A Defiant Goose
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2015
- Messages
- 7,002
- Reaction score
- 10,424
I think the point is the other 160k who died could've died of similar illnesses had the coronavirus not existed. I'm not trying to say they don't matter or shouldn't count toward the death toll. But then if you just flip around and tell all Americans "this virus has killed 190,000 people!" it may technically be correct but we all know it won't be interpreted the way it accurately should be. So now you have politicians making speeches referencing these 190k, people getting fined or jailed for not wearing masks because of mandates implemented using this 190k number, businesses shutting down permanently because of this 190k number, etc when things would've gone much more differently if the public was told "if you catch this virus you have a .5% chance of dying, but if you're completely healthy you have a 6% of .5% chance of dying"Yes, but at the same time, none of us know if even if we're healthy if we could fall into the category of the few it affected badly who had no other health issues. The 180k number is real and how the death toll is portrayed seems to be how people feel about it. 180,000 due to COVID is accurate, as those who died all passed as a result of contracting it. People are stuck on the "pre-existing" or "underlying" condition angle - again, it's simple, if they had never gotten it, they wouldn't have died. And you're right - the fact it's being politicized is ridiculous, but taking that out, the facts are still the facts. The 12k who died solely from it doesn't change the fact the other 160k would still be here if they hadn't contracted it.