Well, hrmmm, you're equating the 20% positive case rate with the 20% of "supposed deaths". We have a higher positive infection rate b/c we test far more that anyone else.Originally Posted by Dallasfan
The issue is we only have 4% of the world population. You need to match infection ratio with population ratio (not death ratio). The vast vast majority of positive cases do not end in death (most don't even have "sickness").
The way you are looking at it you're essentially saying every single 1 positive infection equals exactly 1 death. That's what it means the way you matched up those percentages. They don't align in that way though.
The US is only 4% of the global population yet we "supposedly" have 20%ish of the deaths? Really?
Many of those tallied deaths are *really* either flu, emphysema, copd, kidney/renal disease, heart disease, streptococcus pneumoniae/other pneumonia forms, and we will see that reflected later when official numbers come out.
Those that truly are "excess deaths" at this point in the year, many of them are suicides, starvation, heart disease conditions gone untreated, cancer diagnoses that got put off or delayed, routine procedures that would have saved someone's life, but were caused by the lockdowns & economic fallout.
If it were not for the draconian lockdowns then those excess deaths wouldn't have happened.
Note: The number of reported positive cases is ridiculously low in the news. We expect the infection has hit nearing 1Billion people at this point globally (e.g. 800Mn to 1Bn people already have antibodies from infection). That's what many seroprevalence studies show us. Obviously the infection rate is higher than news or even CDC reports b/c we don't test every single person. We can't; but that doesn't mean many people we don't/can't test aren't or weren't already infected. So yea there are WAY WAY WAY more than just the silly super low positive reported cases on the nightly news.
