Comments by "rockethead7" (@rockethead7) on "Bloomberg Television"
channel.
-
2
-
@carpo719
YOU SAID: "not a conspiracy theory, but they are definitely lying."
== Pffttt. And, you don't see the contradiction in your own statement?
YOU SAID: "They just admitted that only 17% of patients in the hospital with covid are there FOR covid. Meaning of majority of people have some other condition and they just happened to test positive."
== That's a good thing. Why would they lie about a good thing?
YOU SAID: "Omicron is a joke."
== I fail to get the joke.
YOU SAID: "The minister of Health in South Africa even said himself that there is no danger of death for a majority of people"
== That's true of any/all versions of COVID19. Most people will not die from it. But, the early numbers, before there were any treatments and vaccines, was an 8% death rate. Why is this an issue for you to understand? Why is this a point you're even trying to make?
YOU SAID: "and on top of that, there's no way to stop it."
== Well, not stop it completely, no. But, you can really minimize it if the entire population was vaccinated.
YOU SAID: "Everybody will get it.. And the vaccines do nothing against it"
== Pure nonsense. The vaccines cause the human body to build the immunities prior to getting the disease, so, the body is ready to fight the disease before actually contracting it. It reduces the hospitalization and death rates tremendously. It saves lives. The small percentage of people who would ordinarily die (if not vaccinated), have greatly reduced odds of dying (if they are vaccinated). It's remarkably rare that someone is vaccinated, yet dies anyway. Yes, it happens sometimes. But, usually those people have a myriad of other health problems, and COVID just makes it worse. Arguing that vaccines don't do anything is just pure ignorance. Don't sit there and open your comment by saying "not a conspiracy," and then close by saying that vaccines don't do anything. Good grief. Yes, you are obviously spewing conspiracy garbage. Don't quote a minister of health, then contradict the very person you're quoting from. That very same minister of heath that you think supported your viewpoint about the level of danger... also says that the vaccines are very effective. So, you quote from him when you think it supports your nonsense. But, you ignore him when he says things that go against your nonsense. Sorry, I'm not letting you do that.
2
-
It's not that simple. The biggest problem in dealing with COVID is in the hospital and healthcare system capacities. We just don't have the infrastructure and staff to sustain a gigantic rush of incoming patients. For example, India had that type of rush, and what happened? People were dying in the streets near their hospitals. There weren't enough medical ventilators and oxygen tanks. There weren't enough hospital beds. Patients were getting treated in the streets, if they got treated at all. And, people were dying, who otherwise might not have died, if they had enough infrastructure to withstand the influx of patients. The same can happen here, and nearly has. During the peaks, hospitals basically shut down almost all other types of medical treatments (routine checkups, put all but the most life threatening surgeries on hold, etc.), and focused on dealing with the influx of COVID patients. There weren't enough ventilators to go around, and they resorted to using C-PAP and B-PAP machines (not good enough, but better than nothing) to try to deal with the massive waves of patients. It's not a good thing to have any of these kinds of huge spikes. The healthcare system isn't set up to have such a huge percentage of the population in the hospitals at any one time. Thankfully, this latest strain seems to be a bit milder on its effects, even though it's more severe on how contagious it is. But, anyway, no, we cannot rush into "herd immunity," without leaving a trail of unnecessary deaths in the wake.
1
-
@dianemccord6660
YOU SAID: "Again, much milder form of this virus,"
== Thankfully, that is correct... if you're talking about Omicron. But, given that you kept talking about Delta, well, frankly, I don't think you know what you're talking about. Delta was NOT milder. The various studies said that Delta was more severe, or, maybe as equally severe. Definitely not less severe. You have clearly confused Omicron for Delta, and, this makes it pretty clear that you don't know what you're talking about.
YOU SAID: "people aren't flocking to the hospitals."
== Pffttt. The hospitals do not agree with you.
YOU SAID: "Even said that in their report. People are experiencing more mild symptoms."
== Yes, but with the massive quantity of cases, yes, it has resulted in a rise in hospitalizations. It's true that fewer need hospitalization (percentage wise), but, with a huge spike in total cases, even a bit milder, yes, it's still causing deaths and hospitalizations to increase. It's just a lower percentage than the earlier versions.
YOU SAID: "Even with Delta, we didn't have the issues we had with the first and second wave."
== Only because, by that point, there were better treatments and awareness.
YOU SAID: "Yes we can rush in herd immunity"
== Pffttt. Clown. What do you know that the entirety of the medical community doesn't?
YOU SAID: "no one is exempt from catching this virus."
== Depends on what you mean.
YOU SAID: "With 1,000,000 positive cases how many of those ended up in the hospital? There are about 94,000 people in the hospital with Covid in the entire United States with 18,560 in ICU in the entire United States, most of those cases are probably Delta or incidental Covid. Very minimal uptake."
== So, you can quote exact numbers... but avoid stating the exact number of increases in cases that result in hospitalization??
YOU SAID: "India was dealing with Delta at that time and look at India compared to the United States, way different scenario in countries. You can't compare their health system to ours and their availability to equipment."
