October to March period, that means deaths per day were

          • CMK

            Excuse me; I did misspeak. No, the Swine flu and the Bird flu did not have a higher death toll than the yearly flu. The Asian flu did by a lot, however. It is estimated that the Asian flu killed from 1 million to 2 million worldwide in 1957. Concerning the flu in 2009, all numbers that I can find on the Internet say that the death toll was about 80,000, not 61,000. The point, however, was that there was not this complete shutdown of the everything because of it.

            Concerning the mortality rate, for most people, the rate is tremendously low; and that’s why I said it makes no sense to force everyone to stay home, and to force millions of businesses, through which people get their livelihood, to close. Only those at risk should have self-isolated.

            Concerning the average age of death, once again, it’s just at the average life expectancy in the United States. The latest statistics that I checked said that the average age of death from this disease was 75, whereas the life expectancy in the United States is 78, around the age that they would die of disease anyway. I’m not saying that these people shouldn’t take precautions; what I’m saying is that this quarantine is unjustified.

            I understand that the number of deaths is rapidly increasing; this is also to be expected from an outbreak. But does it make sense to close everything down, having millions of people lose their jobs, to prevent this? I suspect that the number of deaths will be around 100,000; are we going to destroy the world economy and millions of people lives for that?

            Now, yes, a lot of elderly people are in government; it would have made sense if these people self-quarantined, because they’re at risk. Why should everyone else have to as well? And you’re definitely overestimating the number of seniors in government as well as the death rate for seniors if you think that the government would collapse if this virus was left to roam free (which, once again, is not what I am saying should have happened).

            You didn’t address what I said about the supermarkets, and you have not addressed the impact that this quarantine will have on the livelihoods of millions of people.

          • Twilk9

            The asian flu also didnt have the luxury of an incredibly interconnected world like ours, as illustrated in todays… adorable comic. Cases were far easier to isolate to coastal cities, and keep them there. Outside of the us, almost all cases were restricted to east and south east asia. You cannot compare virulence of today to virulence 50 years ago.

            Official NIH and CDC numbers place the death toll for 2017-18 at 61000. The only place I’m seeing 80000 is health line. Com, who I trust rather less with disease tracking.

            Only those at risk should self isolate? Well, for mortality, you start seeing an approximately 5% mortality rate at 60+, with a far higher rate that needs hospitalization and critical care. Average age of congress is 63.

            But let’s step beyond that. Current hospitalization rates for those in their 40s are 5%, and these increase with age dramatically. What are you going to do if approximately 1 in 20 people in their 40s needs hospitalization because we let them go about their daily lives? And the other age brackets who’s hospitalization rates are much higher? How are we going to do that with limited hospitals and equipment? You’re going to have start picking who lives and dies, and there will be a lot in the latter. That’ll bump up your mortality even further than it is now.

            And if we isolated only the 65+ population….what then? They’d HAVE to get supplies and be in contact with people going about their daily lives, letting covid jump from person to person and mix in the general population. Unless you’re going to start using our already limited PPE and hospital personnel to ferry supplies to them?

            YOU suspect the number of deaths will be 100,000. That is the low end of the CDC projections, and only if hospitals are adequately supplied and quarantines enforced. If not, the CDC puts the numbers of US dead in the millions.

            THATS why we have quarantine. It’s easy to say now, “oh it doesn’t seem too bad” (even though it still is). Its the same as the anti-vaccine parents who say, “measles doesn’t seem so bad now.” That’s because we have measures in place limiting it. Ignoring those measures bursts the dams.

            I ignored your post about supermarkets because its moot. I’d rather have one main area where people congregate (and one generally large enough that people can stay away from each other) then every single place. Choke points. Easier control.

            And I didnt address the livelihood issue either because if the choice is between livelihoods and lives, that’s not a choice. By the way; today’s death toll is approaching 800, with three hours to go.

          • CMK

            Sorry for not responding sooner; it was getting late here.

            I’d like to know where you get the information that the Asian flu was almost entirely restricted to East Asia outside of the United States, because from the information that I can gather, there were outbreaks all over the world, and especially in the United Kingdom; but I haven’t found much information concerning the spread of the virus.

            According to news reports, the CDC has said that the death toll for the 2017-2018 flu outbreak was 80,000, and that it was 61,000. The official number is 61,000, but you can’t discount the 80,000 estimate. However, my only point in mentioning this flu outbreak was that the media did not even come close to the hysterics that they have engaged in when covering it, and most people didn’t even know about it. I do expect the COVID-19 outbreak to be more deadly than this; I wasn’t using the numbers to compare them. I don’t think that it’s productive to focus on this for this reason.

