If not for media coverage, would you even know there was a global pandemic going on?
That is to say, have you seen any real-world evidence in your daily life that there is global pandemic going on?
Have you seen the carnage and devastation in your community? Have you seen the bodies pile up and watched as tons of people you know fell deeply ill?
Outside of the masks–which I’m now becoming convinced are required mainly to continually remind us that there is a DEADLY PANDEMIC–and the restrictions, have you see any evidence in your life that there is a pandemic?
Do you know lots of people that have gotten extremely sick and/or died due to Covid?
Imagine if there was no media, and you only got your news by word of mouth, would you know Covid existed?
I seriously doubt it.
I have had Covid–I tested positive and everything–and even I wouldn’t have known there was a unique “novel coronavirus” going around. I got it in September right as the weather started to change where I live, and if I didn’t know Covid existed would’ve just assumed it was a seasonal cold/flu. The only thing that I would’ve found unusual was losing my sense of smell and taste for about a week. But I probably would’ve just assumed it was part of the seasonal cold/flu.
Radio technology existed during the 1918 Flu Pandemic, but it was not widely available. All they had back then was telegraphs and newspapers. And yet everyone knew there was a global Flu Pandemic.
There was no media during the Black Plague of the 14th century, and yet everyone knew there was a Plague.
The point is, the proof of these past pandemics was self-evident. People back in those times didn’t need The Media to tell them there was a pandemic going on.
They saw the bodies piling up with their own eyes. They knew plenty of people who got seriously ill, and probably knew people who died.
The same is not true with Covid-19. If we were not constantly bombarded with media fear porn and propaganda, most people wouldn’t even know there was a novel virus going around.
…then governors like Cuomo and Newsom wouldn’t even have to ban Thanksgiving gatherings.
They wouldn’t have to force us to wear masks, force us to stay home, force restaurants to close down, force bars to close down, and force offices to close down.
Because if the virus was really that bad, we’d all be doing that stuff by choice.
If perfectly healthy young people were dropping like flies from coronavirus, then other perfectly healthy young people would hear about it and be scared shitless, and lock themselves down willingly.
All living creatures are naturally inclined towards self-preservation. We hear a loud bang, we jump and look around. We flinch when we think someone is going to punch us. When we’re thirsty, we seek water.
We take notice of our surroundings and instinctively react to any potential threats. If people truly perceived coronavirus as a mortal threat, they would react accordingly without any government coercion. Their survival mechanisms would’ve kicked in by now.
The fact that governments are ordering people to wear masks and stay home “for their own good” is on-its-face ridiculous. They claim they’re protecting us from ourselves, but most people are smart enough to realize that the coronavirus is not a major threat to them.
The very fact that they have to force us to wear masks and submit to “restrictions” is enough proof that the virus is not that dangerous.
My own thoughts on the virus, taking into account having had it in September, are basically that it does exist, but it is way overhyped by the media. If this would’ve happened in 2014, it would have been treated no differently than something like Swine Flu or SARS. We wouldn’t have shut the country down and it would not have dominated our lives for 8 months.
But since 2020 was an election year, it was treated differently than it otherwise would’ve been. So we had to live with the hysteria.
The election was 11 days ago, and while many of us thought the coronavirus (or at least coverage of it) would suddenly disappear after Election Day, the opposite has actually happened. Cases across the country are now spiking more than ever before, and states are going back further into lockdown (like Illinois, where I live):
This “third wave” probably began in early-mid October, but was exacerbated by Halloween Parties across the nation. Based on personal experience, lots of people got the virus at Halloween parties a couple weekends ago and that could partially explain why case counts are shooting higher with each passing day. But it doesn’t fully explain this third wave given that it began at least 14 days prior to Halloween.
Like the second “wave,” we’re not seeing a corresponding spike in deaths:
Now obviously we know the deaths peak after the cases do, but the second wave of cases, despite having far more confirmed cases than the first, did not really see a huge spike in deaths. It’s probably safe to assume the third wave won’t, either.
