Danish study reveals Covid-19 20 times less deadly than WHO claims

originally posted by: chr0naut
The mortality statistics are supposed to be related to those who are known to be infected, not to other large unrelated numbers.

Tell that to the poster I was replying to.

I love how Russia Times article conveniently...doesn't even link to this "study."

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: chr0naut
The mortality statistics are supposed to be related to those who are known to be infected, not to other large unrelated numbers.

Tell that to the poster I was replying to.

Yeah, fair enough, but I value your contributions here more.

... and I was replying to the general 'tone' of a lot of posters here recently, more than specifically to you. Apologies. I was hoping that, by association, some of your credibility would attract others who may not read every post.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Isn't it funny how many of those ATS'ers who want military action against China because it lied about its numbers, are the same people who want to prove that damn near everyone's numbers are wrong, and/or that deny that COVID-19 is a problem.

Can you link a single post of anyone suggesting military action with China? If they did they are rather stupid..., but I think your hyperbole is kind of stupid...

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: trollz

Isn't it funny how many of those ATS'ers who want military action against China because it lied about its numbers, are the same people who want to prove that damn near everyone's numbers are wrong, and/or that deny that COVID-19 is a problem.

I suspect they couldn't even sit on a toilet the right way around.

Assuming that the numbers aren't perfectly correct, what do they actually tell us, and what should our leadership be doing with that information? - Ignoring it while bodies pile up from a bogus malady? - Or, acting on the information that we do have, to save as many as possible?

I think it's something to do with ....fear!

Two points...

1. RT.com is just stirring and being selective
2. If you traslate the study from Danish, as linked by the RT article it says...

Preliminary results from antibody testing must be taken with a number of caveats, the professor emphasizes.

Source referenced by RT

and

But blood donations are not representative of the entire population because they are generally healthier than the total population. - Therefore, the actual number infected throughout the Danish population may well be greater, says Henrik Ullum, who emphasizes that the figures are preliminary and must be read with caution.

The study is not worth much, it is not a proper representation of a populace.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

Isn't it funny how many of those ATS'ers who want military action against China because it lied about its numbers, are the same people who want to prove that damn near everyone's numbers are wrong, and/or that deny that COVID-19 is a problem.

Can you link a single post of anyone suggesting military action with China? If they did they are rather stupid..., but I think your hyperbole is kind of stupid...

Most of them get removed. There were two recent threads, both of which I recall you posting in, and which have now been deleted.

However, as requested, here's some of many that the mods seem to have missed:

link 1

link 2

link 3

Perhaps it wasn't hyperbole?

originally posted by: chr0naut

Perhaps it wasn't hyperbole?

2 were the same post... I also said if someone did say that then they are idiots, as to you hyperbole, I still see it as the same unless you want to join the two idiots too, and I don't think you are one or want to join, so is it hyperbole or not...lol

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

Perhaps it wasn't hyperbole?

2 were the same post... I also said if someone did say that then they are idiots, as to you hyperbole, I still see it as the same unless you want to join the two idiots too, and I don't think you are one or want to join, so is it hyperbole or not...lol

Yes, I should have double-checked the posts before committing it. However, if you go through the particular thread, you will find other posters who echoed the same sentiments. And like I said, similar posts and threads on the topic have been removed.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Yes, I should have double-checked the posts before committing it. However, if you go through the particular thread, you will find other posters who echoed the same sentiments. And like I said, similar posts and threads on the topic have been removed.

Do you think it is a common sentiment among Americans or a couple of people blowing steam? Suggesting using a nuke is a little over the top wouldn't ya think...lol

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

Yes, I should have double-checked the posts before committing it. However, if you go through the particular thread, you will find other posters who echoed the same sentiments. And like I said, similar posts and threads on the topic have been removed.

Do you think it is a common sentiment among Americans or a couple of people blowing steam? Suggesting using a nuke is a little over the top wouldn't ya think...lol

It would be very ill-advised, and is a minority viewpoint but there does seem to be a perception among many Americans that such carnage is morally defensible.

Like with recent drone strikes, and wars against Afganistan and Iraq. Someone (in the US) made a decision to take the lives of other human beings. Did the ends make it the morally and ethically right thing to do, or was it just another justification for murder, for political and economic ends?

