COVID-19 has the potential to be as deadly as the 1918 flu

Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
An important aspect this study did not address is the age of people who died in each case. The life expectancy of Americans in 1918 was about 55 years. It is now pushing 80. (For women, it is ca. 3-5 years longer in both cases.) Of course there are differences in ethnic groups, but this single aspect of the study would seem to render the conclusions questionable at best.

If SARS-CoV-2 was spreading in 1918 New York City, the death rate would likely have been an order of magnitude less than it is today, assuming immune competence of those "old" people (ca. 40-55) is nearly as good as it is today for this age bracket, which is not unreasonable. (Nutrition might have played a major role as well in this regard.) At any rate, failing to take this aspect into account is clearly non-trivial.
 
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
An important aspect this study did not address is the age of people who died in each case.

Data from CDC supports my original post that the two diseases have little in common regarding mortality.

Here is a direct quote from a CDC report* about mortality in the 1918-19 flu :

"Mortality was high in people younger than 5 years old, 20-40 years old, and 65 years and older. The high mortality in healthy people, including those in the 20-40 year age group, was a unique feature of this pandemic."

end quote.

There is little doubt that no comparison can be made between the two pandemics. They are vastly different.

* https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html
 
Aug 20, 2020
1
0
10
Why would you write such an irresponsibly sensational story about Covid? Don't you think we're all worried enough? I am cancelling my subscription to this site because of it. Disgusting
 
Feb 27, 2020
1
0
10
An important aspect this study did not address is the age of people who died in each case. The life expectancy of Americans in 1918 was about 55 years. It is now pushing 80. (For women, it is ca. 3-5 years longer in both cases.) Of course there are differences in ethnic groups, but this single aspect of the study would seem to render the conclusions questionable at best.

If SARS-CoV-2 was spreading in 1918 New York City, the death rate would likely have been an order of magnitude less than it is today, assuming immune competence of those "old" people (ca. 40-55) is nearly as good as it is today for this age bracket, which is not unreasonable. (Nutrition might have played a major role as well in this regard.) At any rate, failing to take this aspect into account is clearly non-trivial.
I take issue with your major assumption that a 55 year-old person in America in 1918 was as healthy as a 55 year-old person today. As you noted, their life expectancy was 25 years less than ours is today. There are valid medical reasons for that. Therefore a 55 year-old then would be much more susceptible to dying from COVID-19 than a 55 year-old today.
 
Apr 12, 2020
50
13
55
  • Like
Reactions: abrogard
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
I take issue with your major assumption that a 55 year-old person in America in 1918 was as healthy as a 55 year-old person today.
I agree with this likely assessment that immune systems may have been less capable in 1918, and specifically noted that in post # 2 that ": (....assuming immune competence of those "old" people (ca. 40-55) is nearly as good as it is today.... " and "Nutrition might have played a major role as well in this regard.")

However, you failed (for some reason) to note from post # 3 the CDC data from the 1918-19 flu epidemic, and repeated below :

"Mortality was high in people younger than 5 years old, 20-40 years old, and 65 years and older. The high mortality in healthy people, including those in the 20-40 year age group, was a unique feature of this pandemic."

This is clearly very different from the current pandemic, where older people are most at risk,, and it seems unlikely to be due to poor nutrition, but cannot be ruled out. No further replies to such commentary will be made.
 
Aug 20, 2020
1
0
0
An important aspect this study did not address is the age of people who died in each case. The life expectancy of Americans in 1918 was about 55 years. It is now pushing 80. (For women, it is ca. 3-5 years longer in both cases.) Of course there are differences in ethnic groups, but this single aspect of the study would seem to render the conclusions questionable at best.

If SARS-CoV-2 was spreading in 1918 New York City, the death rate would likely have been an order of magnitude less than it is today, assuming immune competence of those "old" people (ca. 40-55) is nearly as good as it is today for this age bracket, which is not unreasonable. (Nutrition might have played a major role as well in this regard.) At any rate, failing to take this aspect into account is clearly non-trivial.