The reason is because of increased testing (on Friday there were a record 1.683 million tests conducted nationwide), which is mainly going to find mild or even asymptomatic cases in lower-risk age tiers:
You can see that hospitalizations in the second wave were about the same as hospitalizations in the first wave despite the second wave featuring more than double the cases of the first. This third wave dwarfs the prior two in terms of cases, but we’re not seeing a corresponding spike in hospitalizations. At least not yet. Hospitalizations are likely to keep going up and set this third wave apart from the prior two on the blue chart, but not by an amount that corresponds to the sharp increase in new cases. In other words, the blue chart is not going to look like the red chart.
If you think about it, this is all pretty obvious stuff. When tests are in limited supply, they’re going to be reserved for the worst cases/highest-risk individuals (generally one and the same). When testing expands, it will logically find more and more mild and asymptomatic cases. Those are the only people available to expand testing to. So hospitalizations will be largely the same despite the total case count increasing by a lot.
But my question is this: why does our COVID-19 chart look so different from traditional pandemic charts?
This is the 1918-19 Spanish Flu chart:
You can see the huge spike in October 1918, the rapid decline in November, and then a much smaller third wave in Jan/Feb. 1919. And then that was pretty much it. This is a more complete and modernized chart for the US:
The worst of it really only lasted about 3 months, plus the third wave which was over by April 1919. So really the Spanish Flu lasted about 6-7 months if you’re talking about the full brunt of it.
(Interestingly, the conventional wisdom is that the Spanish Flu was spread around the world by soldiers returning home from WWI, but the war ended on 11/11/1918 and the last of the US troops probably didn’t return back stateside for several months. It was all done by ship and there were several hundred thousand troops in Europe, so it took a long time. Maybe that explains the third wave, but there’s no way the returning US troops could’ve caused the second wave given that it peaked prior to or around Armistice Day.)
What I’m wondering, though, is why America’s COVID-19 chart looks so different from the traditional flu pandemic chart, e.g. the Spanish Flu chart above. Obviously they’re different viruses, but they’re both flu viruses so it’s not like they’re significantly different from one another in terms of how they spread.
There aren’t many good charts available for the 1957 Asian Flu, but this one I found shows a similarity to the Spanish Flu, albeit a far lower peak in deaths:
Spike in October 1957, peak in November, followed by a temporary decline until early 1958, then a second wave peaking in late February, and then that was it. In other words, similar to the Spanish Flu.
But COVID-19 is not like that in America. Our numbers just keep going up and up and up over time. And keep in mind that current conventional wisdom holds that “Patient Zero” for COVID-19 was identified on December 1, 2019. So it has lasted nearly a full year globally.
If you look at the chart comparing COVID-19 spread in different regions of the world, the numbers for Hubei province in China (where it originated) look remarkably similar to a traditional flu season chart:
Hubei is yellow. If the data is to be believed, virus deaths peaked in late February and were basically done by early April. China ex-Hubei was relatively unaffected. I know a lot of Americans assume China lied about their virus figures, and that the virus ravaged China far worse than they will admit. But what if China wasn’t fudging its numbers? What if Covid just isn’t that bad, and we’re just being idiots about it here in America? That’s kind of where I am on the matter now.
I do think China lied about its true virus figures to some extent, I really don’t believe the virus ravaged China all that badly. For instance, while China claims about 86k cases total, I’m not one of those people that believes the real number is like 50 million or something like that indicating outrageous lying by China. I think the real number is probably in the hundreds of thousands or maybe the low millions. But I do believe that China is largely over the virus by this point, and has been for a while.
Being a communist dictatorship, China may have actually been able to contain it far more effectively than the rest of the world. After all, in China, lockdown means lockdown. There are no exceptions. In America, we’ve had half-assed lockdowns. I’m sure China’s stay-at-home orders, travel restrictions and business closures were far more extensive and stringent than here in the US. And I guess it worked.
If you really think about the idea of a lockdown, it works in theory, but only if you can ensure that everyone actually stays locked down for real. If you could actually ensure nobody in America would leave their house for a month, you could beat the pandemic. Everyone who has it just has to stay home until they’re recovered. If you completely eliminate all contact between people who are not living in the same household, then you’ve basically contained the virus. After several weeks of not being able to spread from person to person, the virus will die out. Keep patients in the hospital until they’re fully recovered, quarantine all medical personnel, and you will beat the virus in basically a month. But that’s only if you do a real, full, no-exceptions lockdown with contact tracing.
