"Recovering" from Covid-19

Status
Not open for further replies.

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #26
In the past I wonder how many times people would have tested positive for something. Yet life went on as if no one had anything. I understand preventive maintenance. But this BS has been going on for far too long. When you slow the spread of a virus. Ask yourself if you are staging the epidemic for multiple relapses. There is no preventive maintenance, not with a pathetic sock mask. People will either survive the epidemic when they finally catch it or they will not.
Honestly, I don't think anyone is looking for a halt to the virus right now. I think it is more of a temporary stopgap to save as many lives as possible until more people wise up to the importance of the simple steps they can take, up to the point of a vaccine. 80% fewer infections in groups for people with masks compared to no mask is not a fluke or coincidence. Take the people with masks and add a proper distancing practice and presto, 2 easy and effective ways to avoid contact with the virus.

And I don't believe for one second that everybody has to catch it. Not even most, a lot, or even quite a few.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cabalco

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #27
I'm thinking that COVID 19 doesn't care who you are or most importantly, who you think you are:

Mississippi school confirms 7 COVID 19 cases in a week.

 

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #28
Self-important anti maskers continue to infect America and the most common excuse is "medical reasons"

But the good news is we can very easily let them put their money where their lying mouth is:

Pulse Oximeter

This simply clips to the finger and examines the blood for oxygen levels. They work well, I have had one since I was hit by a drunk driver years ago and my respiratory system and the right lung was badly damaged.

Just get the whiny lint ball to test their oxygen levels (takes a few seconds), put on their mask, wait just a few minutes and test again.

I gave one to a friend that works at Walmart on Baseline Road in Little Rock and it has worked wonders. Not one person who did it showed lower O2 levels while wearing a mask though, not surprisingly, most refuse to do it.

Presto! Instant fraud detector.
 
Last edited:

Endymio

Posts: 403   +287
Not sure why this is even news. Obviously, somewhere in the US, at least some students already have the virus before the first day of class. This is like reporting that the sun came up this morning.

Covid is, for children, less deadly than the common flu. We don't generally close schools over the flu. Furthermore, there are serious developmental, emotional, and physical risks to keeping children out of school for extended periods of time. Finally, we should be cognizant of the fact that nations which have already opened their schools fully saw no resultant surge in cases.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #32
Obviously, somewhere in the US, at least some students already have the virus before the first day of class
Students have to be tested for COVID-19 before they can even go to class the first day. And let's face it, that statement is the exact reason we SHOULDN'T open schools quite yet.

EDIT: A majority do require pre entry testing, but not all so I wanted to correct myself there.

We don't generally close schools over the flu
Flu. Pandemic. To some they are the same.
Finally, we should be cognizant of the fact that nations which have already opened their schools fully saw no resultant surge in cases.
And every one of them used distancing and masking. That won't fly here because we are, you know, "Muricans".
 
Last edited:

Endymio

Posts: 403   +287
let's face it, that statement is the exact reason we SHOULDN'T open schools quite yet.
How so? The flu is much more dangerous to young children than Covid. Every year when schools open, some students already have the flu ... and they transmit that influenza to other students, some of whom die from it. Yet we never close schools as a result. Nor do we require children to wear masks or socially distance to reduce their risk of dying from the flu. This year alone, several times as many children

If your goal is to do what's best for the children, reopening schools is the obvious choice.

Flu. Pandemic. To some they are the same.
The same? No. To young children, the flu is far worse. To the eldery, Covid is far worse. It's really not hard to draw proper distinctions.

And every one of [those nations] used distancing and masking.
No. Sweden, for instance, never closed their schools at all. Distancing and masks were not mandated. And yet, in the entire nation, Sweden only had one young child die from Covid.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #34
No. Sweden, for instance, never closed their schools at all. Distancing and masks were not mandated. And yet, in the entire nation, Sweden only had one young child die from Covid.
No.

"Yet Swedish officials have not tracked infections among school children—even when large outbreaks led to the closure of individual schools or staff members died of the disease".

The same? No. To young children, the flu is far worse.
That is true. But Covid-19 is much more contagious. One 7 year old died in Georgia yesterday. Can't help but wonder how many he spread it to. At school and at home. They are not dying instead of the flu, they die in addition to it. Just yell when the proper number of kids are dead.

From Healthline:
During the 2017-2018 season, there were at least 185 flu-associated deaths in children, and roughly 80 percent of these deaths occurred in children who hadn’t received a flu vaccination.

As a side note, would you care to guess how many Flu patients could have lived if they sought medical attention? We all do it, "Ah its just the Flu, I get'em every few years".
 