The 1918 pandemic is considered unusual in so far as the mortality for older individuals was relatively low (stressing the world "relative"). It has been assumed that the older population had been exposed to an earlier cross-reactive strain of flu that the younger generation hadn't seen. The same is true for the h1n1 flu pandemic of 2009 - where those born before 1957 were somewhat protected, most likely because they had been exposed to a h1n1 variant that had been circulating prior to appearance of the asian flu in the late '50s.
 
Aug 20, 2020
1
1
15
According to Arthur Firstenberg in his book "The Invisible Rainbow" the U.S. Military tried in vain to infect healthy volunteers with 'Spanish Flu'.
Their methods included coughing in the faces of the volunteers (by the 'infected victims') & material was transferred directly from those suffering from this 'Flu' to the volunteers (nose to nose, throat to throat) more than once & 20 c.c. of blood from 5 sick donors were mixed and injected into each volunteer.
"None of them took sick in any way"
Mucous material from the upper respiratory tract was taken from the sick, filtered through Mandler filters and injected into 10 volunteers ; none took sick. The conclusion - it was not infectious/contagious.

Face masks, quarantine & social distancing were widespread but apparently of no use.

Indeed, the disease spread impossibly fast - more rapidly than persons could travel.

As I understand it , The 4 Koch postulates have not been satisfied with respect to Covid-19; has anyone actually shown /proven that Covid-19 is infectious? The Covid-19 'virus' has not apparently been isolated/purified.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chem721
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
has anyone actually shown /proven that Covid-19 is infectious?

The whole reason for employing trackers is to trace those who were in contact with COVID-19 positive people who may be spreading the disease. It is highly unlikely they would be spending such an effort on that alone if it were not infectious, to say nothing of the billions being spent on vaccine research and trials. Make no mistake here, it is very infectious. Read on.

Recent reports from mink farms in the Netherlands indicate the virus can be transmitted from humans to mink and back to humans again.* Reports indicate 100s of thousands of mink have been culled because they were infected with the virus. Lab data indicate that ferrets** are also serious targets, so likely are all members of the weasel family. There is no doubt about the infectiousness of this virus.

I am amazed about the story with the Army trying to give the flu infection to "volunteers". One is compelled to wonder about their age, where they were born and raised etc. And how many were exposed? But definitely their age, and number tested. If they were 18-19 year olds, they were some of the least prone to symptoms. It was not, however, what one would call a scientific test, but it certainly sounds like serious challenges.

It is also important to appreciate that many of the people exposed to the flu pandemic were "survivors" of many viral infections through the years leading up to 1918. It has been shown in numerous cases were many populations that have been exposed to a variety of viruses do much better than those who shelter from them. It is likely that getting infected by minor viruses "exercises" the immune systems and preps it for nasty cases like this, and many that are much worse.


* https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2020/06/19/humans-may-have-caught-coronavirus-mink-thats-wake-up-call-study-infections-animals-researchers-say/


** https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30089-6/fulltext
 
Last edited:
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
After over 60 years of approving this drug, NOW they decide it's dangerous?
Aspirin is an approved drug, but you don't give it to hemophiliacs - people with bleeding disorders.

Drugs are approved for specific conditions, and may not be appropriate for others.

That is why "off-label" use can be troublesome, like with hydroxychloroquine treating COVID-19 . It is not a useful treatment and can cause major problems, which was proven in real use.
 
Last edited:
Apr 12, 2020
50
13
55
Medical FRAUD is being perpetrated from the EMS death certificate filings to the hospital filings of deaths by SARS COV2, which clearly implicates bad record keeping and bad testing practices with test kits that can't possibly be accurate when the virus is in constant mutation. It is for these reasons and many more that the Trump Administration stopped the CDC and WHO counts that were hyper inflating the numbers of SARS COV2 deaths.
This is what you are looking for https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0Y0f0Zmv-5JlTUiXZZENzAE0yElEA1iB9710UGtFLFdZLCD2_79al3AcE
 

SHaines

Administrator
Staff member
Nov 12, 2019
55
70
630
Why would you write such an irresponsibly sensational story about Covid? Don't you think we're all worried enough? I am cancelling my subscription to this site because of it. Disgusting
I appreciate where you're coming from and am sorry to see you go. However, this pandemic isn't likely to be solved by a single medication that just removes it from the landscape (though that would be fantastic). If we want to start seeing genuine improvement in managing the pandemic, people need to be informed about all aspects of it, including the threat.