America does not have the capability to do that. It is not something that fiercely independent and freedom-loving Americans are culturally willing to accept.
But China has both the capability (due to being a dictatorship) and the cultural willingness (collectivism) to do it. So to me it’s at least plausible that China was able to contain the virus and get past it relatively quickly.
Here is the traditional flu pandemic chart, which is very similar to the Spanish Flu chart:
This is what the COVID-19 chart would generally look like in virtually every country if they did not take significant “flatten the curve” measures. And that’s largely what China’s curve looks like. They didn’t “flatten the curve,” they just imposed extreme quarantine measures on Hubei Province and let the virus run its course there. And it largely did by the time April rolled around.
Steve Tsang, director of the China Institute at the U.K.’s SOAS University of London, told Newsweek: “China successfully contained the virus by imposing the strictest of lockdowns and keeping the lockdown going until it reduced local transmission to practically zero. It then enforced effective local lockdowns when new cases arose, and nearly cut itself off from foreign visitors for a very long time.” The outbreak is currently under control, he said.
Asked whether we can trust the case and death counts coming out of China, Tsang said no. “But that is beside the point. I have little doubt that China’s statistics on COVID-19 cases and death are unreliable and represent underrepointing, but in the overall scheme of things, with the kind of numbers in countries like the U.S., India or Brazil being what they are, Chinese statistics still give a rough idea of how China managed the virus over time.”Newsweek has contacted the National Health Commission of China for comment.
Tsang said China was partly able to implement measures due to its authoritarian society. No democracy in Europe or America managed to contain the virus, he said. “Other democracies, notably Taiwan and New Zealand adopted alternative approaches that are also successful,” said Tsang.
“The lockdown was stringently enforced in China, and some people who attempted to break it had the metal doors to their apartments welded,” he said. “So, yes, it was very effective but not at a price that people in democracies would be willing to pay.”
Again, whether you believe China’s figures or not, this was the scene in Wuhan in August:
This could be Chinese Communist Propaganda, but if it’s not it appears that China is long since over this thing.
Meanwhile in America, we did this:
Without “protective measures,” COVID-19 would’ve peaked, wreaked havoc, and then went away relatively quickly. But with “protective measures” it would delay and prolong the spread of the virus. Crucially, and this is what most people missed, the “experts” never promised the “flatten the curve” strategy would reduce the total number of cases in the country. It would only spread them out over a longer period of time. In other words, the choice was said to be between 15-20 million cases in a couple months, or 15-20 million cases over a year’s span, maybe longer.
So here’s my point: we’ve been in the midst of this pandemic since March. It’s been 8 months now. And we have not flattened the curve at all. We haven’t even hit the peak of the virus spread yet:
If you go by the blue line in the “flatten the curve” chart and assume our chart will eventually look like that, we’re not even at the halfway point yet. Our chart might ultimately look like this:
And we wouldn’t be out of this until maybe July, 2021 at the earliest.
Nor is it guaranteed our chart will even look like the blue line, which is what the “experts” promised us. What if we have simply delayed the time until we get the big spike? What if it ultimately looks like this:
It’s already starting to look that way. We’ve just been delaying the inevitable the whole time, it seems like–wasting 8 months and doing irreparable harm to not only the economy but the mental health of millions of people. All for nothing.
I think we’re getting the worst of both worlds here. We have been under half-assed lockdown for 8 months–absurdly allowing months on end of rioting and “protesting” as if the virus respects #SocialJustice–and it looked like we flattened the curve for a while, but then October hit and now it looks like we’re going parabolic anyway.
So: we’re not allowed to live and have fun, and we’re not stopping the spread of the virus. And we’ve tanked our economy. It literally could not be any worse.
Our half-assed lockdown didn’t work. Either you do a full, hardcore communist-style lockdown, or nothing at all. If you do a half-assed lockdown, all it will do is make the virus spread more slowly and, most importantly, prevent you from reaching any sort of herd immunity.
