Volsfaninva917
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2009
- Messages
- 21,217
- Likes
- 33,549
This virus has a survival rate of over 99%. Why should we lock ourselves in our bunker over that?Jesus Christ, don't you get it !? The 4th grader who gets it will be fine. But his parents may not. His grandmother definitely not.
The risk is not just to the initial family member who get it. Why is this so hard for virus deniers to grasp?
Jesus Christ, don't you get it !? The 4th grader who gets it will be fine. But his parents may not. His grandmother definitely not.
The risk is not just to the initial family member who get it. Why is this so hard for virus deniers to grasp?
We shouldn't lock ourselves in a bunker.This virus has a survival rate of over 99%. Why should we lock ourselves in our bunker over that?
Oh, you failed to see the studies that show kids dont transfer to adults?
Thats where it stands today however as cases begin to climb, death begins to fall so the rate will decrease. Daily deaths are down by over 90% since April ( the peak ) so currently things are trending in a positive direction.We shouldn't lock ourselves in a bunker.
There's no credibility in using Trump as a source because he has no credibility. The survival rate is 95%. I bet even a low IQ guy like yourself can do simple percentage calculation
Those "studies" are hardly conclusive and no explanation has been found. If you are talking the Iceland one, the problem is that it is examining people in quarantine situations.
Yet another example of virus deniers latching on to one small piece of data, of questionable value, and unknown mechanics, to justify ignoring the mountain of evidence of the value of limited interaction to the contrary.
Those "studies" are hardly conclusive and no explanation has been found. If you are talking the Iceland one, the problem is that it is examining people in quarantine situations.
Yet another example of virus deniers latching on to one small piece of data, of questionable value, and unknown mechanics, to justify ignoring the mountain of evidence of the value of limited interaction to the contrary.
I agree, but the statement that 99% of the cases are harmless was, as usual, a false claim by POTUSThats where it stands today however as cases begin to climb, death begins to fall so the rate will decrease. Daily deaths are down by over 90% since April ( the peak ) so currently things are trending in a positive direction.
Those "studies" are hardly conclusive and no explanation has been found. If you are talking the Iceland one, the problem is that it is examining people in quarantine situations.
Yet another example of virus deniers latching on to one small piece of data, of questionable value, and unknown mechanics, to justify ignoring the mountain of evidence of the value of limited interaction to the contrary.
I agree, but the statement that 99% of the cases are harmless was, as usual, a false claim by POTUS
I certainly don't need a lesson about social media. I forgot more about real life than you could possibly know about itSo now he's got to give you a link to the study that shows a 99% harmless rate? I got news for you. Real life is not social media. 99% may or may not be accurate but since 85-90% of the cases are asymptomatic, a huge percentage is indeed harmless. Why hammer him on whether it's 99% or 90% or what's harmless?
FAQs About COVID-19 | MedPage Today
COVID-19 | 90% of cases in Vizag are asymptomatic, says Collector
Ninety-six percent of inmates in four state prisons who tested positive for coronavirus were asymptomatic: report
Do you really think it's better overall for kids to not go to school? I don't think you've thought this entire thing through. Are they really safer in day care? Do they possibly need to lunches that schools provide? Don't you think the education is far greater if the kids are in school? All these sacrifices 'cause you're worried about grandma. Grandma can make her own decision whether to see the kids.