It's possible for a thing to be frightening or "sensational," but also true. It's also possible the coronavirus won't hit those numbers. What's important is for people to stay informed and to take the pandemic seriously so we can all work together to do things we have real data to show are beneficial:

  • Social distancing
  • Frequent hand washing
  • Masks to reduce the risk of spread from one person to others
If we only published articles that make people feel good, I personally feel like that would be a disservice to the community. We want to be a place where people can get the latest info, even if that info isn't reassuring. It can definitely be a fine line, but we do our best to walk it effectively. I'm sorry to hear you feel we missed the mark.
 
Last edited:
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
Because how else to you sell a virus with a 97 to 99% recovery rate to the public over these many months.
It is clearly apparent to experts in virology and epidemiology that COVID-19 is a pandemic. To be certain, you don't even need to be an expert to know this. This disease is also known to be caused by SARS-CoV-2, a virus which is a lethal infectious agent. It is also closely related to the original SARS virus that resulted in a mortality rate of ca. 10%., and to the MERS virus that resulted in a mortality rate of ca. 30%. While the current mortality rate is lower, it is still capable of killing millions of people without an effective treatment, such as a vaccine. Most of us believe that allowing millions of people to die, when actions can be made to prevent their deaths, is not acceptable.

Moreover, the virus is constantly mutating. Its continuous replication in humans around the world could lead to a more lethal strain of the virus, killing millions more. It is not wise to take a cavalier attitude to such deadly threats. The better idea is to listen to the experts, most of them learned scientists who almost certainly have reasoned the best course of action based on our developing knowledge of this virus, and past viral infections. As most of us have seen, this is a strange virus, and its potential future threat as it continues to replicate in humans, and some animals, should not be taken lightly.
 
Last edited:
Apr 12, 2020
50
13
55
It is clearly apparent to experts in virology and epidemiology that COVID-19 is a pandemic. To be certain, you don't even need to be an expert to know this. This disease is also known to be caused by SARS-CoV-2, a virus which is a lethal infectious agent. It is also closely related to the original SARs virus that resulted in a mortality rate of ca. 10%. While the current mortality rate is lower, it is still capable of killing millions of people without an effective treatment, such as a vaccine. Most of us believe that allowing millions of people to die, when actions can be made to prevent their deaths, is not acceptable.

Moreover, the virus is constantly mutating. Its continuous replication in humans around the world could lead to a more lethal strain of the virus, killing millions more. It is not wise to take a cavalier attitude to such deadly threats. The better idea is to listen to the experts, most of them learned scientists who almost certainly have reasoned the best course of action based on our developing knowledge of this virus, and past viral infections. As most of us have seen, this is a strange virus, and its potential future threat as it continues to replicate in humans, and some animals, should not be taken lightly.
You're correct Chem, one doesn't need to be an expert one just needs to follow the numbers and the these United States it is only threatening 1% of the population after 6 months (not even meeting the CDC's definition of pandemic) currently with 183,653 deaths but an amazing 3,313,861 in recoveries that the news simply doesn't focus on because if it bleeds it reads. Also it is the experts that stated the fact that it does have a 97 to 99% recovery rate.

Now consider this, after six months of the COVID-19 pandemic, a body of scientific work is emerging that shows our immune system is capable of remembering COVID-19 and producing a lasting immunity.

This immunology work also supports the theory of cross-protection, whereby the body can mount a timely and appropriate defense on the simple inference that Sars-CoV-2 is a lot like other coronaviruses.