I went over herd immunity in a prior article, but the basic idea is this: a lot of people get the virus all at once, therefore those people all become immune at once, and the virus should quickly die out as it will not be able to spread from person to person.
Imagine you have 4 people living on an island, then you introduce a virus that infects one person, then eventually the other three. After they recover, they are immune. Then a fifth person arrives at the island, and that fifth person is infected with the virus. The virus cannot spread anymore via that fifth person, because the 4 people on the island are immune already. The virus will die out after that 5th person recovers from it, because the virus can no longer spread. All 5 people are now immune.
Then imagine you had that same island with 4 people, and you introduce the virus to one of them. You immediately quarantine the infected person, as well as the other three people, and under no circumstances allow them to come in contact with the others. You have quarantined all 4 people and you will keep them under quarantine until A. the person with the confirmed virus case recovers and is no longer contagious, and B. you have ensured that none of the other three have late-developing symptoms. You then lift the lockdown orders after several weeks and allow life to return to normal. In this lockdown scenario, you have prevented the virus from spreading beyond one person on the island. But you still remain vulnerable to transmission from outsiders who visit the island. So as long as the virus is still spreading elsewhere away from the island, you must maintain a travel ban on the outside world. Or at least make all visitors to the island quarantine for two weeks upon arrival.
The problem with the lockdown strategy is that the other three people are not immune to the virus. They’ve only avoided catching it for now, but they are still susceptible to catching it in the future.
And if you do a half-assed “honor system” lockdown, it’s probable that people will not follow it fully and the virus will still spread, albeit more slowly.
The problem with America’s half-assed lockdown is that the virus spreads too slowly to ever reach a level of herd immunity. If immunity lasts for 4 months, then the people who got it the earliest are now–8 months in to the pandemic–vulnerable to contracting it again. An August article tracking COVID-19 reinfections found at least 22 people who caught the virus twice, with an average interval (meaning days between first positive test and second positive test) of 78 days. Meaning immunity may not even last three months.
For herd immunity to work, people have to get it all at the same time. If they’re getting it gradually and slowly, then eventually immunity will wear off and you’ll be right back at square one: the first people to get it will get it again. That’s basically the strategy America is following right now, whether wittingly or unwittingly.
Now, I get that the point of the whole “flatten the curve” strategy was to make sure hospitals were not overrun. But would they ever have been? The virus is spiking right now and hospitals are not yet being overrun.
But even if they were being overrun now–as this CBS News article from Nov. 11 warns–then “flatten the curve” is still a failure. Arguably an even bigger failure. We’ve taken the “flatten the curve” path for 8 months and still hospitals are about to be overrun. So what the hell were the last 8 months for?
Meaning we were never going to be able to prevent hospitals from being overrun no matter which virus strategy we chose. It was always going to happen, it was just a matter of when. We’ve just wasted 8 months of our lives.
I understand that there are different degrees to hospitals being overrun–e.g. overrun by an excess of 50,000 patients vs. being overrun by an excess of 750,000 patients. But we have no idea how badly the hospitals would’ve been overrun had we simply accepted that herd immunity was our only realistic option from Day One. We have no reason to believe the projections of any of the “modelers” and “experts.” After all, these are the people that told us “flatten the curve” would work. And now it’s on the verge of failing.
I am assuming that once Biden takes office, he’ll make a big public show of implementing a 4-6 week lockdown or some “bold action” against the virus, and then after that the media will probably largely move on from it. It will no longer be politically useful to the Democratic Party, and will instead become a liability.
So maybe it’s kind of pointless for me to spend time talking about the virus given that it’s probably going to be done by March.
But still, I can’t get over the fact that we’ve wasted 8 months and gotten the worst of both worlds. America does not have the capability of implementing a successful lockdown, so we’ve been half-assing it for 8 months and getting absolutely nowhere.
Herd immunity is our species’ natural way of surviving viruses. It’s how we got through past flu pandemics in relatively short order.
But not this time: this time we convinced ourselves we could beat the virus. And we’ve failed spectacularly.