            I don’t see what the mortality rate and hospitalization rate has to do with the fact that only those at risk should self-isolate, but you addressed this idea further a few paragraphs later. You say that those over 65 (and also those with pre-existing medical conditions, of course) would be forced to get supplies, and I assume that you are talking about food and toiletries. How would that be any different from how it is now? Don’t these people have to get supplies now, and thus be in contact with people who likely have the virus?

            Now, I’ve always said that these people should have others do their errands for them, and there should be times in stores set apart for them to go if they must go. They should be wearing masks and always washing their hands, also taking high amounts of vitamin C. They are the ones at risk, and so they should be the ones to take these precautions; it doesn’t make sense that young and healthy people can’t go to work because others are at risk.

            If you are talking about medical supplies, once again, it’s the same now; I haven’t heard of hospital staff delivering them medical supplies to their homes. The point is that, what would be a problem under what I proposed, is already a problem under this quarantine. And it doesn’t need to be either way.

            The issue of supermarkets is not one to be ignored. What are markets and local governments doing to control the spread in these places, and why can’t these methods be applied in all places? You say that if one is to choose between livelihoods and lives, they must choose lives. But this is insane: a person’s livelihood is how they stay alive in the first place. Forcing millions of people go into unemployment at the same time for an unknown period of time will cause complete chaos in our society, and most likely complete economic collapse. When I say that this virus is overblown, I mean that it does not warrant these sorts of measures; this will cause much more damage than even one million deaths in the United States.

            Concerning what you said about hospitalization, the 5% of people 40-year-olds who require hospitalization are going to those who are at risk, who I have said should self-quarantine, like the elderly. Now, I believe that this is much lower, as are all, because you are (presumably) using the number of confirmed cases as the number for the total number of people who have the virus. Many people likely have virus who are not recorded to have it because they had very minor symptoms or none at all. Even mainstream sources, which I doubt, are saying that the vast majority of cases are mild. I’d suggest that most people who have this disease right now don’t know that they do. If this is the case, then all percentages go down drastically. But I still get your point; hospitalizations will increase, and that’s why the small number of non-seniors who are at risk should self-quarantine. But should all?

            Concerning my guess that about 100,000 will die, you said that that’s at the low end of the CDC’s predictions; but just a two weeks ago it was predicted that at least 2 million would die, which is what the government went with. You can say that this lockdown is why the number has decreased so greatly, but considering the fact that people are still interacting with each other, in the supermarkets, this just doesn’t make sense.

            Consider also how the government is using the virus to take away our rights; that should at least make you suspicious if nothing else. I also recommend this article if you have time. https://canadafreepress.com/article/the-common-roots-of-climate-change-and-covid-19-hysteria

          • Twilk9

            My mistake, I was looking at data for the 1968 h3n2 pandemic rather than the 1957 one. I will have to read more on that before I can respond.

            “How would that be any different from how it is now?”

            It’s different now because with population as a whole sequestered, there is far less chance of any one individual the elderly person comes into contact with having the disease. If everyone else besides the elderly was out mixing around normally, passing it around, the chance of that elderly person coming into contact with a carrier is maximized.

            But before we get into everything else you said, I want to address your last point, as this is (in my mind) one of the two major problems here:

            With regard to my 5% hospitalization rate for those aged 40-45, you said “I believe that this is much lower.” And if I was using American or Italian statistics, I would agree.

            But those are south Korean stats. And South Korea has performed such widespread mandatory testing and isolation that not only have they provided the clearest picture of the disease (such as the lowest, and likely most accurate death rate of about 1%) they have quickly turned around the spread and mortality in ways not seen elsewhere in the world.

            A number exercise: about 50 million people in the us are between the ages of 40-65 (the highest age not considered at risk,
            and thus not isolated under your policy). There are, by estimates, a little less than 1 million beds/facilities for patients in Americas hospitals. Let’s assume that 60% of the people in that age range get the disease (a LOW estimate, given the r0 value). That’s about 1.5 million who need hospitalizatIon, if my math is right.

            And that’s a LOW number; I used a flat 5% for the whole group, even though the percent climbs when you get to 45-50, 55-60, etc. So that’s already 600,000 more than america can hospitalize. And that’s only one small slice of the population; in order for the numbers to be this low, EVERY OTHER AGE GROUP would have to not be infected or not be hospitalized.

