CDC: Only 50,000 Died from Covid Only, Not 836,000

[Rigby5]

Well, what are you going to do with a COVID patient whose saturations are dropping while wearing BiPAP at 100% FiO2 and a pressure of 20/12?

Lots of things.
Immuno suppressants for one thing, to slow the production of mucus and phlegm.
You can also give expectorants to simply cough up these fluids that are asphyxiating the patient.
By turning the patient often, you can also cause fluids to drain normally, especially face down.
You can also apply drug directly to the lung with inhalation therapy, and can help evaporate excess fluids.
None of these can be done to a patient you have deliberately put unconscious.

 

[Couchpotato]

Odds of dropping dead spontaneously multiplied the time that one has COVID.

Someone lives for 20,000 days and dies in the one week time span of having COVID. The odds these are mere coincidence is not zero, but not very high.

But the reason they "died of COVID" is they were otherwise unhealthy to begin with. You don't get to ignore all the other factors surrounding the cause of death because they are inconvenient for some reason.

 

[pknopp]

Probably because he didn't say that. And this is the real world.

He did. He played the down the risk but he did say that.


“In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?” he wrote. “Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario – however remote – should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?

“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.

NoCookies | The Australian

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Lots of things.
Immuno suppressants for one thing, to slow the production of mucus and phlegm.
You can also give expectorants to simply cough up these fluids that are asphyxiating the patient.
By turning the patient often, you can also cause fluids to drain normally, especially face down.
You can also apply drug directly to the lung with inhalation therapy, and can help evaporate excess fluids.
None of these can be done to a patient you have deliberately put unconscious.

Well congrats, you just got fired for incompetence and for killing patients. Stick to your day job.

 

[ClaireH]

All the time. I suppose you haven't read my posts where I noted Obama (and others) should rot in hell for all the things they did. You only take offense when it's a negative Trump post.



I believe Fauci should have been fired the day he said that a pandemic was worth the cost of doing the research but he wasn't. Not by Obama, not by Trump and still not by Biden. All have failed the country.

That’s somewhat true about my tendency to defend Trump. I would never be caught dead defending Hillary or Biden, for instance, not even during a nightmare could they force me to do so even when using medieval torture tools!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

He played the down the risk but he did say that.

No he didn't. That is not what he said there.

You are ignoring the important, nuanced part for a simpleton narrative: the degree of risk.

But I know nothing will dislodge you from the very first narrative you chose. Ever. Moving on...

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

I think it decreases the chance of getting it...

Obviously it doesn't...lol. we've had more infections since the vaccine than before the vaccine. It's the pinnacle of stupidity, at this point, to claim the vaccine decreases the infections.

The government needed useful idiots and you people ran to be the first in line.

 

[pknopp]

That’s somewhat true about my tendency to defend Trump. I would never be caught dead defending Hillary or Biden, for instance, not even during a nightmare could they force me to do so even when using medieval torture tools!

And a huge problem in this country is those who will defend "their" guy for the very thing they will condemn the other guy for.

 

[Rigby5]

I think it decreases the chance of getting it, decreases the severity of the symptoms if you do get it, and decreases the chance of hospitalization.

So, you're ignorant and wrong. Typical for a Trumpster.

Wrong.
The mRNA injection is not a vaccine at all because it just instructs our own ribosomes to start growing spike proteins in our own cells.
So all it does is temporarily stimulate antibodies.
By taking the mRNA treatment ahead of time, then it decreases its ability to help.
It would MORE effective is one took the mRNA injection AFTER you have become infected, and then wanted the maximum antibody stimulation.

 

[pknopp]

No he didn't. That is not what he said there.

You are ignoring the important, nuanced part for a simpleton narrative: the degree of risk.

But I know nothing will dislodge you from the very first narrative you chose. Ever. Moving on...

Only if you wish to ignore his quote which I posted above.

“In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?” he wrote. “Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario – however remote – should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?

“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.

 

[colfax_m]

Lots of things.
Immuno suppressants for one thing, to slow the production of mucus and phlegm.
You can also give expectorants to simply cough up these fluids that are asphyxiating the patient.
By turning the patient often, you can also cause fluids to drain normally, especially face down.
You can also apply drug directly to the lung with inhalation therapy, and can help evaporate excess fluids.
None of these can be done to a patient you have deliberately put unconscious.