During the election campaign, Trump was promising a vaccine by the end of the year, and the media told us that was nonsense.
Pfizer’s CEO says the vaccine will be free for all American citizens. Wow!
It’s a miracle.
Biden won. So the virus is no longer politically advantageous for the Democrats; they can’t use it to attack Trump. In fact, COVID is now a liability for the Democrats–or at least it will be starting January 20, 2021.
Expect to see COVID-19 disappear in record time.
The vaccine will be touted as a miracle cure for COVID-19 it’ll be Mission Accomplished™, that’s all she wrote; that’s a wrap, folks.
NY Governor Andrew Cuomo, the self-righteous douchebag who runs the jurisdiction with the highest per-million Covid deaths on the planet, and who wrote a book celebrating himself for his supposed “leadership” during the Covid-19 Crisis, is now being investigated by the DoJ for under-reporting the number of nursing home Covid deaths–which, of course, were caused by his borderline-criminal decision to force them to accept Covid patients.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is requesting more data on COVID-19 deaths linked to New York nursing homes after receiving figures that indicate a significant under-count of deaths at publicly run nursing homes in the state.
The Justice Department’s civil division on Tuesday night requested from state officials data on deaths linked to New York’s more than 1,000 private nursing homes.
New York records provided in response to an August Justice Department inquiryindicated that a quarter of deaths in the state’s roughly two dozen public nursing homes weren’t disclosed to federal health officials, administration sources said.
New York indicated that about 400 residents of the state’s public facilities died from COVID-19, according to federal sources, who said that state facilities had only disclosed about 300 deaths to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In total, the New York Health Department publicly reports about 6,720 deaths from the serious respiratory bug in nursing homes and adult-care facilities. But the true scope of New York’s tragic toll in nursing homes is expected to be much higher.
Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo has angrily denied accusations that a March 25 state rule barring nursing homes from turning away coronavirus-positive patients contributed significantly to New York’s 33,000 COVID-19 deaths.
But it did. It obviously did. Coronavirus almost exclusively kills the elderly and infirm, and the Wiseguy Governor was apparently not Wise enough to understand that.
The media has been largely quiet about the resurgence of Covid-19 in Europe, as it undercuts their ability to single Trump out for his supposed unique incompetence. But for the past month or so, most of Europe has been in the midst of a “second wave” of the virus. Have a look at the chart for the UK:
Their second wave dwarfs the first one, and has been ongoing for over a month now.
In all five instances, the second wave has been much larger than the first. The deaths have lagged somewhat, or perhaps they won’t appear at all and this “second wave” will be shown to simply be a byproduct of increased testing.
But one country in Europe is having a much smaller “second wave” than the others:
First, it seemed as if COVID-19 might be a disease which afflicted only China. Then it erupted in Europe, followed soon after by the US. Then, during the norther hemisphere summer, the epicenter moved to South America. Now, it is very much back in Europe. Countries which locked down for weeks, with huge impact on their economy, such as Britain, Italy, Spain and France, have little show for their efforts except for horrendous GDP figures for the second quarter. Britain had the worst figures, with a 20.4 percent shrinkage, followed by France (-13.8), Italy (-12.4) and Germany (-9.7). The US, with a 9.5 percent shrinkage, looks relatively good.
No European or North American country can be said to have come out of the COVID-19 crisis well. All have suffered far higher numbers of cases and deaths than have Far Eastern countries — something which is becoming increasingly difficult to explain through government actions alone, given the severity of lockdowns in Europe. It may turn out there is another factor, such as some degree of immunity from pre-existing exposure to other coronaviruses. But as we go into the election, it is no longer fair to pick out the US as the class dunce, nor to blame it on Donald Trump. The US is coming out of COVID no worse than any European country — and in terms of keeping its economy intact, it has performed a little better.
So the lockdowns have been a complete and utter waste.
I am not an infectious disease expert. I am totally speculating here, so I could be completely wrong. But at this point I am basically convinced that, essentially, “Viruses are gonna virus” and there’s little we can do about them.
We have to let them run their course. I know it’s hard to accept, especially for powerful politicians and “scientists” who think they’re literally all-powerful gods. But they can’t stop a virus.
