There It Is: CDC Equates Coronavirus Hospitalizations to Seasonal Flu and Finally Admits It’s MUCH LESS Dangerous for Children

Gateway Pundit ^ | 05/02/2020 | Jim Hoft

[SeekAndFind]

In late February, nearly a month after Presient Trump banned travel from China to the United States in January, the CDC terrorized Americans by claiming the Wuhan coronavirus had a mortality rate of 2.3% at its epicenter.

The CDC compared the coronavirus mortality rate of 2.3% to the seasonal flu mortality rate of 0.1%.

Two weeks later WHO leader, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, sparked a global panic when he claimed the COVID-19 had a 3.4% mortality rate and then compared that number to the annual estimated seasonal flu mortality rate of 0.1%.

These irresponsible and completely inaccurate statements led to the greatest economic crash since the Great Depression.

30 million Americans are currently unemployed due to the crisis and the number is growing each week.

On Friday the CDC equated the Wuhan coronavirus to the seasonal flu.

The COVID-19 hospitalization rates are “similar to” those in the 65 and older category during “recent high severity influenza seasons.”

And the COVID-19 hospitalizations for children 17 and under is MUCH LOWER than the seasonal flu hospitalization rates during recent influenza seasons.

The COVID-19 is LESS DANGEROUS to children than a typical influenza!

CDC equates covid19 & flu, 5/1/20: covid19 hospitalization rates are "similar to" those in >65 yo's during “recent high severity influenza seasons” & for children (0-17) "much lower than flu hosp rates during recent influenza seasons” (h/t @ElonBachman) https://t.co/8sAdxRPlK6 pic.twitter.com/G2RGnNCZU6

— Andrew Bostom (@andrewbostom) May 2, 2020

And just think — We destroyed out economy for this!

[who knows what evil?]

...so now where do we place the blame..?

[daniel1212]

How do you equate an accurate mortality rate?

WoM is right in that first statement. We will never know how many people actually had the disease. How do you equate an accurate mortality rate?

You settle for a reasonably accurate mortality rate

1. Test all the deceased and differentiate btwn documented deaths by Covid-19 versus underlying conditions.

2. Do more testing including random testing to estimate the % infected.

3. Base the estimated mortality rate on the number of documented deaths by Covid as a % of the est. number of those infected, and provide a separate mortality rate based on the number of documented deaths by Covid with underlying conditions.

4. Provide mortality rates based upon the two classes of Covid deaths as a % of the whole population.

[DoughtyOne]

Are you including broad-spread testing of the whole populace (at least in sampling) to find out how many actually had the disease?

Without that we’ll never know, and even then there would be
a lot of guess-work involved.

[daniel1212]

Are you including broad-spread testing of the whole populace (at least in sampling) to find out how many actually had the disease? Without that we’ll never know, and even then there would be a lot of guess-work involved.

I mean broad random volunteer testing in various locations, from beaches to . bus tops, without reporting the infected unless they want to be.

[DoughtyOne]

Okay, this random testing could be used to extrapolate a
general idea of the infection across the populace, but it
would seem to me to still be a guessing game.

There are people who deal in things like this, but seeing
how polls and other cross sections of the populace’s opinion
are gamed, you almost have to expect some games with this
depending on what the overall goal becomes.

I’m not totally against it. I think you have to do something
along these lines. I’m just not as confident as others
might be that it will be handled any more properly than
the actual counts were at medical facilities.

[daniel1212]

Okay, this random testing could be used to extrapolate a general idea of the infection across the populace, but it would seem to me to still be a guessing game.

Yes, but that would provide a far better estimate of the mortality rate than what we have now (upon which so much weight is laid for determining response), and in relative terms it qualifies as what I termed "reasonably accurate."

And regardless, as far as response is concerned, using CDC estimates, what is the mortality rate of 116,000 deaths (Asian flu) among 171,984,000 Americans versus the same (potential) number pf COVID-19 deaths among 330,541,000 Americans?

[DoughtyOne]

Yes, I believe your right, and that population comparison
with numbers was a good point too.

[daniel1212]

Yes, I believe your right, and that population comparison with numbers was a good point too.

But the main thing is that Trump is to be blamed for not banning travel to the United States from China by foreign nationals in late January, and imposing travel restrictions on some other countries, instead criticizing such as un-American, and encouraging people in late February to take part in a Chinatown celebration (without masks and distancing). And approving going on cruises in early March if one are a healthy young person, and in mid-April sanctioning fornication with strangers is one is willing to take the risk,

Of course the above is not what the President did (not that he is blameless), but the response to this virus is much political.

[hawkaw]

I don’t think the context of the article is correct.