Last edited:

Endymio

Posts: 403   +287
"More than 25 children died of the coronavirus in July alone.
No, not if we are talking young children. In the 0-14 age bracket, there have been a total of 45 deaths since Feb 1, the official start date of the epidemic (source: CDC NCHS prov. data brief). Over the same period of time, 233 children have died of infectious pneumonia, 105 of the common flu, and 779 of auto accidents. A grand total of nearly 13,000 children under age 14 died from all causes during that period -- nearly all of those preventable.

Every year we send children to school, knowing a small percentage of them will die as a result. Why do we do it? Because the benefits of in-person schooling for millions of children far outweigh the minimal risks. For Covid, the risk is less than minimal. It is microscopic.

Would you care to guess how many Flu patients could have lived if they sought medical attention?
Essentially the same amount. Nearly all flu victims do in fact seek medical care once their symptoms worsen. Many seek help at the first blush of a symptom. And when they do, their health care provider tells them to go home until and unless their symptoms worsen. Why? Because for the flu -- like Covid and other respiratory viruses -- there is little medicine can do. You can provide symptomatic support, or use a retroviral which may or may not reduce the severity somewhat. In a severe case, ventilator support may -- or may not -- help.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #37
No, not if we are talking young children. In the 0-14 age bracket, there have been a total of 45 deaths since Feb 1, the official start date of the epidemic (source: CDC NCHS prov. data brief). Over the same period of time, 233 children have died of infectious pneumonia, 105 of the common flu, and 779 of auto accidents. A grand total of nearly 13,000 children under age 14 died from all causes during that period -- nearly all of those preventable.
I don't even know how to respond to this nonsense so I will ask you again.
I can't help but wonder how many kids spread it at school and at home. They are not dying instead of the flu, or crashes, or tornados. They die in addition to it. Since 45 is not yet enough, again, just yell when the proper number of kids are dead.

Because for the flu -- like Covid and other respiratory viruses -- there is little medicine can do
Dumb. Just suggesting that most people that survived would have done so even if they had never consulted with a Dr. or went to the hospital is without merit and not even worth discussing.

And there is plenty to be done for the flu if starting treatment early enough. Huge numbers of people that die at home of the flu or at a hospital after showing up too late for treatment could have been saved even if you only count a ventilator and antibiotics since so many people don't end up with pneumonia but die of infections.
 
Last edited:

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,477   +5,853
If I don't need an immediate operation, I don't want to hear a word the doctors have to say. They often can not even agree among themselves on which medication to peddle. As far as I care they can shove it all up their ***. Maybe then we at least wouldn't be engineering epidemics.
 

Endymio

Posts: 403   +287
Since 45 is not yet enough, again, just yell when the proper number of kids are dead.
An excellent example of the logical fallacy known as the appeal to emotion, often used when one lacks a rational argument. Let's use your own pseudo-logic on you. If 233 children dead of pneumonia isn't enough for you, yell when the proper amount die. If 105 dead from the flu isn't enough, please yell. If 390 dead children every year from swimming pools (the number one cause of death for those under age five) isn't enough, how many is? What number of kids need to die before you're in favor of shutting down the nation's pools? How can you be so insensitive? Oh, the horror!

They are not dying instead of the flu, or crashes, or tornados. They die in addition to it.
So your argument is that 13,000 dead children annually is a perfectly acceptable result, one requiring no special action whatsoever ... but 13,045 is a catastrophe, requiring us to shut every school in the nation? Absurdity. I won't bother to point out that your "solution" subjects millions of children to the emotional, psychological, and developmental harm that results from isolation and long-term school closures.

suggesting that most people that survived would have done so even if they had never consulted with a Dr. or went to the hospital is without merit and not even worth discussing.
Did you type this in error? The vast majority that survive the flu never visit the doctor, so yes they would have survived with or without medical treatment.

And there is plenty to be done for the flu if starting treatment early enough. Huge numbers of people that die...could have been saved even if you only count a ventilator and antibiotics
Err, antibiotics don't help against the flu ... or any other virus. As for ventilators, they often damage the lungs or cause secondary infections; they are a last-gasp measure to prevent death, and one that fails much more often than it succeeds.

I don't even know how to respond to this
Obviously.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #40
An excellent example of the logical fallacy known as the appeal to emotion
No, just a statement that not having enough dead to do anything about it is the real failure of logic.
So your argument is that 13,000 dead children annually is a perfectly acceptable result, one requiring no special action whatsoever ... but 13,045 is a catastrophe
Just 1 is a catastrophe, and should be addressed when there are things that could have been done to prevent it. Just sitting on ones hands and deflecting a point is so donald tRUMP.
The vast majority that survive the flu never visit the doctor, so yes they would have survived with or without medical treatment.
Very true but your post said " the flu -- like Covid and other respiratory viruses -- there is little medicine can do" is obviously false since medical attention is way more successful than doing nothing. Are you suggesting that everyone that was hospitalized and survived would have survived if they just rode it out?
Err, antibiotics don't help against the flu ... or any other virus. As for ventilators, they often damage the lungs or cause secondary infections; they are a last-gasp measure to prevent death, and one that fails much more often than it succeeds.
Yeah, guess what they are doing now. Ventilators are a last-minute hail Mary and have definitely helped. Antibiotics are used to prevent infections. However, a member of my family in health care just told me that they have backed off because of the possibility of bacteria building resistance so you are right about that.
 