It has happened before - US history.

originally posted by: chr0naut

It would be very ill-advised, and is a minority viewpoint but there does seem to be a perception among many Americans that such carnage is morally defensible.

Like with recent drone strikes, and wars against Afganistan and Iraq. Someone (in the US) made a decision to take the lives of other human beings. Did the ends make it the morally and ethically right thing to do, or was it just another justification for murder, for political and economic ends?

It has happened before - US history.

You can't go from 0 to 60 with this... No one is going to war with China or drop nukes on China... lol

We also like to dump a ton of sanctions on countries too, and there is a good argument that our sanctions are worst than our wars.

Killing Chins's economy by leaving them and going else where would be worth about 100 nukes in damage. America's capitalism made China what it is today, sorry to say, but we can say we brought 1 billion Chinese out of extreme poverty in the last 30 years.

We are reaching a point where China is too expensive so time to move on....

originally posted by: vonclod
The study is not worth much, it is not a proper representation of a populace.

It is RT abusing the study - the study itself was useful for what it tried to be.

The question was: Since we have demographic data for the blood donors and since we have demographic data for confirmed cases, we can compare the two groups. If we test blood donors blood, how well then does the numbers translate between the two groups.

In essence the study asked how many cases went unreported for every one that did get reported.

originally posted by: DupontDeux

originally posted by: vonclod
The study is not worth much, it is not a proper representation of a populace.

It is RT abusing the study - the study itself was useful for what it tried to be.

The question was: Since we have demographic data for the blood donors and since we have demographic data for confirmed cases, we can compare the two groups. If we test blood donors blood, how well then does the numbers translate between the two groups.

In essence the study asked how many cases went unreported for every one that did get reported.

And since the donors are healthier than the general populace, it could have even greater prevalence...

Tell me again what happens when the number of infected is up and the number of deaths stays the same?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

It would be very ill-advised, and is a minority viewpoint but there does seem to be a perception among many Americans that such carnage is morally defensible.

Like with recent drone strikes, and wars against Afganistan and Iraq. Someone (in the US) made a decision to take the lives of other human beings. Did the ends make it the morally and ethically right thing to do, or was it just another justification for murder, for political and economic ends?

It has happened before - US history.

You can't go from 0 to 60 with this... No one is going to war with China or drop nukes on China... lol

We also like to dump a ton of sanctions on countries too, and there is a good argument that our sanctions are worst than our wars.

Killing Chins's economy by leaving them and going else where would be worth about 100 nukes in damage. America's capitalism made China what it is today, sorry to say, but we can say we brought 1 billion Chinese out of extreme poverty in the last 30 years.

We are reaching a point where China is too expensive so time to move on....

So, in a war of economies, wouldn't the larger economy have advantage over the smaller? China's economy is now larger than the US's.

The only way the US could regain the upper hand is by being more business savvy and trading it's way back to number one. You don't win by throwing in your hand and refusing to play anymore, after the first hand.

Anyway, we have strayed far from the topic.

On comparing GDP China is smaller than the US. The EU used to be pushing towards the biggest, but since the UK left it has reduced somewhat (sad face).

In a war of economies size is secondary. What counts is economic diversity and social cohesion. Without access to the rich markets of the developed world, of which the US is the biggest, China fails. If the Chinese economy falters, then one of two things could happen. (1) The society breaks down because without economic growth the Chinese dictatorship would rapidly lose any mandate and popularity, and/or (2) China discovers a war to maintain national focus - say takes on Taiwan, or creates conflict in Vietnam, as they have done before. China has been building a military for something.

Without access to Chinese exports, the US would look somewhere else to produce the cheap tat they need. This will accelerate moves in India, for example, or some other country where labour is cheap.

a reply to: trollz

Just another nail in the coffin for this manufactured hoax crisis.

Not really the data for a number of reasons varies a lot from country to country.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: trollz

Just another nail in the coffin for this manufactured hoax crisis.

Not really the data for a number of reasons varies a lot from country to country.

Are you disputing that there are more infected people than we have confirmed cases for? Are you disputing that said unconfirmed cases that are not hospitalized and tested and who recover on their own lower the mortality rate for the virus?