== Yes, I can make the comparison. I was merely illustrating a point. Healthcare systems have capacity issues. Not all healthcare systems have the exact same capacity issues, but, all healthcare systems have a maximum capacity. Ours is being taxed right now.
YOU SAID: "They have had a very little uptake in cases and hospitalizations now."
== Are you trying to say "uptick" and not "uptake"? That's twice now that you've mistyped that word. I mean, I find it really difficult to cut through these things you write, when you confuse one version for another, you are barely literate.
YOU SAID: "Look at South Africa now. Very minimal hospitalizations with Omicron around 7500 hospitalizations out of 59 million people and many were incidental cases. Their peak hit around Dec. 12 and is already declining daily. Yes of course you are going to have deaths unfortunately, but you are going to have that with any virus."
== Oh no. Nope. We're done here. You just got done complaining that I couldn't bring up India as a comparison, and now you're telling me to look at South Africa??? Nope. I'm done. You're a crackpot.
1
-
It's not that simple. Our infrastructure cannot handle the size of waves of patients that come from your strategy. And, no, it's not "lower risk" to use natural immunity as a strategy. Vaccines are a far superior strategy, with far less risk than taking your chances on whether or not COVID will kill you. I mean, your strategy could actually work fine, if the population consisted of only people under 30 years old. But, people in their 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, do not fare well just gambling on a natural immunity strategy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@user-bg2oi4bz3p
You can spew your nonsense until the cows come home. It doesn't make it true. Your ignorance bleeds through every word you type. If you think "most countries" are not affected by COVID, then you are out of touch with reality. "Most countries" do not have the testing and tracking that 1st world countries have. And, "most countries" do not have the massive amount of traveling that 1st world countries have. For example, it's no mystery about why Ghana would have fewer COVID cases than 1st world countries might have. There aren't many people going in and out of Ghana every day. And, they have extremely strict travel and vaccination policies. Compare that to the USA, with 45,000 flights per day, and relaxed COVID policies. What do you expect to happen? You want to "put two and two together"?? Alright, you can do that. There are about 30,000 medical journals worldwide, and you're welcome to supply your calculations and proof of your assertions. YouTube comments is where crackpots and clowns go to profess their anti-science gibberish. Meanwhile, we have the entire medical community around the world at our fingertips in the medical journals. THAT is where you should be publishing your "two plus two" logic. Show the world what you know. Publish in a medical journal. Show the world why the entire planet's medical community is wrong.
By the way, when you write up your COVID medical journal paper, you might not want to compare countries that test people constantly with those that don't. Kind of makes you look silly. Nobody gets tested for the flu, dummy. If you get it, and you see a doctor, and get treatment, yes, it gets documented. But, if you think that's the same as COVID testing, you're just going to get laughed out the door at any medical journal you attempt to publish in. The countries that test people constantly will result in higher numbers. The countries that don't test will result in lower numbers. It means nothing when it comes to the actual contagiousness of the disease, nor the fatality rates. Those are different concepts. Good luck with your submissions to the medical journals. Clearly, you think you know more than the entire planet's experts. So, you can prove you're right via the scientific method in the medical journals, right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ferreal92
What ARE you talking about? You just got done confusing income with expenses. You are completely backward, yet, you're doubling down on this ridiculous gibberish? No, dummy. Politicians do not benefit from COVID. I mean, the prime example is Donald Trump. If not for COVID, there'd be no way in the world that he'd have lost his run for a 2nd term. No possible way. The economy was booming. Unemployment was lower than it had been in nearly a century. North Korea stopped firing off nukes. Etc. I mean, Trump was a bit crazy, thinking weird things, and was an amazing delusional narcissist. But, that never stopped him before, and, even the people who hated him would benefit from him being in office. But, COVID completely derailed that. His silly notions about crazy treatments, his public illiteracy about the underlying sciences, and his distrust of the entire medical community, his failure to develop a rollout plan, etc., resulted in such public hatred that he couldn't get re-elected. COVID destroyed his chance at re-election. And, that's just the most obvious case. Politicians as a whole did not benefit from COVID, its vaccines, or anything in this dynamic. The most benefit the politicians could have is for everything to thrive. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Your analogy to smoking is completely broken. You cannot outlaw it. That was tried with alcohol, remember? It was a complete and total disaster. Nobody stopped drinking, and all that happened was that it created a massive crime network, and they had to repeal the amendment. The same would happen with smoking. So, they chose to fight against smoking by issuing massive taxes on smoking, and increasing public education. This has nothing whatsoever to do with vaccines for COVID. Smoking is not a virus. Smoking is not a contagious disease. Smoking is a voluntary act. Getting COVID isn't. You cannot make getting COVID illegal. You cannot tax getting COVID. You cannot sit there and compare the two things.
Sorry, but your one-dimensional thinking is just too far down the toilet for me to even start educating you. I mean, your mind has clearly been so deluded that it would take a couple of years of basic education in civics, law, medicine, etc., before you could possibly understand. You're too far gone for me, sorry.
1
-
1