The argument was: Did the hospitals overflow from Covid?
And they did not overflow anywhere in the world.
The argument was: Did the hospitals overflow from Covid?
And they did not overflow anywhere in the world.
> New Toronto field hospital prepares to accept patients as ICUs overflow
> Greater Toronto Area hospitals are so overwhelmed due to record COVID-19 admissions that some patients are being transferred to health-care centres outside the region.
[1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/coronavirus-newsletter-april-...
Post an actual link to ICU numbers if you truly '#believeTheScience'
Here I did it for you.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=078a3...
Do your own data analysis and see ICU admissions are only up 15% or so.
Also, according to other media outlets, ICUs in Toronto haven't filled up, they're 'NEAR capacity'.....which has been the story for over a year everywhere.
The media drums things up to make money and should not be used as evidence for your argument.
The media also said San Diego ICUs and Houston ICUs were overflowing but it didn't happen.
For example, this sensation article never happened:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/...
Do you have anything supporting your argument of hospital overflow with substance?
Or do you get all of your 'science' from the news media?
First you attacked a comment (above), claiming they'd moved goalposts in their arguments, and then you claimed hospitals had not overflowed. Subsequently, you responded to a comment providing a citation saying they did, by demanding a different source - which is moving the goalposts, the very thing you criticized in someone else.
Here, look at this, another article showing Indian hospitals have overflowed, this time from Reuters:
> Indian hospitals turn away patients in COVID-19 ‘tsunami’ [1]
This is relevant because you yourself consider Reuters a citable source, at least when you like what it is saying [2].
That comment you cited Reuters in reminded me of another of your comments [3] (I actually did mark your words, as requested):
> Mark my words America is heading towards herd immunity as long as we stay this course, and this will be all over by the end of the year. (you, eight months ago)
How's that herd immunity coming along? Was it all over by the end of the year?
[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/india/indias-daily-coronavirus...
Texas had 40,000 people at a football game, has no covid restrictions, and is at record lows for Covid.
With the exception of Michigan almost every single state has reached record lows of Covid.
It's not an exact science but we have reached herd immunity in almost all of America within a few months of what I predicted.
All with only 25 to 40 percent vaccination number. So it's clearly not vaccination or restrictions providing the full herd immunity.
As for India sure I'll give you that. I should amend my statement to mean 'First world' countries with adequate ICU capacity had no ICU overflow.
You have to quote a third world country with the average personal income of 2000 dollars a month to support your argument because the hundreds and hundreds of other worldwide first and second world countries didn't have any hospital overflows. This is not surprising or unexpected and disingenuous of you to discredit hundreds of other countries in favor of a single country to support your argument.
However, the rest of the first world outside of India has had no hospital overflow.
Asking for a legitimate source this is not the news media.... is not 'moving the goal posts'.
You 'beleiveInScience' Covid zealots think the news media is science. I hate to break it to you but the news media is not a reliable scientific source. You should try to learn what science is before you #believe in it.
I'm not sure what you Covid zealots require to feel safe again.
I legitimately feel sorry for you.
You're in a permanent prison of fear.
You're implicitly conceding that contrary to your earlier assertions, there have been hospital overflows, but now are further restricting your claims to only apply to first and second world countries.
You're also ignoring the fact that I chose this particular article not because I couldn't find first world examples (I already did, see above), but because this one was from a source (Reuters) you've already endorsed by citing articles from it yourself.
Now you're writing a rambling attack to distract from the fact that you have nothing to support your claims, and can only try to evade the evidence against them.
Any person with good faith and an honest mindset would agree that India is the exception not the rule.
Covid zealots are not known for honesty though.
Official sources and raw data: https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20210310-paris-hospitals-... https://bonjour.tousanticovid.gouv.fr/app.html#chiffres
Are you going to shift the goalposts again and redefine to "Anglosphere first world countries"? Or are you going to admit you don't know what the hell you're talking about?
"Covid zealots" is a peculiar term, i'll give that. Makes little sense of course, but nothing you say does.
ICU's run "near capacity" all the time, so the news source you linked is simply stating a normal situation in a sensational context.
See here: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/patient-flow/2-healthc....
What I mean by Covid zealot is people who believe things that aren't real about Covid based on poor critical thinking and/or poor understanding of the data or some other reason that I don't understand.
ICUs in France had their capacity doubled over last summer, and since the beginning of the year everything elective has been postponed to make place for Covid patients.
> What I mean by Covid zealot is people who believe things that aren't real about Covid based on poor critical thinking and/or poor understanding of the data or some other reason that I don't understand
So denialists that still fail to grasp the gravity of the situation, like yourself?
Patient numbers are still NOT ICU capacity. Numbers can go up and still not be at capacity.
If I'm indeed not missing something that is either poor reasoning or a disengenuous citation.
If you get all of your information from the news media there's 'gravity to the situation' but if you look at statistics...
Covid is mostly over in the states and either over or on the downswing around the world, with the exception of a few third world countries.
You should look at statistics and not the news media.
In the U.S., States are at record lows of new infections and almost every state has lifted most of it's restrictions and we're not even at 40% vaccination rate.
Even New Zealand has opened it's borders to Austrailia and their vaccination rate is in the mid teens.
Covid's fatality rate in the states was around 0.00125 and I'm assuming other places as well.
Trying to understand the gravity of the situation that you claim exists.
It's like The 3 billion people who believe in God. Despite all evidence to the contrary the zealots will cling to their narrative.
Totally wrong. Johns Hopkins says the case fatality rate in the states is 1.8% [1]. Many others are worse, like Canada at 2.0% and 2.9% for the United Kingdom.
You can do the math.
Hell only 33 million in the states tested positive for contracting Corona.
33 million / 400 million
Which is infection rate of .0825
Even if you double it to account for non tested cases that .16% JUST CASES.
Even if you double that you're not even at 1% yet.
The experts err to the EXTREME side of safety.
These are the same experts that say only eat steak if it's well done and not to drink more than 2/3 cup of wine in an evening.
You can look up the definition.
so 572,674 / 32,124,869 = 1.8%
As I already said, and as you can look up yourself, in the link I gave.
The fatality chance for a healthy person in the general population is the measure of risk for the average person. Using the same measure of population that the R value uses to calculate infectiousness.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number
Have you been using 1.8% chance of death as your chance of dying? I would be scared too.
For a healthy person to become infected is a very small number to begin with and highly biased towards the elderly or people with co morbidities.
You can legitimately lighten up. Your risk from this is infinitesimally small if you're under 55 and healthy.
If not it's still unbelievably small.
> fatality ratios (the number of deaths divided by the number of confirmed cases)
So you’re wrong. Again.
It's literally the definitions of those words.
It's fine continue to be scared. I legit feel bad for you.
My state just lifted the mask mandate recently and were not even at 30% vaccination rate yet.
Feels good.
In related news:
https://twitter.com/nucholibre/status/1384558587339362306/ph...