            Theres a reason our hospitals are already overrun. Theres a reason naval hospital ships are being called in to serve civilians on shore. And that’s only now, with us JUST starting the exponential inflection on the curve.

            That’s why I said what I did; if you are going to only restrict the at risk population, you are likely going to have to start picking who lives and dies, by the tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of healthy, working age individuals.

            And we dont even know what effect this disease will have long term on the other 95%. We know almost nothing about this disease. Symptoms like the one covid induces (and that other coronavirus have caused) have been associated with long term scarring/fibrosis and loss of functional lung tissue, in healthy recovered patients, and we dont know how or if that will occur here too. We’re only just starting to get good epidemiology info thanks to countries like South Korea.

            In a situation like this, where you risk the lives and health of millions with almost no information, caution is more indicated than not, until a clearer picture is formed. Again; money and an economy can be restored. Lives cannot (and neither can dead lung).

            Now for the rest of your points:

            “What are markets and local governments doing to control the spread”

            Many of the things you said: limited hours, designated times for population sections, and frequent sanitation of handleable materials. By keeping these measures controlled in one point of contact for a community, you minimize the errors that will still allow the virus to spread. If every place had then and were still running your errors (and spread) would vastly multiply.

          • CMK

            Concerning what you said about how this quarantine decreases the chances of a self-quarantined at-risk people getting the virus and comparing it to what I suggested, it’s clear that a quarantine is an overreaction; it’s overkill. Most of these people, having family to help them, have the ability to ask others to get their food and medical supplies for them. If they want, the loved one who does this can drop the food or medicine off at their door so that they don’t have to come in contact with them. For those who absolutely don’t have anyone to help them, times should be set apart where only those who are at risk, who would presumably not have the virus, can shop. This simply makes more sense considering the detrimental economic effects that a full lockdown will soon have.

            You haven’t been understanding what I suggested entirely. I have said that those at risk are those who are elderly and those who have pre-existing conditions, not only those who are elderly. It’s reasonable to believe that most of that 5% that are hospitalized had pre-existing conditions. Those most likely to be hospitalized (because they have pre-existing conditions) would self-quarantine as well and adhere to the same precautions.

            Concerning hospitals being overrun, based on the statistics, I can see that. But I would like to know what is counted as a “hospitalization”, because I haven’t been able to find information on this. Is a person who is hospitalized and then tests positive for COVID-19 considered to have been hospitalized because of that disease? Does he have to test positive before he is admitted to the hospital to be considered hospitalized for the disease, or is he tested inside of the hospital? If he is tested while in the hospital, how long does it take for him to be tested? We know that the disease spreads very rapidly in hospitals where it is present; in South Korea they cause the most cluster infections.

            But I still don’t believe that this warrants a shutdown of the entire economy, which means that millions of people lose their jobs. 10 million people filed for unemployment in the last two weeks of March alone. If hospitals are being overrun, they need to tell people that have loved ones over 75 that are sick to stay home; I know that this is very sad for people and would cause outrage, but it’s either some sick, very elderly people die or there is a devastating economic crash, which now is already in the works. I guarantee that this will cause much more outrage, and will be much more damaging in the long run. If you really think that “money can be restored” in this context, you’re mistaken. The consolation is that these elders have already reached life expectancy. And I suspect that hospitals will start to do this soon anyway.

            All I can say about your comment that an economy can be restored is that I hope you’re right; but from what I see, this economic crash will be devastating, much more than COVID-19.

            I don’t see tens or hundreds of thousands of healthy working-age individuals would die if only those at risk self-quarantined; yes, some healthy people do die of this disease, but it happens very seldomly.

            By saying that other coronaviruses cause lung scarring and fibrosis, you are essentially admitting that this happens already. But by saying that we “don’t know what may happen” concerning the long-term effects of this disease, you are saying that we ought to do something that is certain to cause mass destruction, namely, putting millions of people out of jobs, in order to stop a potential problem. Mass unemployment is much more serious than you seem to think it is. But in any case, my proposed solution not only makes more sense in fighting against this virus, but it was obvious.

            Concerning your final paragraph, based on how receptive people were to everything that the government told them concerning this virus, I am sure that workplaces would have engaged in frequent sanitation of all handleable materials, telling people to always wipe whatever they use; yes, this would be annoying, but it’s not only less annoying than a complete shutdown, but it’s also much less destructive. In any case, though, those who were at risk of developing serious complications should not be in the workplace at all.

            Dedicated hours for seniors and those at risk would be possible for all retail stores, and other workplaces could have seniors work from home, or else live on their savings for a while.