Endymio

Posts: 403   +287
Just 1 is a catastrophe...
So one Covid death is a catastrophe...but hundreds of flu deaths are just fine? And tens of thousands of deaths from other preventable causes are A-OK? What is be distorting your thinking to such a degree...?

it...is so donald tRUMP.
Aha! There it is...
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #42
So one Covid death is a catastrophe...but hundreds of flu deaths are just fine?
I'm going to say this as simply as possible. I'm repeating myself, but only to dumb it down for you. Hundreds of deaths are not fine, and 1, or 25, or 50 deaths is not something to brush aside. I hope you can understand that now brother.

Aha! There it is...
There what is? The denier in chief?
 
Last edited:

Endymio

Posts: 403   +287
Hundreds of deaths are not fine, and 1, or 25, or 50 deaths is not something to brush aside.
But you are brushing them aside. Hundreds of dead kids, dead from the common flu this year alone. Tens of thousands dead this year from other preventable causes. Yet you've never once even thought about closing the schools to save THOSE lives, did you? Or closing all the swimming pools, a device that is much more easily banned than in-school education, yet kills more children than the flu and Covid combined. How about the automobile? Even more deaths. Why not ban those?

Unfortunately, you can't be honest-- not with us, or with even with yourself. Tens of thousands of kids dead from the flu doesn't bother you one bit. But 45 dead from Covid? Why, you can use that to advance your anti-Trump obsession! And who cares how many tens of millions of children are permanently injured by long-term school closings, right?
 

Endymio

Posts: 403   +287
For those still deluded about the yearly flu and COVID 19.
Well you can Google, but you can't read. That chart counts only confirmed flu deaths, which, because the vast majority of people who die from the flu are never tested specifically for the virus, is an enormous undercount. The CDC understands this, and even your article grudgingly admits it. The CDC actual estimates of flu deaths from last year alone run as high as 52,000. During the year of the H1N1 outbreak, total flu deaths ran well over 70,000 -- some estimates approached 90,000.

Oh, and what action did we take that year? The Obama Adminstration ordered a halt to all flu testing at the height of the outbreak, under the rationale that "we already know there's an epidemic, so why test for it"? That halted the rise in the official "confirmed" death rate ... but it didn't halt the deaths.

Were you here that year posting in favor of masks, social distancing, and school closings? I didn't think so.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #46
That chart counts only confirmed flu deaths, which, because the vast majority of people who die from the flu are never tested specifically for the virus
Confirmed and unconfirmed are nearly equally divided between flu and covid 19. I realize unconfirmed are how folks like you debate, its the new strawman. You say something so out of the park nobody would ever even think to research or confirm it, then you say "now, prove me wrong"
Were you here that year posting in favor of masks, social distancing, and school closings?
70-80% of people who died of flu were unvaccinated. There is no vaccination for covid 19 yet. Of course that varies by season.
"flu vaccine reduced children’s risk of flu-related pediatric intensive care unit"(PICU) admission by 74% during flu seasons from 2010-2012.
Well you can Google, but you can't read
And you can guess but you cant Google.
 
Last edited:

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #47
While I have no love for Trump or even like. Ok ok, I can't even look at him for long without puking, I have always been a man that believes in the credit where credit is due mantra.


Let's just hope it wasn't an election ploy as is being talked about (even on fox) and gets into the hands of citizens soon. At least it is something until a permanent deal can be ironed out.
 
Last edited:

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #49
This guy has an open mind. It is hard to argue with someone that has an open mind.

I like Dr. Z. He always gives both sides to the story and seriously, a lot of his observations are included in my posts on COVID-19. But what I do is find another reliable source to quote because balanced thought is often hated by both sides of an issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cliffordcooley

scavengerspc

Posts: 529   +368
TechSpot Elite
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #50
So it has been pointed out to me (emphatically) that health care workers are very unhappy at the suggestion (not just by Dr. Z) some COVID 19 patients "die of other things but hospitals just list Covid-19 as the cause of death". And that they are really not amused at the suggestion that they are not doing their jobs correctly or are taking shortcuts.

On the upside, you can all be thankful that you didn't have to be on the receiving end of that phone call.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.