@metal-brain saidI tried to open the above link and it will not open for me and instead I strangely get the following error message which is exactly as follows;
https://www.fredericknewspost.com/news/health/fort-detrick-lab-shut-down-after-failed-safety-inspection-all/article_767f3459-59c2-510f-9067-bb215db4396d.html
451: Unavailable due to legal reasons
We recognize you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore access cannot be granted at this time. For any issues, contact webmaster@fredericknewspost.com or call 301-662-1177.
27 Mar 20
@metal-brain saidThey still wouldn't need to pretend that it originated in China. Further, the disease spreads fast, they'd have been seeing large numbers of cases months ago.
https://www.fredericknewspost.com/news/health/fort-detrick-lab-shut-down-after-failed-safety-inspection-all/article_767f3459-59c2-510f-9067-bb215db4396d.html
@deepthought saidExactly.
the disease spreads fast, they'd have been seeing large numbers of cases months ago.
@deepthought saidThere was no testing available months ago. People would have assumed it was the flu. What is the infected/death ratio in the US so far?
They still wouldn't need to pretend that it originated in China. Further, the disease spreads fast, they'd have been seeing large numbers of cases months ago.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-originated-us-japanese-tv-broadcast/5704493?fbclid=IwAR26CfKpEzXO9MF-qPNHIFJZU_HMUNXOtXU84-3hgrn3RPoXrNKhK8f63so
What was the flu death rate every year for the past 4 years? Why don't flu deaths get reported? Why only C19? Don't they want people to know people are dying from the flu too?
@metal-brain saidHow do you know they "assumed" wrong?
There was no testing available months ago. People would have assumed it was the flu.
@metal-brain saidLook, to give you a rough idea about a third of Transport for London Staff are off sick at the moment. My estimate is that about 1,500 people will die in this country over the next 7 days. The normal weekly all-cause mortality rate in the UK at this time of year is about 10,000 per week. These figures take into account seasonal influenza. Had the virus been released in the US in early November then you'd see it in the mortality figures in January.
There was no testing available months ago. People would have assumed it was the flu. What is the infected/death ratio in the US so far?
https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-originated-us-japanese-tv-broadcast/5704493?fbclid=IwAR26CfKpEzXO9MF-qPNHIFJZU_HMUNXOtXU84-3hgrn3RPoXrNKhK8f63so
What was the flu death rate every year for the past 4 years? Why don't flu deaths get reported? Why only C19? Don't they want people to know people are dying from the flu too?
@deepthought saidWhat percentage of people infected with C19 die? What is the latest update?
Look, to give you a rough idea about a third of Transport for London Staff are off sick at the moment. My estimate is that about 1,500 people will die in this country over the next 7 days. The normal weekly all-cause mortality rate in the UK at this time of year is about 10,000 per week. These figures take into account seasonal influenza. Had the virus been released in the US in early November then you'd see it in the mortality figures in January.
@metal-brain saidI just did linear regression on the log of the number of deaths since the 14th. As far as I'm aware it's still 0.9%. However, that figures based on mortality rates in China. It was found that 74% (from memory) of critical coronavirus patients in the UK were overweight compared with 64% in the general population. I don't know the figures for China - I'd guess lower - obesity there is around 5% to 6% compared with 28% in the UK which implies a lower rate for being overweight. So their mortality rates could be lower as a consequence. I need to think about how that translates into an IFR though.
What percentage of people infected with C19 die? What is the latest update?
@deepthought saidThe more people that are tested the lower that death rate should become. The more people that are tested the higher the infection rate should become as well.
I just did linear regression on the log of the number of deaths since the 14th. As far as I'm aware it's still 0.9%. However, that figures based on mortality rates in China. It was found that 74% (from memory) of critical coronavirus patients in the UK were overweight compared with 64% in the general population. I don't know the figures for China - I'd guess lower - o ...[text shortened]... ates could be lower as a consequence. I need to think about how that translates into an IFR though.
How do you know how long a virus has been in a country when testing just started? We could just be revealing what was already there for some time. The deaths could have simply been blamed on the flu.
https://www.health.com/condition/cold-flu-sinus/how-many-people-die-of-the-flu-every-year
The article above says the official toll of the 2019-2020 influenza season won't be known for months. Does anyone have month by month comparisons they can show?
@metal-brain saidThe infection fatality ratio is the number of people who die divided by the estimate of the number of people infected. The case fatality ratio is the number of people who die divided by the number of confirmed cases. Testing reveals the number of cases. The CFR drops with testing, the IFR does not necessarily, it can increase. What more testing would do is improve our estimates of how many are infected, but that can go in either direction.
The more people that are tested the lower that death rate should become. The more people that are tested the higher the infection rate should become as well.
How do you know how long a virus has been in a country when testing just started? We could just be revealing what was already there for some time. The deaths could have simply been blamed on the flu.
https://ww ...[text shortened]... fluenza season won't be known for months. Does anyone have month by month comparisons they can show?
@metal-brain saidIf it looks exactly like the flu and the doctors and experts think its the flu then it probably is and it should be the default assumption that it probably is until if or when we have evidence or reason for thinking the contrary is more likely.
What else would they assume? If you don't know C19 exists what else would you blame it on?
Have you a problem with that?
Back to my question: How do you know they "assumed" wrong?
28 Mar 20
@humy saidHow do you know they "assumed" right?
If it looks exactly like the flu and the doctors and experts think its the flu then it probably is and it should be the default assumption that it probably is until if or when we have evidence or reason for thinking the contrary is more likely.
Have you a problem with that?
Back to my question: How do you know they "assumed" wrong?
I'm not trying to prove it. I'm trying to establish reasonable doubt. SARS-2 may have been here longer than most people think. It has not been proven it started in China. It may have started in the US.
You cannot rule it out.
28 Mar 20
@deepthought saidThe lack of tests available makes it very likely that the infection rate will artificially increase when more are available, especially since people can have the virus without symptoms. If you were a betting man where would you place your bet?
The infection fatality ratio is the number of people who die divided by the estimate of the number of people infected. The case fatality ratio is the number of people who die divided by the number of confirmed cases. Testing reveals the number of cases. The CFR drops with testing, the IFR does not necessarily, it can increase. What more testing would do is improve our estimates of how many are infected, but that can go in either direction.
We will know more when people without symptoms are widely tested. There are not enough tests for that right now. That is why they are rarely tested. They are being rationed for people with symptoms.
@metal-brain saidAre you implying it probably was C19?
How do you know they "assumed" right?
I'm not trying to prove it. I'm trying to establish reasonable doubt.
If not, you make no point and everything I said there is exactly correct.