            The media’s coverage of this virus is creating mass hysteria.

          • Twilk9

            I’m not really sure what you’re saying in your paragraph discussing fibrosis, so let me explain further. SARS, the 2004-5 coronavirus outbreak who pathologically most resembles covid, induced pulmonary fibrosis and lung loss (the kind associated with chronic smoking) in about a third of its otherwise healthy survivors within the year that followed infection. MERS, the other closest relative, induced the same in a slightly higher percentage.

            These fibrotic lungs in turn frequently lead to reduced oxygen capacity, higher susceptibility to disease, significantly reduced life span, etc (think smoking).

            It is too early to tell if these long term effects will be the same or similar; however, preliminary imaging of the effects of covid on lung tissue show INCREDIBLY similar patterns of pathology to SARS. As I said, dead lung tissue cannot be restored. If covid continues to act like Sars, we are talking about potentially tens of millions of americans who will be saddled with fibrotic lungs, mortality, poor chronic health, etc. Not to mention the medical expenses that will accrue. As I said; caution is warranted until more information is collected.

            I looked more deeply into the 1957 flu outbreak, and one thing that you’ve neglected to mention is that there WERE widespread closures of schools (government ordered) and businesses (industry’s choice). Unemployment shot up 6.5% during the outbreak as a result, and GDP shrunk 10%, the single largest drop in post depression history.

            More to come accidentally pressed post too early

          • CMK

            All respiratory illnesses have the potential to cause serious lung damage, but research (https://health.clevelandclinic.org/heres-the-damage-coronavirus-covid-19-can-do-to-your-lungs/) tells us that these serious problems occur in the minority of people who have severe cases of COVID-19, not among those who have mild cases. It makes sense that the percentage of people who suffered such damage would be greater with SARS because SARS is much more dangerous overall than COVID-19 is. The article that I linked talks about acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), as do most that talk about lung damage caused by COVID-19; I haven’t found anything concerning induced pulmonary fibrosis specifically, but if you have, I would appreciate it if you linked it.

            I never opposed the closing of schools; that’s mostly harmless, although it may by psychologically dangerous to some students and may result in some layoffs (teachers and administrators would be immune to this). I’d like to know where your information concerning business closures and significant economic downturn comes from, because, I couldn’t find anything that said anything of the sort; however, according to the Economic Report of the President in 1957 (https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/publications/ERP/1958/ERP1958_Chapter2.pdf), 1957 was a prosperous year overall (no, I did not just read the first sentence, but it’s a good summary of the entire report), and there was not even a mention of economic troubles.

            It says that unemployment remained stable throughout the year with only a slight increase from the last year, and gross domestic increased from the last year. There is no mention of mass business closures either or of the flu pandemic that took place during that year, among other things. It’s an interesting paper overall. One would think that the sort of thing you described would be necessary to mention. The fact is, though, that the majority of businesses were indeed open, which is not like how it is now. We are seeing most businesses either close or experience a large decrease in sales because the media has got everyone fearing that they might die if they leave their homes; I have spoken to people and seen how they speak online, and this is how they feel. Once again, 10 million applied for unemployment in only the last two weeks of March, and it will get worse.

            I don’t believe that your statistics concerning those with diabetes and other illnesses considers some necessary factors. Firstly, according to this source: https://www.aarp.org/work/employers/info-2019/americans-working-past-65.html, in 2019, about 20% of people over 65 were employed or looking for employment, which means that less than 20% of those over 65 are working, and thus over 80% are not. Those who are also tend to be healthier. Secondly, according to this source, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1500929/, people over 65 account for 60% of all newly diagnosed cancer malignancies, and “cancer incidence in humans rises exponentially in the final decades of life”. This essentially means that most of the people with cancer are over 65, and thus wouldn’t be working. Diabetes and heart disease are also skewed towards the elderly, although many under 65 have both conditions.

            But even if it is the case that 15-20% or even a slightly higher percentage of Americans wouldn’t be working, this would be preferable to shutting down most of the economy, putting millions out of jobs. 80% of Americans would be working, and many of those who are at risk would most likely be working from home anyway and still getting paid. I disagree that businesses would not be able to function under these conditions, and, in any case, this is a terrible justification for shutting all businesses down.

            What you said about those at risk interacting with healthy family members who may have the disease is a legitimate concern with what I proposed; but what you said about choke points applies here, although in a different way. These people should be wearing masks, even in the home, they should be constantly washing their hands, and they should limit their physical contact with family members. Everyone in the family should also wash thoroughly clean whatever they use, that the at-risk person would also use. Like I said about workplaces, this would be annoying, but it would be worth it.

