Hardly put to rest when the moderator is shilling for you.
President Trump explain critical race theory in 2 minutes while I first mischaracterize it as sensitivity training and myself and Joe Biden constantly interrupt you.
Vice President Biden let me carry water for you and lend weight to the false and racially divisive talking point you have been practicing non stop and I will tell Trump to shut up if he interrupts you.
Yeeeeah right, that debate was an absolute farce, no one came away as a winner and at points Biden was babbling as babbling as ever.
Wallace did more than that, as the ridiculous racial sensitivity and white supremacy questions demonstrate. But overall, your point is right. Trump killed himself by jumping all over Biden like a Tom Cruise on Oprah’s couch.
That realclearpolitics article is hilarious. All of the things it suggests are things Trump is unlikely to ever do, for example:
The actions he can take to fuel the comeback might look something like this:
No nicknames. “No Sleepy Joe” or “Crazy Nancy.” Be less divisive. This will assist Trump with the few remaining undecided voters, suburban women, and the reluctant Trump voters who agree with his policies but recoil from his blustery and, at times, bullying persona.
I thought it was going to be some argument that he can use sympathy to his advantage. I’m glad they didn’t go there at least.
Back on track, any live Trump videos yet? I saw the recorded one that lasts about 1:30. I suspect he can’t do much more than that without coughing, and I guess to him that’s admitting he’s weak, so we won’t see anything much longer than that unedited if recorded.
But even trying to compare 0.13% to 0.1% is not correct - 0.13% is a low estimate for COVID IFR, and 0.1% is a typical Seasonal Flu CFR, you are not comparing the same metrics and are biasing one over the other.
Flu IFR of .1 is from a previous post to an article I linked. The variance in the IFR estimates .96 in Covid vs .15 with the flu is precisely why I said I would not look at the IFR. Current assumptions are all over the place. Yes they are as with the CFR as well but use a range and evaluate scenarios and apply that rather than just picking a random IFR and applying it to 8bn ppl, 300m etc. Your numbers of deaths will swing by millions.
The linked article is referencing a WHO report here, and from this report it’s not clear if the number they give for seasonal flu is IFR or CFR, so I wouldn’t trust the article based on this.
From The WHO:
Mortality for COVID-19 appears higher than for influenza, especially seasonal influenza. While the true mortality of COVID-19 will take some time to fully understand, the data we have so far indicate that the crude mortality ratio (the number of reported deaths divided by the reported cases) is between 3-4%, the infection mortality rate (the number of reported deaths divided by the number of infections) will be lower. For seasonal influenza, mortality is usually well below 0.1%. However, mortality is to a large extent determined by access to and quality of health care.
For the sake of the argument it would be good to have a more relaible source for typical seasonal flu IFR. (the wiki exceprt I poster earlier does not have good references.)
You should be really careful about using Wikipedia in cases like this. The 0.1% figure listed for influenza is the IFR, not the CFR. The references cited are not direct, authoritative sources, and I don’t think the person who added the data knew what they were doing.
Go direct to the CDC:
The .13% influenza IFR is from the 2016-2017 flu season.
The IFR for flu varies from year to year depending on how bad the dominant strain(s) are and how well the vaccines protect against it/them.
One thing to keep in mind when comparing influenza to the new coronavirus is that we don’t have a vaccine for the coronavirus and it’s never been in the population before. There’s a vaccine for flu and millions of people get it, especially in the vulnerable populations that have been hit hard by coronavirus.
So the fact that the coronavirus IFR is already believed to be so low without a vaccine and lack of well-tested treatments shows that it’s thankfully not the killer it looked like it might be when it emerged in Wuhan.
Thanks for the references. As a slight nitpick, the 0.13% number is based on an estimate of people with “Symptomatic Illnesses”, whereas there is probably a significant number of asymptomatic cases (up to around 50% according to the CDC below), so the IFR (including asymptomatic) will be lower.
Why is the 3% to 11% estimate different from the previously cited 5% to 20% range?
The commonly cited 5% to 20% estimate was based on a study that examined both symptomatic and asymptomatic influenza illness, which means it also looked at people who may have had the flu but never knew it because they didn’t have any symptoms. The 3% to 11% range is an estimate of the proportion of people who have symptomatic flu illness.
