by Patrick ➕follow (55) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 41 - 48 of 48 Search these comments
mell saysDialisys patients, surely you must be jesting! "Perfect" group representing the avg. person, people who hardly go anywhere and who can croak at contact with any moderate to severe virus. I expect them to have low serum prevalence. Most studies around the world with a real (averaged) focus group done as early as spring 2020 arrived at anywhere from 20%-40%
Other recent studies in the US and state test dashboards are similar.
You have the answer... the early tests that you loved to reference with anywhere near 20-40% were wrong.
I'm pretty sure that for most of us, we know relatively few people that were infected.
Basically we're nowhere near peak infection, hospital overload, and deaths that would happen if the virus was allowed to spread freely.
Is this also a false study?
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2773576
It's funny how everybody is in on these conspiraci s and the orange prophet is the one to be believed.
Is this also a false study?
ThreeBays saysMeh, studies that fail to show
Don't let the facts get in the way of your truth.
There's still no exact known explanation as to why Japan, an aging, highly dense country, that didn't have much social distancing measures, had so few cases.
« First « Previous Comments 41 - 48 of 48 Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,193,346 comments by 13,877 users - GreaterNYCDude, mell, stereotomy online now