            Also consider that most of those over 65 and probably many over 55 live only with their spouse, or alone. This would mitigate the problem.

            Thank you for your service as a doctor. My question concerning hospitalizations was this: how is a person said to have been hospitalized for a certain disease? If they have the flu, for example, are how are they considered to have been hospitalized because of the flu specifically? If they were in the hospital already for something else and then got the flu in the hospital, would they be counted as having been hospitalized for the flu as well? I know that the question sounds like it has an obvious answer, but considering that in some countries like Italy, a person is said to have “died” of COVID-19 if they just had it in their system when they died, this question is not too unreasonable.

            Another question is this: there were said to have been 10,900 hospitalizations in New York as of March 31. Does this number include the people who were hospitalized and have now left the hospital? Are all of those people in the hospitals right now? Considering the videos that people are taking of hospitals that are said to be overrun, which show that they are not at all overrun (you can find these here: https://twitter.com/hashtag/FilmYourHospital?src=hash), I doubt what they say about hospitals being overrun, although I see it as being possible based on the statistics alone. The answers to the questions that I asked are will factor into this.

            I also wouldn’t be surprised if many of those who go to the hospital for this disease (that don’t need respirators) could be treated at home, based on what they say they do to treat the illness. Treatment mainly consists of rest, drinking fluids, and consuming Vitamin C, from what I have heard; why can’t this be done at home for those who don’t need respirators?

            I would disagree with your last statement. The vast majority of cases are still mild or asymptomatic, and the media is overblowing the threat of the virus by making it seem like this is not the case; most believe that this virus will kill them if they get it, although this is extremely unlikely for most. Even the majority of the old survive, although they need medical help. Yes, there are some logistical problems associated with the disease, but it’s not apocalyptic. The death rate is extremely low, and likely under 1%, and severe cases are very low as well. It does not warrant this shutdown, or the panic that it has created in most people of this country.

            Like I said before, this illness is killing people on average at the life expectancy, and most have some underlying condition. Why would you cause mass panic because of this? If hospitals can’t take everyone, why wouldn’t it be proper to tell the oldest to stay home?

          • CMK

            I don’t understand this, but my response to your comment was deleted. It was here yesterday. This doesn’t make sense.

          • CMK

            I’ll just post it again.

            All respiratory illnesses have the potential to cause serious lung damage, but research (https://health.clevelandcli… tells us that these serious problems occur in the minority of people who have severe cases of COVID-19, not among those who have mild cases. It makes sense that the percentage of people who suffered such damage would be greater with SARS because SARS is much more dangerous overall than COVID-19 is. The article that I linked talks about acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), as do most that talk about lung damage caused by COVID-19; I haven’t found anything concerning induced pulmonary fibrosis specifically, but if you have, I would appreciate it if you linked it.

            I never opposed the closing of schools; that’s mostly harmless, although it may by psychologically dangerous to some students and may result in some layoffs (teachers and administrators would be immune to this). I’d like to know where your information concerning business closures and significant economic downturn comes from, because, I couldn’t find anything that said anything of the sort; however, according to the Economic Report of the President in 1957 (https://fraser.stlouisfed.o…, 1957 was a prosperous year overall (no, I did not just read the first sentence, but it’s a good summary of the entire report), and there was not even a mention of economic troubles.

            It says that unemployment remained stable throughout the year with only a slight increase from the last year, and gross domestic increased from the last year. There is no mention of mass business closures either or of the flu pandemic that took place during that year, among other things. It’s an interesting paper overall. One would think that the sort of thing you described would be necessary to mention. The fact is, though, that the majority of businesses were indeed open, which is not like how it is now. We are seeing most businesses either close or experience a large decrease in sales because the media has got everyone fearing that they might die if they leave their homes; I have spoken to people and seen how they speak online, and this is how they feel. Once again, 10 million applied for unemployment in only the last two weeks of March, and it will get worse.

            I don’t believe that your statistics concerning those with diabetes and other illnesses considers some necessary factors. Firstly, according to this source: https://www.aarp.org/work/e…, in 2019, about 20% of people over 65 were employed or looking for employment, which means that less than 20% of those over 65 are working, and thus over 80% are not. Those who are also tend to be healthier. Secondly, according to this source, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.go…, people over 65 account for 60% of all newly diagnosed cancer malignancies, and “cancer incidence in humans rises exponentially in the final decades of life”. This essentially means that most of the people with cancer are over 65, and thus wouldn’t be working. Diabetes and heart disease are also skewed towards the elderly, although many under 65 have both conditions.