Over the course of the pandemic, medical fears have been shaped as much by what the future holds in terms of second waves and mutations during the cold of winter, as by what has been happening in the world at any particular moment.

However, studies both peer-reviewed and not, are seeing positive changes in the human innate immune response to COVID-19 that suggest the diseases’ days of unfettered infection are numbered.

For example, in one peer reviewed study from Nature, immunologists in Singapore studied the cellular memory of T-cells, an important immune cell that weaponizes other immune responses in addition to tracking and eliminating pathogens on their own.


The researchers found that:

  • People with or recovering from COVID-19 displayed immediate memory T-cell activation to the virus’ proteins.
  • People with an infection history—going back as far as 17 years—of SARS-CoV-1 which emerged in China around 2002-2003, had long-lasting memory T-cell responses that ”displayed robust cross-reactivity to the N protein of SARS-CoV-2.”
  • And, perhaps most interesting, SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T-cell activation was found “in individuals with no history of SARS, COVID-19 or contact with individuals who had SARS and/or COVID-19.”
The last point is certainly enough to give us hope. And yet more positive research emerges.

Another study, this one not yet peer-reviewed, found that the response of antibodies—one of the primary classes of immune cells used to defend against pathogens—stayed active in saliva up to 115 days after the onset of symptoms in COVID-19 patients.

While antibody and T-cell responses in the blood have been extensively studied, this work, published in the preprint publication, has been one of the first to look at responses in mucus cells. The scientists note this is an important area of research since the virus infects in the upper respiratory tract.

“The immune response is doing exactly what we would expect it to,” Gommerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto who worked on the study, told CNN. “At least at about four months, which is, as far as, most of us can measure at this point in the pandemic.”

Work on yet another kind of immune cell, the ‘helper’ T-cell as opposed to the ‘killer’ T-cell, was completed earlier in the year when several studies published in Nature and Sciencefound that the helpers could also, more than half the time, identify COVID-19 and sound the alarm, and that these helpers were present in patients that had never been exposed to COVID-19.

The evidence of re-infection is, at this point, non-existent, which suggests humanity’s collective immune system is working well to combat it.

“So that is all good news,” Gommerman said. ”That means that people who are infected with this novel coronavirus should have the capacity to mount what’s called a memory immune response to protect themselves against infection.”

Heck, even world wide there is only 829,666 deaths compared to influenza to be 500,000 deaths globally last year. We will possibly not see a million deaths from this but most certainly not in the States. I stand behind my comment.
 
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
Heck, even world wide there is only 829,666 deaths compared to influenza to be 500,000 deaths globally last year. We will possibly not see a million deaths from this but most certainly not in the States. I stand behind my comment.
Since almost the whole world is or was locking everyone down and doing everything to stop it, just about everybody else stands behind a totally different notion of the disease, and the unknowns it entails. And clearly still do.

Standing behind some early suppositions based on very limited data, and lacking any knowledge of where this virus is headed offers no proof of anything. It is merely an opinion on the course of the disease at this point. Many of the claims made by those who downplay its significant threat hinge on hope, which is not a good strategy for dealing with a deadly disease with unknown potential.

As noted before, most of the world does not accept millions of deaths from the disease, which would have occurred without the drastic measures taken already, an aspect not reflected in many optimistic analyses. The notion that "only 829,666 deaths" (more by now) of course does not take this into account for obvious reasons - it doesn't fit their narrative. Doubtless had the disease been allowed to spread unfettered, those numbers would be in the millions. And this remains today the opinion of experts, like it or not.

Those who profess to a lack of concern for the fatalities also do not note the morbidity, which is also significant. Millions will likely suffer life-long afflictions, many severe, after surviving the disease. There is little point in debating these issues. I will stand with the vast majority of scientists and insist that this disease needs to be stopped ASAP.

Clearly the minority opinion in this regard is severely limited in number, as proven by the global response to stopping it.
 
