Not to downplay things but...
Fatality rate is "only" 3% thus far (much less than SARS which was around 15%) and has primarily been those elderly with underlying health issues. Transmission is similar to the common cold but with a longer incubation period.
We don't know the fatality rate on this one yet. But the number of people recovered is currently less than the number of people who have died. Also 3% fatality rate is higher than spanish influenza which was only 2.5 or so and that killed 1/3 of the worlds population.
You are making an apples to oranges comparison. Fatality rate in the context I am speaking of is the percent of people who die out of those who contract the virus, not the overall percent of the global population who dies. For spanish influenza, that number was 10% to 20%. For coronavirus, it stands at about 2-3% currently.
In other words, spanish influenza killed 10-20% of those infected which equated to 2-3% of the entire world population (infection rate was around 33%, not fatality rate). Coronavirus appears to kill 2-3% of those infected (though that's a preliminary number) but what the overall effect on world population will be will depend on infection rate.
We wont know the kill rate until a month after it spreads outside of china. Being a bio weapon grade infection its probably going to be fairly deadly. Deadly enough to cause a stock market crash and a lot of panic which by itself is enough to be a pain in the ass.
Bio weapons, yes but that doesn't mean viruses necessarily. To be sure, research has been done but rational actors long ago came to the conclusion that a virus as a weapon is pretty stupid as you have no way to contain it, at least not if it is very effective. Bacteria based weapons are more likely but biological weapons in general aren't very good in terms of achieving military goals or are at least less useful than more conventional weapons except as perhaps a weapon of terror.
In any case, what is the evidence that this particular virus is not natural? It seems to follow a line of similar viruses that have developed over the decades. Maybe they are all weapons but to what end? Even this one seems a very poor choice for a weapon. Many people likely have mild or no symptoms, potentially increasing its spread but wouldn't you want to be able to easily contain a weapon? It's also not nearly as deadly as other bio weapon choices would be. Or at least that's what the evidence suggests so far.
Take extra Vitamin C. Our bodies can at least try. Our immune system can fight so many things to an extent. One of the problems is that many people are not healthy enough to handle germs and everything. Yes, this is a specific situation that is deadlier. I'm not denying how contagious this Corona Virus is.
I don't even have anything to add to this absolute fucking potential disaster.
You should try to though because the question remains: is it really a disaster? Who knows? We really should all know if it is a disaster. We'd appreciate it. I'd appreciate and I'm sure as hell that the Chinese Mainlanders would appreciate it.
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation, and Liberty. We are a peaceful and non-violent movement that sees information as being held back by corrupt forces in the private sector and government. Our Mission.
Claims Trump isn't going to basically landslide election.
Believes Bernie Sanders is going to be president.
Doesn't understand this makes them even dumber than a Norwegian underwater basket weaving image board.
Its the lack of self awareness that is most troublesome with these kinds of people.
Not to downplay things but...
Fatality rate is "only" 3% thus far (much less than SARS which was around 15%) and has primarily been those elderly with underlying health issues. Transmission is similar to the common cold but with a longer incubation period.
We don't know the fatality rate on this one yet. But the number of people recovered is currently less than the number of people who have died. Also 3% fatality rate is higher than spanish influenza which was only 2.5 or so and that killed 1/3 of the worlds population.
You are making an apples to oranges comparison. Fatality rate in the context I am speaking of is the percent of people who die out of those who contract the virus, not the overall percent of the global population who dies. For spanish influenza, that number was 10% to 20%. For coronavirus, it stands at about 2-3% currently.
In other words, spanish influenza killed 10-20% of those infected which equated to 2-3% of the entire world population (infection rate was around 33%, not fatality rate). Coronavirus appears to kill 2-3% of those infected (though that's a preliminary number) but what the overall effect on world population will be will depend on infection rate.
We wont know the kill rate until a month after it spreads outside of china. Being a bio weapon grade infection its probably going to be fairly deadly. Deadly enough to cause a stock market crash and a lot of panic which by itself is enough to be a pain in the ass.
There's no real proof that this is a weapon.
What is the definition of or some examples of a "bio weapon grade infection" anyway?
I'm not convinced that man has or can yet make a virus more deadly and contagious than nature can.
Either way, time will tell.
We have had bio weapons for at least half a century now. The tech to modify viruses is pretty well documented I think.
Bio weapons, yes but that doesn't mean viruses necessarily. To be sure, research has been done but rational actors long ago came to the conclusion that a virus as a weapon is pretty stupid as you have no way to contain it, at least not if it is very effective. Bacteria based weapons are more likely but biological weapons in general aren't very good in terms of achieving military goals or are at least less useful than more conventional weapons except as perhaps a weapon of terror.
In any case, what is the evidence that this particular virus is not natural? It seems to follow a line of similar viruses that have developed over the decades. Maybe they are all weapons but to what end? Even this one seems a very poor choice for a weapon. Many people likely have mild or no symptoms, potentially increasing its spread but wouldn't you want to be able to easily contain a weapon? It's also not nearly as deadly as other bio weapon choices would be. Or at least that's what the evidence suggests so far.
Take extra Vitamin C. Our bodies can at least try. Our immune system can fight so many things to an extent. One of the problems is that many people are not healthy enough to handle germs and everything. Yes, this is a specific situation that is deadlier. I'm not denying how contagious this Corona Virus is.
Upvoted by @aagabriel for having similarities to the #informationwar tag, posts like this anyone can add the tag #informationwar so we can more easily find and upvote them! (by @aagabriel)
Ways you can help the @informationwar!
Shit, it is Resident Evil all over again!
4chan knows everything! WWG1WGA.
Its the lack of self awareness that is most troublesome with these kinds of people.
screenshotted
hehe this is so cringe.
By the way, landsliding an election is kind of impossible if he gets removed from office. So its good to know you thought he wasn't going to win.
What? I have no idea what this means. You're the one claiming there will be a "landslide", lol.