            But even if it is the case that 15-20% or even a slightly higher percentage of Americans wouldn’t be working, this would be preferable to shutting down most of the economy, putting millions out of jobs. 80% of Americans would be working, and many of those who are at risk would most likely be working from home anyway and still getting paid. I disagree that businesses would not be able to function under these conditions, and, in any case, this is a terrible justification for shutting all businesses down.

            What you said about those at risk interacting with healthy family members who may have the disease is a legitimate concern with what I proposed; but what you said about choke points applies here, although in a different way. These people should be wearing masks, even in the home, they should be constantly washing their hands, and they should limit their physical contact with family members. Everyone in the family should also wash thoroughly clean whatever they use, that the at-risk person would also use. Like I said about workplaces, this would be annoying, but it would be worth it.

            Also consider that most of those over 65 and probably many over 55 live only with their spouse, or alone. This would mitigate the problem.

            Thank you for your service as a doctor. My question concerning hospitalizations was this: how is a person said to have been hospitalized for a certain disease? If they have the flu, for example, are how are they considered to have been hospitalized because of the flu specifically? If they were in the hospital already for something else and then got the flu in the hospital, would they be counted as having been hospitalized for the flu as well? I know that the question sounds like it has an obvious answer, but considering that in some countries like Italy, a person is said to have “died” of COVID-19 if they just had it in their system when they died, this question is not too unreasonable.

            Another question is this: there were said to have been 10,900 hospitalizations in New York as of March 31. Does this number include the people who were hospitalized and have now left the hospital? Are all of those people in the hospitals right now? Considering the videos that people are taking of hospitals that are said to be overrun, which show that they are not at all overrun (you can find these here: https://twitter.com/hashtag…, I doubt what they say about hospitals being overrun, although I see it as being possible based on the statistics alone. The answers to the questions that I asked are will factor into this.

            I also wouldn’t be surprised if many of those who go to the hospital for this disease (that don’t need respirators) could be treated at home, based on what they say they do to treat the illness. Treatment mainly consists of rest, drinking fluids, and consuming Vitamin C, from what I have heard; why can’t this be done at home for those who don’t need respirators?

            I would disagree with your last statement. The vast majority of cases are still mild or asymptomatic, and the media is overblowing the threat of the virus by making it seem like this is not the case; most believe that this virus will kill them if they get it, although this is extremely unlikely for most. Even the majority of the old survive, although they need medical help. Yes, there are some logistical problems associated with the disease, but it’s not apocalyptic. The death rate is extremely low, and likely under 1%, and severe cases are very low as well. It does not warrant this shutdown, or the panic that it has created in most people of this country.

            Like I said before, this illness is killing people on average at the life expectancy, and most have some underlying condition. Why would you cause mass panic because of this? If hospitals can’t take everyone, why wouldn’t it be proper to tell the oldest to stay home?

    • CMK

      The fact that this opinion is unpopular on this site shows how deep the hysteria really is.

      • Jaqen H’ghar

        it’s just a coof, bro

  • guтαvuh

    Funnily enough the US has now more cases than any country so….Lol?

    • Jaqen H’ghar

      America First

    • TRVTH

      >2020
      >believing ChiCom propaganda

    • Chris Redfield

      China Is Lying About The Death Toll
      Postby HP Mageson666 » Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm

      The official report from the Communist Chinese government states that 3305 people in China died from the current pandemic.

      However this does not match the evidence of the actual counts. The Daily Mail
      reported that Boris Johnson was told by his scientific advisors the numbers the Communist government had given were down played by 15 to 40 times.

      Some of this has slipped out of China. Caixin a newspaper inside China interviewed a truck diver on March 26 in Wuhan, who stated in two days he delivered 2500 urns full of human ashes each day. Making five thousand people. From the stats on Wuhan only around 131 people die normally a day within Wuhan. This is five thousand in two days. The same news paper showed a picture from just one funeral home in Wuhan that had 3500 urns that were full of ashes. Some images that have escaped from with Wuhan show hundreds of people lining up to pick up urns of their family members. The signs states in Chinese that no
      pictures or video are allowed. The Communist Party is covering up the real amount.

      There are also reports slipping out of social media in China of major riots against the Communist government.

