TexasCHLforum.com

As with all info available in the Information Age, feel free to validate the data shown here. If there is even a scintilla of truth here, then we are truly being played.

This is posted on the blog page of a continuing-education-for-nurses-site that I know very little about. I found it linked from the Bongino Report today: https://ceufast.com/blog/the-deadliest- ... in-history

CNN, MSNBC, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer all say Trump mishandled every one of those pandemics and is responsible for all the deaths. He'll be extensively questioned about them Thursday night.

Rob72 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:53 pm HIV/AIDS should not even be listed, we encourage its propogation via social policy.

Amazing how little a bunch of dead people mean compared to sacred Political Correctness.

One of the first hints that the chart is not truly useful is the misuse of the word pandemic. To be a pandemic, it must occur in multiple places, so a Japanese smallpox epidemic would never make the pandemic definition. Another problem with it is that it is comparing disparate data. The number of years and the populations (either worldwide, national, or possible exposure) are necessary for a valid comparison. Even better would be the number of cases total, with the number of fatal cases, and the number of cases that were not fatal but had lasting medical effects.

Unlike the others, I would include the HIV/AIDS epidemic. To be fair though, you would have to add in what factors were taken to prevent/mitigate or encourage the spread of the disease. There is a common myth (based on a single possibly true incident) that the US government tried to wipe out Indians by giving them smallpox, so HIV is not the only potential epidemic that might have social engineering assisting in the spread.

The issue I have with the Covid numbers is that the death count has been wildly inflated. The CDC already admited that anyone who dies that test positive for Covid is considered a Covid death.

The spanish flu on that graphic was a pandemic and lasted for a year, very similar to covid 19. The world population now is much much greater than 1919, so imagine what the deaths would have been with a comparable population to today. I think the chart is very useful for comparison purposes to what the media and politicians say, since they only focus on deaths and not what the fatility rate is.

It doesn’t take a graphic to tell me we’ve been taken. I have found that when I state the masks and response to this is nonsense, I’m attacked. Most people have been so indoctrinated that they can’t accept any opinion except the one that agrees with the media narrative. They will also tell me that I just haven’t been affected by Covid and that’s why I’m opposed to this overreaction. Of course when I tell them my dad died from Covid in May that accusation crumbles and they don’t know what to say.

One huge issue in this comparison is that the number of people who died from COVID is drastically reduced compared to say, the Spanish Flu because our ability to help patients with respiratory disease and dysfunction has advanced from "a comfortable bed and prayers" to "a comfortable bed and prayers and a ventilator" since 1921. Virtually all of the folks who wound up in an ICU today (most of whom got better and went home) would've just been dead in 1919-1921. The original motivation for the lockdowns was "flattening the curve" (remember that phrase?), which was essentially the goal of avoiding a situation in which capacity limits on the aforementioned ventilators resulted in case fatality rates approaching 1920 numbers instead of 2020 numbers for the folks who showed up after the last vent was used. That has worked.

The hotly debated part of the response to the virus stems from the wildly disparate infection fatality rates among different groups of people. That distinction doesn't lend itself to "people who eat out are monsters" or "masks are tyranny" as arguments, and instead requires a look at data and practical techniques for reducing the incidence among folks who are likely to get very sick with or die of COVID and minimizing the impact on people who are very likely to shrug it off.

Rob72 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:53 pmSmallpox is grossly misleading, as the numbers were inconsequential during its last 50 years, i.e., only a literal handful of people alive today know what treating it is like.

Many more than a "literal handful" of people know what it was like. I'm 67 and I had to get it. My sister (8 years my junior) had to get it too. When I enlisted in the Air Force, they did it again, even though they could see the scar. Note: The second time did not scar up, since I was already vaccinated.

I remember the polio vaccine too. That one was kinda fun. They dropped the serum on a sugar cube and you just sucked on it until the cube melted. Some of my classmates were bummed they couldn't have seconds.

Pawpaw wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:00 am

Rob72 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:53 pmSmallpox is grossly misleading, as the numbers were inconsequential during its last 50 years, i.e., only a literal handful of people alive today know what treating it is like.

Many more than a "literal handful" of people know what it was like. I'm 67 and I had to get it. My sister (8 years my junior) had to get it too. When I enlisted in the Air Force, they did it again, even though they could see the scar. Note: The second time did not scar up, since I was already vaccinated.

I remember the polio vaccine too. That one was kinda fun. They dropped the serum on a sugar cube and you just sucked on it until the cube melted. Some of my classmates were bummed they couldn't have seconds.

68, and ditto. The Hong Kong Flu epidemic in that graphic took place during my junior/senior year of high school. I’ll grant that COVID-19 can kill you. It killed a good friend of mine a couple of months ago. As someone who has some of the co-morbidities that place me at higher risk, I’m NOT one who denies the danger. ON. THE. OTHER. HAND........ in 1968/69, we didn’t lose our minds over the Hong Kong Flu, and its death toll—both nationally and globally—came close to COVID-19's current toll as of right now.

Here’s what we DID do: nurses and doctors working in some public health clinics and critical care units where severely ill flu patients were being treated, wore masks and other PPE as necessary when these patients were under their care.

Here’s what we DIDN'T do: We didn’t shut down businesses and kill our economy. We didn’t restrict freedom of movement. We didn’t close our schools and churches. Governors and other petty thieves didn’t enact ridiculous executive orders outlawing the sale of garden seeds, while protecting liquor stores. They didn’t sanction unmasked rioters while outlawing singing in church. They didn’t make the decision to NOT wear a mask into an arrestable crime punishable by fines and jail. We didn’t turn the flu into a political movement. We didn’t weaponize it into a campaign issue. We didn’t pronounce a sitting president or other politicians guilty of having murdered the flu's victims. The Democrat Steno Pool (AKA “the media”) wasn’t complicit in a plot to use the weaponized issue to overthrow our entire political structure and economic engine.

We didn’t do those things back then, but we most certainly are doing them now.....and it’s not happening in a vacuum. There WILL be consequences, regardless of who wins in November. Ask yourselves, who stands to benefit?

THIS is why I stockpile beans, bullets, and bandages.

Thanks for posting this