Last edited:
Apr 12, 2020
50
13
55
Since almost the whole world is or was locking everyone down and doing everything to stop it, just about everybody else stands behind a totally different notion of the disease, and the unknowns it entails. And clearly still do.

Standing behind some early suppositions based on very limited data, and lacking any knowledge of where this virus is headed offers no proof of anything. It is merely an opinion on the course of the disease at this point. Many of the claims made by those who downplay its significant threat hinge on hope, which is not a good strategy for dealing with a deadly disease with unknown potential.

As noted before, most of the world does not accept millions of deaths from the disease, which would have occurred without the drastic measures taken already, an aspect not reflected in many optimistic analyses. The notion that "only 829,666 deaths" (more by now) of course does not take this into account for obvious reasons - it doesn't fit their narrative. Doubtless had the disease been allowed to spread unfettered, those numbers would be in the millions. And this remains today the opinion of experts, like it or not.

Those who profess to a lack of concern for the fatalities also do not note the morbidity, which is also significant. Millions will likely suffer life-long afflictions, many severe, after surviving the disease. There is little point in debating these issues. I will stand with the vast majority of scientists and insist that this disease needs to be stopped ASAP.

Clearly the minority opinion in this regard is severely limited in number, as proven by the global response to stopping it.
The 829,666 deaths was current when I posted 833.207 is what it is as of now. It is clear you have no real understanding of what this is all about, but you are correct this isnt a debate and the scientist you stand with ...well you have no proof they are the majority or you would have cited it. With that in mind you have cited next to nothing if anything unlike me who has. See son I do not debate I state facts so I understand why you do not wish to debate me. You should have to even engaged me because I do know my **** over this. I am saddened for the deaths but if our governments were to be honest with us then it would not be the problem it is and would probably not even be on anyone's radar at 1%. I celebrate tho the millions that have survived that you seem to have no clue about. Go hide your head.
 
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
The 829,666 deaths was current when I posted 833.207 is what it is as of now. It is clear you have no real understanding of what this is all about,
There no desire on my part to debate you precisely because of statements like the above.

And here is why I have a "real understanding of what this is all about:"

Once again you fail to note that these numbers, approaching 1 million fatalities, result from a major lock down to contain the virus, and does nothing to address what would have happened without it. You are quoting from articles I have read or am aware of, but none directly address or prove anything about the issues I have mentioned - the need for continued containment which most of the world is locked into. You may not be, but billions of others are. Something tells me it is for a very good reason, one that you have no real understanding of.

That is the issue that you seem to deny when you start quoting flu virus statistics with this virus, and telling us it's not so bad after all. But again, the case numbers for mortality and morbidity is the result of massive containment efforts. When you use such approaches to debating, it is not a debate with you, but a lecture on your view of things. No time for that.

Simply put, and without doubt, the whole world is fighting this virus and you are hoping that everything will work out fine. Again, hope is not a rational strategy for controlling a lethal infectious disease. And my doctorate in biochemistry has more than adequately prepared me for debating these issues. There is simply insufficient time to deal with all of the trivial aspects, none of which are remotely definitive. Convincing people of the need for taking drastic actions is more important to me than endless debates that go nowhere fast. And this one was apparent from the get, and now it is over.

If you want to express your brilliance in a way that might be acceptable, respond to my thread on another virus, and show us what you have. It is related - another retrovirus:

 
Apr 12, 2020
50
13
55
There no desire on my part to debate you precisely because of statements like the above.

And here is why I have a "real understanding of what this is all about:"

Once again you fail to note that these numbers, approaching 1 million fatalities, result from a major lock down to contain the virus, and does nothing to address what would have happened without it. You are quoting from articles I have read or am aware of, but none directly address or prove anything about the issues I have mentioned - the need for continued containment which most of the world is locked into. You may not be, but billions of others are. Something tells me it is for a very good reason, one that you have no real understanding of.