      The actual amount being reported from RFA is around 48,000 and more deaths just within Wuhan. This virus is raging out of control in China.

      https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/wuhan-deaths-03272020182846.html

      Estimates Show Wuhan Death Toll Far Higher Than Official Figure

      As authorities lifted a two-month coronavirus lockdown in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, residents said they were growing increasingly skeptical that the figure of some 2,500 deaths in the city to date was accurate.

      Since the start of the week, seven large funeral homes in Wuhan have been handing out the cremated remains of around 500 people to their families every day, suggesting that far more people died than ever made the official statistics.

      “It can’t be right … because the incinerators have been working round the clock, so how can so few people have died?” an Wuhan resident surnamed Zhang told RFA on Friday.

      “They started distributing ashes and starting interment ceremonies on
      Monday,” he said.

      Seven funeral homes currently serve Wuhan — a huge conurbation of three cities: Hankou, Wuchang and Hanyang.

      Social media users have been doing some basic math to figure out their daily
      capacity, while the news website Caixin.com reported that 5,000 urns had been delivered by a supplier to the Hankou Funeral Home in one day alone — double the official number of deaths.

      Some social media posts have estimated that all seven funeral homes in Wuhan are handing out 3,500 urns every day in total.

      Funeral homes have informed families that they will try to complete cremations
      before the traditional grave-tending festival of Qing Ming on April 5, which would indicate a 12-day process beginning on March 23.

      Such an estimate would mean that 42,000 urns would be given out during that time.

      Various calculations
      Another popular estimate is based on the cremation capacity of the funeral
      homes, which run a total of 84 furnaces with a capacity over 24 hours of
      1,560 urns city-wide, assuming that one cremation takes one hour.

      This calculation results in an estimated 46,800 deaths.

      A resident of Hubei province, of which Wuhan is the capital, said most people there now believe that more than 40,000 people died in the city before and during the lockdown.

      “Maybe the authorities are gradually releasing the real figures, intentionally or unintentionally, so that people will gradually come to accept the reality,” the resident, who gave only his surname Mao, said.

      A source close to the provincial civil affairs bureau said many people had died at home, without being diagnosed with, or treated for, COVID-19.

      The source said any talk of the true number of deaths in Wuhan was very
      sensitive, but that the authorities do likely know the real figure.

      “Every funeral home reports data on cremations directly to the authorities twice daily,” the source said. “This means that each funeral home only knows how many cremations it has conducted, but not the situation at the other funeral homes.”

      The source said Wuhan saw 28,000 cremations in the space of a single month, suggesting that the online estimates over a two-and-a-half month period weren’t excessive.

      Wuhan resident Sun Linan said relatives of those who died are now forming
      long lines outside funeral homes to collect their loved ones’ ashes.

      “It has already begun,” Sun said on Thursday. “There were people lining up
      in Biandanshan Cemetery yesterday, and a lot of people forming lines today at Hankou Funeral Home.”

      Hush money Wuhan resident Chen Yaohui told RFA that city officials have been handing out 3,000 yuan in “funeral allowances” to the families of the dead in exchange for their silence.

      “There have been a lot of funerals in the past few days, and the authorities are handing out 3,000 yuan in hush money to families who get their loved ones’ remains laid to rest ahead of Qing Ming,” he said, in a reference to the traditional grave tending festival on April 5.

      “It’s to stop them keening [a traditional expression of grief]; nobody’s allowed to keen after Qing Ming has passed,” Chen said.

      The son of deceased COVID-19 patient Hu Aizhen said he had been told to
      collect his mother’s ashes by the local neighborhood committee.

      “The local committee told me they are now handling funerals, but I don’t
      want to do it right now,” the man, surnamed Ding, told RFA.

      “There are too many people doing it right now.”

      Chen said nobody in the city believes the official death toll.

      “The official number of deaths was 2,500 people … but before the epidemic
      began, the city’s crematoriums typically cremated around 220 people a
      day,” he said.

      “But during the epidemic, they transferred cremation workers from around China to Wuhan keep cremate bodies around the clock,” he said.

      A resident surnamed Gao said the city’s seven crematoriums should have a capacity of around 2,000 bodies a day if they worked around the clock.

      “Anyone looking at that figure will realize, anyone with any ability to think,” Gao said. “What are they talking about [2,535] people?”

      “Seven crematoriums could get through more than that [in a single day].”

      Reported by Qiao Long for RFA’s Mandarin Service, and by Lau Siu-fung for the
      Cantonese Service. Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.

      • Chris Redfield

        Re: China Is Lying About The Death Toll
        Postby HP. Hoodedcobra666 » Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:20 pm

        Let us question this, why did 8 to 20 millions of users permanently disappear from their phone database, as if suddenly they disappeared and they are no longer using a phone?

