41–50 of 103 posts
It may well be less deadly, but it is far more contagious. Reinfection also seems to be not uncommon. We do not fully understand the long term effects of even a mild case, or indeed how repeated reinfection might compound any such effects, given that we might expect to catch it once or twice a year as opposed to once or twice in our lives for flu.
There is absolutely no reason to expect that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The flu once mutated to be very deadly, and there's no particular reason it couldn't happen again. For all anybody really knows, the next super deadly flu strain might show up tomorrow. Are you going to spend your life terrified of this "what if" scenario too?
>Are you going to spend your life terrified of this "what if" scenario too? This might be worth reviewing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity
These COVID threads are almost always garbage, but we can't make them better by throttling people for writing snarkily; if there's something of value to take from a comment on these threads, everyone will have to do the work of mining it out.
Still going to mask up when going indoors. I don't want the flu, I don't want a cold and I don't want to get covid.
It may well be less deadly, but it is far more contagious. Reinfection also seems to be not uncommon. We do not fully understand the long term effects of even a mild case, or indeed how repeated reinfection might compound any such effects, given that we might expect to catch it once or twice a year as opposed to once or twice in our lives for flu.
> "once or twice in our lives for flu." I guess some people are more susceptible than others (or have more risk due to lifestyle factors), but only once or twice in a lifetime ? I'd guess I've had a really bad flu at least once every 4-5 years or so on average in my lifetime, and moderate cases probably every 1-2 years. I had Covid twice as well, within a year (both times in 2020, before vaccines were available).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
an even greater way to destroy your immune system? dying from covid!
Or I don't die from covid, and my toddler has lifelong slight disadvantage in language acquisition due to hysteria.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
enjoy your long covid! https://www.njspotlightnews.org/2022/03/living-with-covid-mo...
"Long Covid" is mainly just hypochondria. A lot less of it is real than the hype would have you believe. The media loves spooky stuff because it generates clicks. Hypochondriacs are a thing: they are out there. Some of them have gotten Covid-19, and that of course turns into their new obsession.
Lung scarring is certainly real and can take a long time (up to a year) to fully heal. This isn't imaginary: lung function and capacity can be quantified and measured.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realize there is a happy middle ground between hiding inside forever and pretending COVID doesn't exist, right?
Yes, that middle ground is stopping all required COVID mitigations and let people live their lives as they did before. COVID is here to stay. Time to start treating it like every other endemic disease. ps Pretty sure the comment you responded to was sarcasm.
Should also try to push back against a culture of going to work and similar when blatantly symptomatic (I don't want a cold, I don't care if it is mild, I don't want it).
It may well be less deadly, but it is far more contagious. Reinfection also seems to be not uncommon. We do not fully understand the long term effects of even a mild case, or indeed how repeated reinfection might compound any such effects, given that we might expect to catch it once or twice a year as opposed to once or twice in our lives for flu.
I'm much more sympathetic to the death rate concerns (admittedly: Omicron makes it easy to have that kind of sympathy) than to the long-COVID stuff. Appeals to long-COVID all seem like an appeal to an application of the Precautionary Principle that, taken to any sort of logical conclusion, would shut down society. You can do shutdowns (and I supported them!) to manage an acute crisis, but you can't generally do them as a precaution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So were you going through life wearing a mask to mitigate the risk of a deadly flu in 2018 and before? I think probably not, but if your priority is risk mitigation, shouldn't you have been? Risk mitigation is not my priority. If it were, I'd never ride my bike again, even with my helmet. I'd never go kayaking, or rock climbing. I wouldn't swim in lakes, and you'd never catch me in the ocean. If I were preparing for…
> So were you going through life wearing a mask to mitigate the risk of a deadly flu in 2018 and before? I think probably not, but if your priority is risk mitigation, shouldn't you have been? No because those flu viruses were not novel, or as deadly. When there is a large degree of uncertainty (like a deadly novel virus), I personally tend towards caution and am fine being too cautious rather than not cautious enoug…
That information always lags reality. When/if the next deadly flu strain emerges, it will have emerged before it is discovered to have emerged. If you're not planning for this scenario, are you really planning for the worst case? You could be Patient Zero for Spanish Flu Part Two, with your preemptive masking being the difference between global disaster and nothingburger.
It may well be less deadly, but it is far more contagious. Reinfection also seems to be not uncommon. We do not fully understand the long term effects of even a mild case, or indeed how repeated reinfection might compound any such effects, given that we might expect to catch it once or twice a year as opposed to once or twice in our lives for flu.
"once or twice in our lives" flu is a seasonal illness, unless you're a complete shut in, you get it much more frequently than that, considering the modern diets and vitamin deficiencies.