We have a flu vaccine, and yet people still get the flu every year. Tens of millions of people, in fact.
Most of the Western world has been under lockdown for seven months-plus, and yet the virus still spreads.
As much as the media and the “experts” decry the idea of herd immunity, I don’t see any other way to handle an infectious disease than herd immunity. A virus cannot spread if a decent chunk of the population is already immune to it. This means people have to get it and recover from it. A lot of the cases are going to be asymptomatic. Herd immunity is not as scary a term as it has been made out to be.
The problem with the lockdowns is that they simply prolong the inevitable. They drag the process out, and that’s bad because I’m assuming with Covid, people who had it previously are only immune for several months. After all, Covid is a coronavirus just like the flu and the common cold, and you do not get lifetime immunity from the flu and the cold when you get them once. It stands to reason that you will not have lifetime immunity from Covid-19. In fact, I’m sure some of the people who got it early this year have already lost immunity to it by this point. They can get it again.
A new virus is introduced into the population, and it spreads rapidly because nobody has immunity to it. But the more it spreads, the more people become immune to it. Eventually, enough people become immune to it that it can’t really spread anymore. It just makes sense. This is why I believe in the idea of herd immunity.
When your body is exposed to a virus or bacteria, it makes antibodies to fight off the infection. When you recover, your body keeps these antibodies. Your body will defend against another infection. This is what stopped the Zika virus outbreak in Brazil. Two years after the outbreak began, 63% of the population had had exposure to the virus. Researchers think the community reached the right level for herd immunity.
You might be thinking, “63%?! That’s 200 million Americans!”
It’s a fair point, but what’s the alternative? Lockdown Forever? Sorry, not happening.
And, like I said above, the lockdowns aren’t actually stopping the virus from spreading. They’re merely delaying and prolonging the spread of the virus. They’re just giving us the worst of both worlds.
We know lockdowns don’t stop the virus because they told us so from the very start.
Remember “flatten the curve”?
“Flatten the curve” was never supposed to defeat the virus, it was only meant to ensure we didn’t overload our hospitals with Covid patients all at once.
But for some reason, people are now under the impression that if we lock down for long enough, the virus will just magically disappear.
That was never the plan at the start. It just sort of became the plan once politicians started seeing case numbers go up and up and up. “Oh no, cases are increasing. Better keep the lockdown in place.”
WebMD’s article says we’d achieve Covid herd immunity with between 50-67% exposure:
When does a community reach herd immunity? It depends on the reproduction number, or R0. The R0 tells you the average number of people that a single person with the virus can infect if those people aren’t already immune. The higher the R0, the more people need to be resistant to reach herd immunity.
Researchers think that the R0 for COVID-19 is between 2 and 3. This means that one person can infect two to three other people. It also means 50% to 67% of the population would need to be resistant before herd immunity kicks in and the infection rates start to go down.
None of this is certain, however. All those numbers they’re throwing around are guesses. They have no idea what the R0 of Covid-19 is, nor do they know what the herd immunity threshold is.
It could be far lower than 50-67%.
But the moment you search the term “herd immunity” you are bombarded with “NO NO WRONG WRONG HERD IMMUNITY BAD BAD BAD!!!!” articles:
Herd immunity is our natural response to infectious diseases. How can it be “debunked” or a “fallacy”? It is literally our species’ natural defense mechanism against viruses.
For a simple example of how herd immunity naturally works, let’s assume the R0 is 3. I’m walking down the street in a crowded city and someone sneezes on me. I do my best to avoid it, but I still get the virus. I then infect 3 people, who in turn infect 9 people, who then infect 27 people, etc. Plus that guy who sneezed on me also infected two other people in addition to me, and they infected 6 other people, who then infected 18 additional people, which turns into 54 people, etc.
But what if I was already immune to the virus and I didn’t get it even when that guy sneezed on me? That’s 27 people who didn’t get the virus because I was immune to it.
In what possible way is any of this a “fallacy”? Herd immunity is logically and demonstrably true.
We want young, healthy people out there getting it and building up immunity, as crazy as it sounds.
It sounds counterintuitive, and lockdowns sound like common sense, but the more isolated we are, the more the virus will pick us off one-by-one. The more young, healthy people that get it, the more they will build up society’s herd immunity.
Yes, we should obviously be isolating the elderly and high-risk, but the faster the infection runs through the young and the healthy, the quicker society as a whole develops herd immunity.
But right now, it feels like people are getting it one-by-one due to social isolation measures and lockdowns.
So what is the herd immunity threshold? Is it 50%? 60%? 70%?
Some studies estimated that the actual number of cases including asymptomatic and mild cases could be 700 million to 1.4 billion people—or 11 to 21 percent of the global population of 6.8 billion at the time. The lower value of 700 million is more than the 500 million people estimated to have been infected by the Spanish flu pandemic. However, the Spanish flu infected a much higher proportion of the world population at the time, with the Spanish flu infecting an estimated 500 million people, which was roughly equivalent to a third of the world population at the time of the pandemic.
So, Swine Flu in 2009 petered out at between 11-21% of the global population.
The Spanish Flu of 1918 petered out at around 33% of the global population.
This is a chart that shows the major flu pandemics since the late 1800s, and what percentage of the world they infected:
The seasonal flu is between 5-15% for the H3N2 strain, and 3-11% for the H1N1 strain. Those are consistent figures, year after year after year. Why would we expect Covid-19 to be wildly different?
The 1889 flu pandemic and the Spanish flu were obviously very widespread, infecting as much as 60% of the world based on differing estimates.
But no flu pandemic since then has infected more than 20% of the world population. I think we should focus more on the more recent flu pandemics than the 1918 Spanish Flu, because there were many advances in modern medicine between 1918 and the 1957 Asian Flu.
1957 Asian Flu: 500 million+ cases, infected at least 17% of the world.
1968 Hong Kong Flu: 500 million+ cases, infected at least 14% of the world.
2009 Swine Flu: 700m-1.4 billion cases, infected at least 11-21% of the world.
Right now, the Coronavirus has infected only about 41 million people worldwide, at least that we know of. I’m sure there are other estimates out there showing the real total far higher.
But 41 million is nowhere close to past flu pandemic numbers. It’s not even one half of one percent of the world’s present population.
It’s been over 7 months just here in America since the virus arrived. It’s been nearly a year since it broke out in China, and already they’re throwing massive concerts in Wuhan, the supposed epicenter of the virus.
Either this virus is far less contagious than past flu pandemics, or we are simply delaying its inevitable rapid spread phase with all of our lockdowns and social isolation measures.
Remember, the Swine Flu of 2009 infected between 700 million-1.4 billion in a span of 20 months (Jan. 2009-Aug. 2010). That’s between 35-70 million new cases a month, a pace that completely blows Covid-19 away.
And while the world Coronavirus fatality rate is supposedly 2.7% (total deaths divided by total cases, via data found here), we already know that many of these deaths are erroneously attributed to Covid. The death rate is not 2.7%. That’s an inflated figure promoted by people who want to politicize the virus.
If pandemic history is anything to go by, this virus will not go away until it infects at around 1.4 billion people, which would equal 18% of the world population. Who knows how close it truly is to that figure (in other words, how many more people have been infected than the official totals show), but even if the true infection figures are 10x higher than the official data that means only 400 million people have been infected thus far worldwide. It means we still have hell of a long way to go.
I would love it if we could get through this without 1.4 billion people getting Covid. But if we’re being realistic about the whole thing, that’s not likely to happen. Why should this flu pandemic be different from those of the past?
We don’t even have to go by previous pandemics to get a sense of where the herd immunity threshold actually lies for Covid-19, because there are parts of the world where Covid-19 herd immunity has already been reached:
This thread from Twitter by Yinon Weiss does an excellent job explaining herd immunity, but essentially he looks at the prevalence rate of Covid antibodies in different places all around the world–Germany, Sweden, New York City, Iran, Northern Italy–and found that even in the worst-hit areas, they topped-out at 15-20% antibody presence.
This was the author’s conclusion:
Herd immunity is likely not 50-67%. It’s probably closer to 15-20%.
Even though that thread was from over 2 months ago, it still holds today. On October 9, the Chicago Tribune reported 20% antibody prevalence in Chicago. Official figures claim the city has had about 83k cases, but the 20% antibodies figure would indicate about 540,000 cases out of the population of 2.7 million.
We need to let this thing run its course while simultaneously taking steps to isolate and protect the elderly and high-risk. Nearly 80% of Covid deaths are people over the age of 65. We need to be protecting them, while letting everyone else develop herd immunity.
But, again, you can’t prolong the herd immunity phase, or else people will lose immunity after a few months. We are prolonging the spread of the virus and are risking entering a neverending cycle of the coronavirus where there is never a large enough portion of the population infected at any one time to translate into herd immunity.
We need to get over this idiotic attachment to the idea that only Magical Masks and All Powerful Politicians can save us from this deadly plague. It’s nonsense. Herd immunity is how the human race survives pandemics. It is our natural defense mechanism for them.
It went from “15 days to slow the spread” to “Guess we’re just going to have wear masks and socially distance forever…”
Nope. Nope nope nope. Not happening.
I have had Covid. It’s the flu.
And yet people are treating it like it’s the black plague. People will literally walk into the street to get around you if you’re walking down the sidewalk without a mask on.
People are driving their cars by themselves with masks on.
We have to work out with masks on for Pete’s sake.
Do not let this insanity become the “new normal.” Anyone who says the Covid restrictions are the “new normal” needs to be shipped straight to Gitmo.
Do not let them “normalize” putting all of us under essentially permanent house arrest
Do not let the Maskcucks win.
I remember in the years after the 2008 Financial Collapse, all the “smart people” and “experts” told us we’d just have to get used to the “new normal” of an extremely weak economy, because hey, if Obama couldn’t fix the economy, then obviously it was an unfixable problem. “Guess we’re going to have learn to live in an economy without manufacturing.”
Except all those manufacturing jobs didn’t disappear; they were shipped overseas. And the ruling class lined its pockets massively because of it.
Anytime they start throwing around the term “New normal,” you can be almost certain that what’s really taking place is a massive transfer of wealth, power or both.
They’re way smarter than us. Our small, right-wing brains simply cannot comprehend the rationale behind how masks work and theoretically stop the spread of Covid-19, the most dangerous virus in world history.
Of course, the helpful graphic says “minimize the number of times you take your mask off,” yet following their advice and putting your mask on after every bite of food is literally maximizing the number of times you take your mask off. Because you have to take it off to have another bite of your food. And then put it on again. And then take it off again. And then put it on again.
Over the past 6-7 months of Covid, lots of Democrats have come to believe that they’re Super Geniuses for telling everyone to wear a mask, as if it’s some extremely complex, high-level science. “Believe the SCIENCE, wear a mask! SCIENCE!” They now view the simple act of wearing a mask a sign of their own moral and intellectual superiority. They wear the masks because they Believe In Science, and they’re quite smug about reminding us of that.
But what about the science that says our natural propensity for constantly touching and fiddling with our masks might actually make wearing a mask more dangerous than not wearing one, because you’re bringing your dirty hands into contact with your face more often than you otherwise would?
On March 8 of this year, Anthony Fauci himself said that “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask” because a. you’re going to be fiddling with it and touching it which could inadvertently lead to infection, and b. they’re really only meant for medical patients and medical workers.
Around the same time, the US Surgeon General urged people to “STOP BUYING MASKS!” and not just because we needed to make sure there were enough for hospital workers: he said it’s because they don’t work.
Lots of people are under the mistaken impression that top government officials were initially telling people not to buy and wear masks solely because they wanted to avoid a shortage of masks for medical professionals. While both Fauci and the Surgeon General did mention that as a reason they were advising against masks, they both also went as far as to say wearing a mask is not going to make much of a difference in keeping you healthy.
As with just about everything the Democrats say nowadays, the “Believe in Science, Wear a Mask” propaganda is an inversion; in reality it’s little more than pseudoscience. The masks are for mentally reassuring the gullible, Fake News-Watching masses, not stopping the spread of the virus.