        They clearly are lying and their death and infection rates may have reached
        closely a million or more in both cases, or possibly way more. The CCP
        is a Communist lying government, which as per usual, puts human life in
        the last level of importance.

      • Hammerstrike

        “The (((Daily Fail))) reported bollocked that Boris Johnson was told by his scientific muppet expert (((advisors)))”
        Sounds legit!
        “Muh 20 miljuns dead phone chinks! They must all have died and been turned to Soylent yellow!”
        Really??!
        https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/comments/fqb3bg/whats_with_this_20_million_drop_in_numbers_thing/
        “Muh incinerators! Muh funeral urns! It’s like anudda shoah!”
        Hahaha! (((Propaganda))) is getting sillier by the day!
        https://www.boatsinker.online/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/IMG_20200330_0001-1240×1104.jpg

  • Rainy Haze

    The American Academy of Pediatrics is committed to addressing the factors that affect child and adolescent health with a focus on issues that may leave some children more vulnerable than others. Racism is a social determinant of health that has a profound impact on the health status of children, adolescents, emerging adults, and their families. Although progress has been made toward racial equality and equity, the evidence to support the continued negative impact of racism on health and well-being through implicit and explicit biases, institutional structures, and interpersonal relationships is clear. The objective of this policy statement is to provide an evidence-based document focused on the role of racism in child and adolescent development and health outcomes. By acknowledging the role of racism in child and adolescent health, pediatricians and other pediatric health professionals will be able to proactively engage in strategies to optimize clinical care, workforce development, professional education, systems engagement, and research in a manner designed to reduce the health effects of structural, personally mediated, and internalized racism and improve the health and well-being of all children, adolescents, emerging adults, and their families.

    • Jaqen H’ghar

      Imagine liking your own comments

    • Albionic American

      Racism promotes white people’s flourishing. Notice that white Americans’ fertility crashed around the time our elites in the 1960’s constructed and enforced on us at gunpoint their arbitrary ideology which makes racism the most horrible thing in the world.

      • AmazingSteak

        This guy out here straight up advocating for racism on the grounds of correlation == causation. Because the baby boom didn’t end in the 60s at all because all the WW2 bois had stopped having their victory kids, no it must have been the Blackman getting the same rights I enjoy without thinking about it.

        • Shay Vicemerski

          Well… there are quite a bit of white supremacists in this community. Dont be surprised to see racism here.

          Just like you shouldn’t be surprised to see people with some ‘odd’ (to say the least) beliefs in flat-earth and anti-vax communities or other conspiracy camps.

          • fern tuttleby

            Just because white people don’t want to live with large groups of brown and black people in their communities doesn’t make them racist, it makes them logical and observant.

          • TRVTH

            “Racism” just means “noticing.”

      • Shay Vicemerski

        well, slavery used to promote a society but as you cant use slave for commercial services (the biggest part of the workforce in most western nations) its not as beneficial as in the past.

        Lots of big projects were pushed by use of slavery. Just happens to be that whites were not used as much as other nations. But in the future it might well be that whites will actually be slaves again.

        idk though.

        • fern tuttleby

          Definitely exposing yourself to be pretty ignorant of history…and grammar.

          • Shay Vicemerski

            oh. you thought Europe and the US & A would be the world’s leaders forever? how cute.

        • Chinese Communist Party

          The greeks and romans enslaved more european (white or olive) people than you could imagine.
          What are you talking about @shayvicemerski:disqus ?
          There have almost certainly been more white slaves in history than brown or black.

    • Downvoted because you liked your own comment, without reading it.

  • Divosa Uplanovytch

    Kung Flu

    • TRVTH

      I prefer to call it the Wu-bonic Plague.

      • jonathan

        Winnie the Flu

  • Lhassir

    It’s just the Coof bro.

  • Lhassir
  • Albionic American

    If white nationalists ran the United States, they would make the flourishing of normal white people their priority according to the principles of their humanist philosophy; and this pandemic wouldn’t have gotten established here.

    • SuperSeal

      where are you on the political compass

      • Shay Vicemerski

        I am not sure yet. I still figuring that out.

        • FlyingThunder

          pretty sure he isnt on any compass but in his moms basement.

  • Major Matt Mason

    Shouldn’t that be an elbow bump?

  • jonathan

    Chinese isn’t a race, so calling it the Chinese virus isn’t racist. Checkmate.

  • Thwibbith

    Itali! No!

Primary Sidebar