If you're not a health expert

I was looking it up and the CDC said that variant dominated the 2014-15 flu season, so it wasn't novel in 2017. I could also be a smart aleck and say that trump wasn't all over the place lying about it during the 2017 flu season.

CDC: H3N2 dominates 2014-2015 flu season

https://www.healio.com/infectious-d...059c}/cdc-h3n2-dominates-2014-2015-flu-season

Yes so why after that did it go on to become the biggest killer in four decades in 2017? Also why was the Tamiflu vaccine so ineffective?
 
I do not remember ever claiming how many will die, but since you are confidently making the assertion I did, then give me a link to a post where I made the claim

can't tell you people apart......you all sound alike........blahblahblahblah.........just a droning hum from the left.......
 
Yes so why after that did it go on to become the biggest killer in four decades in 2017? Also why was the Tamiflu vaccine so ineffective?

I can't wait to see Christiecrite dance around those questions.

giphy.gif
 
If you actually READ my comments, you would realize that my posts were about trump, not the virus itself.

If you actually read little Thingy's dictatorial demand, you would realize that unless you're a health expert, you may not comment in any fashion.

If you're not a health expert or you haven't studied viruses or illness or pandemics thoroughly & extensively: please stop. You don't know anything.

Are you disobeying little Thingy's imperious instruction?

If so, then you must perforce be agreeing with moi. :D


philosopher-cat
 
The WHO data is based on incomplete and inconclusive estimates.

How inconclusive would you like? The WHO would have to be out by a factor of 50-100 to make this as harmless as seasonal flu. The mortality rate would have to be 0.04% - 0.08% instead of around 4%.

If that were the case there would be no problem. Unfortunately it ain't so.
 
How inconclusive would you like? The WHO would have to be out by a factor of 50-100 to make this as harmless as seasonal flu. The mortality rate would have to be 0.04% - 0.08% instead of around 4%.

So you say. Public-health scientists say the real death rate is probably lower than the current WHO estimates. U.S. health officials suggested in an article in the New England Journal of Medicine that the death rate could be well below 1%. Other estimates have ranged between 1% and 2%.

Yet you chose the parrot the highest estimated number you could find as if it was an established fact.

If that were the case there would be no problem. Unfortunately it ain't so.

If I'd said there was "no problem", you'd have a point.

Since I didn't, you don't.
 
Last edited:
U.S. health officials suggested in an article in the New England Journal of Medicine that the death rate could be well below 1%. Other estimates have ranged between 1% and 2%.

If the death rate was 1%, it would still be an order of magnitude deadlier than flu (for which, in any case, we have vaccines).

But pick whatever figure you like; I've had enough of your quibbling.
 
Older people with compromised immune systems caused by lung disease, kidney disease, heart disease, diabetes and obesity are
prone to less of a recovery rate from any virus. It is what it is. So, get healthy prior to contracting a virus. Viruses take time
for the body to heal itself.
 
Back
Top