They’ve already been on dexamethasone and baracitinib. They’re too tired from breathing at a rate of 40, their cough is just too weak. They’ve been proning as much as they can but now they’re hard to arouse because their pCO2 is 80.

Almost everything you said can be done with someone who is unconscious. Nothing you’ve suggested is going to have an immediate benefit. Meanwhile their brain is being deprived of oxygen.

What do you do? Watch them die?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Only if you wish to ignore his quote which I posted above.

I explaiined why you are intentionally misinterpreting it, and how. Not much else I can say. It's all very simple and transparent,whatyou are doing.

 

[Rigby5]

The pandemic is a reason. This is not imaginary. It’s real

Except slowing down an epidemic, so that it can NEVER end, is NOT at all a reasonable response.
The reasonable response is to end it as quickly as possible.
And we deliberately did not do that.

 

[pknopp]

I explaiined why you are intentionally misinterpreting it, and how. Not much else I can say. It's all very simple and transparent,whatyou are doing.

I really don't care what your spin is. I posted the quote and he said exactly what I said he said.


“In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?” he wrote. “Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario – however remote – should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?

“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.

 

[colfax_m]

But the reason they "died of COVID" is they were otherwise unhealthy to begin with. You don't get to ignore all the other factors surrounding the cause of death because they are inconvenient for some reason.

Most of the country is “unhealthy”.

Do we say someone who died in a car crash died because they were obese? Of course not. Yet obese people are twice as likely to die in a crash.

 

[colfax_m]

Except slowing down an epidemic, so that it can NEVER end, is NOT at all a reasonable response.
The reasonable response is to end it as quickly as possible.
And we deliberately did not do that.

Yes. I deliberately tried not to get COVID. I know. That makes me bad in your mind, but I was really more concerned about giving COVID to vulnerable people, which seems like it was kind of a priority.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Yet here you are responding to them.

How odd.

I'm snowbound and bored. What's your excuse?

 

[initforme]

Well we're going to call it 50001 then soon as my neice, no comorbities ad you losers proclaim, is intubated and the Dr said her lungs are shot. The virus had taken over. Gave her. 5 percent chance. It sure is the hoax you dimwits talk about. How dumb. I get to attend a funeral soon. And by the way she is unvaxxed and will leave behind 3 young kids and no father.

 

[ClaireH]

And a huge problem in this country is those who will defend "their" guy for the very thing they will condemn the other guy for.

Human loyalty, a genetic defect or necessary attribute? It depends on the circumstances but considering everything, it’s been a necessary attribute. Most humans become very loyal to humans (including politicians) they believe represent their views the best and have their interests at the helm of policy. Voters are responsible to follow up as to whether or not the politicians are following through.

Added thought about loyalty: It is primal DNA programming that was necessary for cave dwellers to have such loyalty to survive, “good tribes”united with other “good tribes” to increase the chances of survival against the more cutthroat tribes.

This concept of loyalty is very much represented in the “modern” political arena. Human behavior just isn’t really very modern imo. We just use better sticks and stones to fight wars with the only improvement being advanced technology.

Question -which political groups do you think will unite to defeat a certain opponent?

 

[pknopp]

Human loyalty, a genetic defect or necessary attribute? It depends on the circumstances but considering everything, it’s been a necessary attribute. Most humans become very loyal to humans (including politicians) they believe represent their views the best and have their interests at the helm of policy. Voters are responsible to follow up as to whether or not the politicians are following through.

I can't grasp the idea of how lying represents your best interest.

Added thought about loyalty: It is primal DNA programming that was necessary for cave dwellers to have such loyalty to survive, “good tribes”united with other “good tribes” to increase the chances of survival against the more cutthroat tribes.

This concept of loyalty is very much represented in the “modern” political arena. Human behavior just isn’t really very modern imo. We just use better sticks and stones to fight wars with the only improvement being advanced technology.

Question -which political groups do you think will unite to defeat a certain opponent?

Lies have got a countless number of people killed.