That is the issue that you seem to deny when you start quoting flu virus statistics with this virus, and telling us it's not so bad after all. But again, the case numbers for mortality and morbidity is the result of massive containment efforts. When you use such approaches to debating, it is not a debate with you, but a lecture on your view of things. No time for that.

Simply put, and without doubt, the whole world is fighting this virus and you are hoping that everything will work out fine. Again, hope is not a rational strategy for controlling a lethal infectious disease. And my doctorate in biochemistry has more than adequately prepared me for debating these issues. There is simply insufficient time to deal with all of the trivial aspects, none of which are remotely definitive. Convincing people of the need for taking drastic actions is more important to me than endless debates that go nowhere fast. And this one was apparent from the get, and now it is over.

If you want to express your brilliance in a way that might be acceptable, respond to my thread on another virus, and show us what you have. It is related - another retrovirus:

You called me out, I have no wish to follow you like you have followed me, nuts son I am still waiting for any brilliance from you period. There is no debate period (I do not debate I post real facts not any view of my own have you linked anything like I have?) as you have yet to debunk anything I have sited. This is not being beat because of lock down it simply has not presented itself to be a real threat and the world is being held at bay from a virus that has not even reached 1% world wide and has a 97 to 99% recovery rate. What a joke. Your right , you have no desire to "debate" for the quote you chose exactly "you have no real understanding what this is about".
 
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
This is not being beat because of lock down it simply has not presented itself to be a real threat and the world is being held at bay from a virus that has not even reached 1% world wide and has a 97 to 99% recovery rate.
Another in a string of classics :

"it simply has not presented itself to be a real threat" BECAUSE of the lock down. Wow!

And your noted "recovery rate" still suggests that everyone is all better, when morbidity is horrific for many survivors.

There is no need to debunk anything you post. What is real need not be debated as it is small part of a developing story, the rest (like your take on the pandemic) is self-debunking. Glad that you have run up the white flag so we don't have to read anymore of this.

And I can't blame you for ignoring the post on HIV. I wouldn't have ventured a guess either. Clearly not up you alley since that is real science, not observations that can be "modeled" as anyone sees fit, hoping that some people will buy into. Now there you have some cause for hope without it being a bad strategy. If in doubt, check out that famous quote from P.T. Barnum.

 
Apr 12, 2020
50
13
55
Another in a string of classics :

"it simply has not presented itself to be a real threat" BECAUSE of the lock down. Wow!

And your noted "recovery rate" still suggests that everyone is all better, when morbidity is horrific for many survivors.

There is no need to debunk anything you post. What is real need not be debated as it is small part of a developing story, the rest (like your take on the pandemic) is self-debunking. Glad that you have run up the white flag so we don't have to read anymore of this.

And I can't blame you for ignoring the post on HIV. I wouldn't have ventured a guess either. Clearly not up you alley since that is real science, not observations that can be "modeled" as anyone sees fit, hoping that some people will buy into. Now there you have some cause for hope without it being a bad strategy. If in doubt, check out that famous quote from P.T. Barnum.
Your still communicating with me? You lead me to believe you were done. your right what is real is not debated and it why I said I do not debate, but you on the other hand as I have seen pretty much looks to engage EVERYONE and bless them with you presence. There is no need to debunk me is exactly what a person says that cannot debunk someone, or do you not know logical fallacies. Also another logical fallacy is inserting words that are not said or implied into someones mouth to claim a false victory. I will give you this , you do like to argue, but I have no time for trolls or children so I am done...I am no longer entertaining you but you may have the last word because your psykhe build up will urge you to have it. I will simply celebrate the millions upon millions that have survived as opposed to the hundreds of thousands that have passed away rest their souls, you will always see the positive from me but you keep up with the negative.Bye bye now...
 
Jul 27, 2020
308
47
230
Bye bye now...
My last post was not a debate. It was statements of facts, and setting the record straight. There was nothing at all related to any debate, which is what I have ended. Challenging misleading information is a welcome pursuit for me. The white flag flies again, never to be lowered, we hope.

Happy to repeat one of your comments : Bye, bye now.,,
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY