The debate "Ebola Was More Dangerous Than Coronavirus Yet I Don't Remember the Economy Shutting Down" was started by
March 12, 2020, 2:47 pm.
103 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 69 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
jrardin12 posted 11 arguments, Impossible posted 1 argument, Paula posted 1 argument, debater_69 posted 1 argument, Nemiroff posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 20 arguments, historybuff posted 1 argument, Allirix posted 2 arguments, rhaegar posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
jrardin12, Impossible, jlwiza, sifat, Dazed_Confused, Paula, Joelm, glenn54, debater_69 and 94 visitors agree.
AnarchoCommunist, Kp, historybuff, tyler0300, niks, Allirix, akashmeka, tisya_aaa, rhaegar, Nemiroff, marnik98 and 58 visitors disagree.
i dont know where 100% death rate came from.
pandemic is an large epidemic with 100% death rate
Ebola was more deadly while corona is much faster as to how it spreads which makes it more lethal . particularly in developing nation's . As. a person who lives in a developing nation if it even reaches one of our slums because they are so densely populated we are done for .
yes, but ebola was an epidemy an coronavirus is pandemic
Well I am still not panicking yet.
heres the real killer of coronavirus, system overload. the hospital system. i grossly underestimated how much lethality a moderately damaging but highly infectious disease can do.
even if you get into a survivable car accident, you may die because of the Corona virus. there is no room, the doctors and nurses are infected, people are sharing invasive machinery. holy shit. im starting to panic.
even if 100% infectability is inevitable, we have to do whatever we can to delay the spread of this illness. we can treat everyone in turn, but we can't treat everyone at the same time. even reducing car accidents and flu cases is helpful.
staying out of hospitals and maintaining distancing is a must.
i agree, fear is bad. however, how do we proactively deal with the virus without accurate knowledge of how it spreads and how far it spread?
trying to judge the coverage is difficult, especially since the singular media we are referring to are many many entities with very different levels of quality ranging from new york times to infowars.... but let us not forget how this conversation started. trump and his cultists claiming this was no different if not less threatening then the flu and the coverage was causing the stockmarket to crash (as if closing down businesses was either wrong, or would cause no fiscal damage if that darned media would keep its mouth shut).
in a legal analogy, you dont need to go through a difficult trial if you can judge the initial accusation as meritless.
> do you believe that honest, objective coverage of a pandemic is fearmongering?
If it is genuinely fair and balanced objective coverage than no it is not fearmongering. But fair and balanced objective coverage isn't the same as honest, objective coverage. Truth can be intentionally or unintentionally selective or unbalanced, different pieces can be focused on more than others and that will change how an audience reacts.
I'm too worn out from all this to think about whether or not I think the way it was covered was balanced or not though. I still believe we shouldn't fear the virus, we should just act proactively to avoid the spread.
which is why accurate information is necessary, even if it causes panicky idiots panic. the rest of us need to know how to avoid/minimize this disease if we want to actually do some good, instead of being fooled into a false calm while people continue to die.
you say "crisis" as if you question if its a crisis.... but your complaint is that the crisis is so bad the safegaurds we did put in are too little.
which is it?
do you suggest we cut off food supplies too?
also, simply wipe down the boxes with a sanitizing wipe. not that difficult. its an airborne virus, as long as she stays home, simple wipedowns should be more than effective.
this virus is only scary if we dont do anything to control its spread. its quite simple to control if you stay informed and and use some common sense.
So during this "crises" I am wondering if we are being duped. Every day of last week I went to the supermarkets in my area and found that every day those stores are packed with people, can't even find a parking spot. I am wondering just how we are saving grandma? Coronavirus can stick and stay on cardboard and plastic for days, so if I am delivering my grandma groceries she still is at risk of catching Coronavirus. I don't see how closing everything except grocery stores is going to prevent the spread of Coronavirus because now grocery stores will be vulnerable.
i have a question regarding your view of the media coverage independent of any democratic connections.
do you believe that honest, objective coverage of a pandemic is fearmongering?
it is my belief that fearmongering involves exxaggeration with the intent to instill fear.
objective coverage of facts may instill fear (possibly justifiably), but the intent is to provide information, the fear is just an inevitable by product of scary facts.
it is also my opinion that although the media should not distort the fact to push fear, should not distort the facts to push calm. their job is to provide information, not artificial calm the population. leaders in government may need to control info to maintain order, but the press is supposed to be the counterbalance to that, not the accomplice.
its hard to not be in agreement with a flip flopper at some point. however considering your pattern of creating threads on subjects the day after trump tweets the exact same argument; i have a feeling the only reason you arent flipping with him is cause youve been pressured to consistently defend this position and lack trumps charisma to flip flop effortlessly.
still, no attempt on your part to examining the facts or numbers. just going on hunches and knee-jerk beliefs. i would welcome disagreement if it came with some substance.
Well rest at ease because right now I am not in agreement with Trump. Actually, you are probably more in agreement with him than I am.
btw, the trump cult is a regular criticism i level at jrardin. he routinely parrots the trump/fox narrative, and provides little evidence of ever questioning it. it was not meant in reference to you.
although a lack of equipment, or poor treatment in overcrowded 3rd world countries could very much spike the mortality rate.
it is definitely not 3-5% fatality rate, many people are untested. the problem isnt the fatality rate but the infection rate. even if it has a 0.1% fatality rate, 0.1% of every american is 330,000 dead in usa alone. if we were to not change any behavior, a near 100% infection rate is very possible.
if i may make a few corrections. the flu mutates frequently, i dont think immunity has anything to do with it. when a particularly nasty strain of the flu comes out, like the spanish flu, it kills millions.
the key differences between this coronavirus and the flu is:
1. coronavirus spreads for up to 2 weeks before symptoms are spread. this is probably the biggest threat. everybody is essentially typhoid Mary walking around spreading disease without even knowing it. when you finally realize you are sick, everyone around you is already infected.
2. new information shows it may be airborne. unlike the flu that can stay in the air for short periods and short distances, coronavirus is smaller, lighter, and can remain in the air longer and farther.
3. it appears to stay alive on surfaces up to twice as long but im not 100% sure about this info.
4. it is new. not an issue with immunity, but just alot of uncertainty on how to treatment and potential outcomes.
Okay my mind is changed. These measures aren't just to be cautious, we have a duty to the vulnerable to out them in place.
My belief was because the flu kills 32-170 people a day in America alone, if we were to suddenly track its movements we'd have a same panic. People would want similar social distancing measures.
I saw the freak out about the higher death rate as invalid because it's certainly not that high.
I didn't really care about the dem thing.
But now I realise, because this virus is new, no human has developed immunity so everyone is a potential carrier. The reason the flu isn't as big of a threat is because many many people have developed immunities over the generations the viruses have existed, plus we have vaccines now. All this creates a herd immunity that protects the vulnerable. That's not the case with the COVID19 because it's new, so we need to put in extra measures.
The death rate from the flu might be lowerable if we apply the same measures, but it wouldnt lower it much. Applying these measures to the flu would be like lowering speed limits to 30 km to reduce car fatalities. Yes it will certainly save lives, but many will still die and the impact on society wouldn't justify it.
Also Trump isn't my cult leader, lol? I literally said it's unpatriotic for anyone in the USA to support him. My reasoning had nothing to do with him.
Covid-19 is more infectious and more deadly than the flu. somewhere between 10 and 30 times more deadly. If left unchecked, it would likely infect most of the world and kill something like 3%-5% of the world's population.
If you think that taking action to prevent potentially hundreds of millions of deaths is "overly exaggerated" i can only assume you are incredibly biased, do not know the relevant information or choose to ignore reality.
your free to think whatever you want, however that you are choosing to simply believe what you want instead of what is real, and that you are actively choosing to ignore the numbers and other data.
someone can choose to believe there are 8 days in a week, that doesn't make their belief true.
the insane rate of spread is proving even more deadly. because everyone is getting sick at almost the same time, we may not have enough equipment to treat everyone. increasing the death rate independent of the virulence of the virus.
I still think it is overly exaggerated.
lmao, apparently today even trump acknowledged reality and said "this is a bad one, a very bad one," and recommended avoiding gatherings of 10 or more.
so much with overblown democratic conspiracy that he and his fake fox news have been pushing. what will you say now that your cult leader flipped?
and what was there any difference between the rate of spread of Coronavirus vs swine flu?
did you bother to actually compare the details? or are details irrelevant even you simply blindly parrot paritsan talking points without thinking?
I am just saying that nothing closed or stopped because of it. Schools didn't even shut down and it was affecting everyone under 65.
and what are you reminded about with swine flu? swine flu pandemic lasted nearly 2 years. we are only in month 2 of corona virus and its already everywhere.
add some numbers to whatever random disease you name next.
I was just reminded of the swine flu and this much mayham didn't occure.
why the all or nothing view?
flu is very contagious
this Corona virus is much more contagious
also, flu doesnt spread before symptoms show. thats huge.
No, because the flu is highly contagious, thousands of people die because of it, and we don't close everything down.
I agree. Capitalism is flawed
so you think closing public gatherings is not something we should do when faced with a highly contagious disease we have minimal information on?
Yeah, in the end no one is satisfied.
Everything we do before a pandemic is alarmist. Everything we do after is inadequate.
Apparently though, we don't need a vaccine if there is such a high recovery rate. I am not saying we shouldn't get one, but we should be able to function not just close schools, universities, ballgames, jobs etc. The old people barely do any of these activities anyway. I still think it isn't necessary to shut everything down, it is rediculous. Some of these places said they are shut down for a few weeks or months. My question is if Coronavirus is still taking lives and that time comes up, then what are they going to do?
Dems are using Coronavirus to try to take Trump down by fearmongering.
> Agree. But Media would blow it up for any leader, and an opposition has no duty to be a calming voice to stop them. And any patriotic American should want trump out. He's made the USA an international laughing stock. He embodies all the American stereotypes perfectly. A stupid, fat, unhealthy, selfish, narcissist with more money than sense. Anyone with respect for themselves or their country shouldn't want him as their leader. He's a demagogue that represents the US broken political system perfectly. Only 19% of the US population actually voted for him, yet he won, because y'all don't actually vote.
Coronavirus is less dangerous than Ebola.
> Don't agree. Ebola wasn't contagious until you are too sick to function. It also hit a region that has very little international access. Ebola was far less dangerous becuse you had no chance of getting it. The hazard was much higher for Ebola, but the risk was far far lower. Danger = risk*hazard, so Ebola wasn't as bad.
Coronavirus has a 97% recovery rate and is only affecting, for the most part, people in their 80s.
> The recovery rate is higher, so I don't agree. I agree it's worse for older people though and that's why we need to stop the spread. If we were this cautious for the flu we'd save far more lives too, but we're not because it's not something we actively fear.
Yes major sport organizations are closed down and the economy is taking a plunge for no reason and universities are shutting down.
> I wouldn't say no reason, but yeah I think if we decided to track any other coronavirus we had no vaccine for we'd have similar panic.
Just Stay Calm and Carry On. There is no need to fear except fear itself.
> Agree, it's good to be alert and precautionary, but we should also stay calm. It's possible that more people would suffer from economic activity halting than from everyone getting the coronavirus. The poor are hurt more than the rich. Smart rich people are probably loving this.
cmiiw, as i know ebola only spread in a handfull country which mostly is african that has no economic power at all. only a few dozens thousands of people get infectes. corona will infect 70% of human population. most dead cases is elderly thats why im worried for my parent.
and i would like to point out the constant conflation of media with democrats almost as a foregone conclusion. poor performance by the media, if that is the case, is seperate from the insistence of a conspiracy theory by a political party.
the reason im pressing the issue with you is that in reponse to jrardins opening post you responded with a blanket agreement.
his post involved.
1. dems are using coronavirus to take down trump.
2. major sporting events and other gatherings are shutting down for no reason but dem hype.
3. market is plunging for no reason but dem hype.
4. there is no need to fear.
i suspect you only agree with 4, but ive been unsuccessfully trying to get you to clarify this. furthermore, the disease is a threat to anyone's grandparents or pregnant women (fever in general can end a pregnancy). as potential unaffected carriers of a highly infectious disease, perhaps you are mistaken fear for concern and caution. as well as the information necessary to be properly cautious.
if some sensationalist actors act overly dramatic, is the entire medium guilty of it? im certain the papers simply criticized the response of the administration, not cried doomsday.
and regardless, most of the doomsday cries i did see were financial papers reporting a crash after it happened, not leading up to it. conspiracy theory may have some outlandish connontations, but it is a myth with no basis in reality spread simply because it is believable.
most mainstream media has been doing just what you suggest, with articles like "the government is downplaying the situation" and "we need more test kits". saying the Gov is doing abc, it should be doing efg.
The gov, however, is making stuff up like "we have 15 cases, that number will be going down" and claiming it will just "go away one day, like a miracle," how do you cover that without a sense of shock?!? when the government is denying reality, thats why the press exists. they never made the virus itself more threatening except by reporting accurate numbers.
And yeah I'm not blaming the reporting of the WHO I'm blaming how its being reported on by others
I don't know about a conspiracy, but saying "we're not prepared for this disaster!" is an unnecessary spin to put on a message that should just be "The government is doing x y z but should be doing a b c. You should do d, e, f to protect yourself and others. If you get flu like symptoms then quarantine yourself until you can be tested".
the deadliness i was mostly talking about is its spread, which without intervention seems like it would spread to nearly all of humanity. so even if it kills only 0.1% of infected like the flu, it will essentially be killing 0.1% of all mankind. thats huge.
if you look beyond the single number you are focusing on, its spread does justify some of the panic, which is the subject of this thread. the numbers the who provides are the best numbers they can provide, and they are open about that.
im also calling any democratic conspiracy theory connected to this nonsense. which is what i think lead you to conflate the role of democratic leaders and questionably left leaning media.
Yes, it's 0.1% when taking into account the estimated 25 million people who never see a doctor because their symptoms aren't bad enough. Confirming coronavirus is even harder than just looking at symptoms. Just look at how incompetent the USA is ATM with testing.
Until we test a sizeable population of people randomly (not just people with symptoms) we don't have a way to estimate how many people have had the virus but not been tested. What's certain is the fatality rate for coronavirus is not close to 3.4%.
The issue is it's highly contagious so we still have a duty to protect vulnerable people. If you spread the virus you create a network of carriers, if any of those carriers pass it on it makes your network larger, if anyone dies in that network then you're responsible for their death. So any death rate is bad when it infection rate is so large.
But saying its 34x deadlier than the flu is flat out wrong. IDK if that's what you believe, but so many people are distorting what the WHO is saying
Be alert not anxious!
even tho it's less deadly, the wildfire contagiousness of this virus is creating fear we wont have enough ventilators, increasing the deaths.
Sure we probably, hopefully, will get plenty if ventilators, but just showing contagiousness increases mortality without having to make the virus more lethal.
also i looked it up, flu is 0.1% mortality, so even if we downgrade it to 1% mortality, that's still 10x the seasonal flu.
also, even if it may be a leaders job to keep people calm, the media are not leaders. the press is meant to reveal information. they shouldnt start a needless panic, but they should still provide truth.
and as i mentioned, if you create calm by falsely minimizing a bad situation, how long will that be effective, and what will happen next time? yes leaders should instill calm, but not by lies dismissing the existence of the problem. instead they should create calm by instilling confidence in their solution.
denying there is a problem is what dictators do, like China at the beginning of the outbreak.
@Neimroff, I agree with you about the spending spree in the stock market.
now is the time for a stock market shopping spree!
i disagree that social interests are to blindly reassure. if you expect leaders to just say "everything will be ok," the result will be that the message will be not trusted.
furthermore he put a politican in charge of a medical disaster where most other nations were putting a doctor or epidemiologist.
you are absolutely correct that this virus is not particularly deadly, but is that the only factor you are using? it is highly contagious, lasts longer on surfaces, and spreads before people even know they are sick. it's been spreading like wildfire and if left unchecked could infect 100% of the population.
The general mortality rate is certainly lower then 3.4, but it is inevitably much higher if only looking at the vulnerable populations. even if the flu kills more of the people who get sick, this virus will get many many more people sick. most will recover, but many will die.
leaders should prevent panic, but they shouldnt lie. the Democrats are not screaming end of the world, they are citing official scientific statements since the administration wont. and they are announcing measures to contain the spread.
trump admin may say everything is ok, but then they shut down all travel from europe. i remember when he said on tv there were only 15 and were gonna go down. soon zero.... talking about it going away via miracles. wtf?
It's a good time to have gold or cash though.
Well it's both right? Yes there was a global panic before the dems took ahold of it, but did they do anything to ease the panic? Not that I know of, they just fell into fear mongering mode as the opposition usually does. Trump was the one that tried easing the panic.
Political interests and societal interests aren't always misaligned. Trump's were aligned, the dem's weren't
you agree with the severity of the disease?
or the dem conspiracy theory part?
because im pretty sure the international response was just as alarming well before American democrats got involved.
Even the 3.4% death rate comes from the reporting methodology that is biased to people with severe symptoms. We're not including people who haven't presented severe enough symptoms to get tested. The test is horrific. They take a flexible stick and shove it through your nostril all the way to the back of your mouth. If I got flu symptoms I'd just isolate myself.
But using the same methodology for calculating the death rate of the flu puts it at almost 10%.
We should be alert and follow the hygiene instructions so the vulnerable people in society don't get it, but all we're doing is tracking a flu. If we were to track how any flu virus spreads it would be scaring the public. Last year my grandparents retirement home was hit by the flu and 11 people died. That wasn't even national news
Haha another thing we agree on
are dems in charge of Italy and south Korea too?
Dems are using Coronavirus to try to take Trump down by fearmongering. Coronavirus is less dangerous than Ebola. Coronavirus has a 97% recovery rate and is only affecting, for the most part people in their 80s. Yes major sport organizations are closed down and the economy is taking a plunge for no reason and universities are shutting down. Just Stay Calm and Carry On. There is no need to fear except fear itself. Don't pay attention to the majority of the Dems who are trying to blow everything out of proportion to bring the economy down and get Trump removed from office