Joe. Go get your medication refilled and take it. Your family is concerned about you
Covid-19 is killing children at an astounding rate
- Thread starter Joes Place
- Start date
The AAP cites "mounting evidence" that transmission of the coronavirus by young children is uncommon, partly because they are less likely to contract it in the first place.
https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threads/pediatricians-call-for-in-person-school-this-fall.321271/
AAP seems to be citing rather outdated information.
As I've already linked where summer camps have been shut down due to outbreaks.
What "conflicting opinions"? Be specific.
Early on, no one saw any children sick from this; they were presumed to not catch it.
Since then, we have identified infections in them, but very few severe.
Then, ~30 days following exposure, more and more children are developing severe symptoms unlike anything doctors have ever seen: Kawasaki Disease with additional cardiac problems that are very severe and life threatening - requiring ICU support, life support and ECMO.
So, if you're referring to statements at "different times" based on "different data", I think you're confused. Pay attention to the most recent (last week or two) information - even up to the last few days, and stop citing statements made months ago before the new information were avaiable.
Don't be obtuse. I know that's hard for you. We could start with masks. Even when the CDC switched to recommending masks, for several days they still had an FAQ page on their website explaining why masks might not help.
And you yourself are acknowledging evolution. But you also continue to harp on people using outdated data that's not outdated at all.
And last but not least, you move on to new data when it suits you, and fall back on "not peer reviewed or clinically trialed" when that suits you. You want it both ways, based on whatever position you've taken.
What part of "look for the most recent information on this" is confusing for you?
I understand there were conflicting recommendations months ago. Stop bringing them up as though "we have no idea what to do now". We have better information. People simply won't follow it. The WH won't recommend it, because it will piss off Trump.
Trump's own Task Force guy wouldn't even debunk an outright lie by Trump to convey clear information to the public. So long as people will not call a spade, a spade, you are going to have 30% or more of the population ignoring anything they say, and only going with what Trump says. And that's why we are where we are here.
Nothing about it is confusing for me, Joe. It's you who's confused.
‘....a life-frightening(??) complication of coronavirus infection in “healthy” children’ LOL
The sciencedirect article you linked in another thread said that 83% of patients in one study had multiple underlying conditions.
It’s very common for immune compromised kids to get knocked the hell back when exposed to any virus: their immune system overreacts in a massive way: thus your mis-c.
The pertinent question being WHY are we seeing millions of children in the US with autoimmune diseases?
@naturalbornhawk @Nat Algren
Any ideas WHY our children might have crappy immune function?
What did that have to do with "crappy immune function"?
They are clearing Covid-19 just fine. Then, their immune systems overreact.
The CDC is likely behind 2-4 weeks bc they are a govt run organization. Making it even worse is they are a Trump run govt organization, you have one person doing work and everyone else is leaning on their shovels and watching.
It was YOUR article I quoted. Do you even look at the stuff you post?
Again: do you even read what you post?
Healthy immune function precludes a ‘self-destruct’ option. Unless it’s been short-circuited somehow.
It was YOUR article I quoted. Do you even look at the stuff you post?
Again: do you even read what you post?
Healthy immune function precludes a ‘self-destruct’ option. Unless it’s been short-circuited somehow.
Read the REFERENCES.
Not the NEWS MEDIA SUMMARIES
I quoted directly from an article that YOU provided. Are you trying to educate & inform us or lead us on a wild goose chase?
And here all along I was thinking that ScienceDirect is ‘the world’s leading source for scientific, technical and medical research’. Now you’re telling me they’re just another media source?
So confusing
As I've told you, time and time again, go to the source documents.
News stories get some things right. They get some things wrong.
The source documents indicate this is a very very bad virus.
If you don’t want people citing the information you post cuz it might not be accurate, here’s a suggestion: link better sources.
That source was simply a business article, on a company who's stock bumped up on MIS-C news; that implies the business side of things recognizes a "market opportunity" is coming.
I've posted plenty of other core science info for you to read.
Joe sure jumped all over that article I posted like 5 years ago that posted a measles death chart while talking about measles cases and said we shouldn't trust ANYTHING from a source that is guilty of mis-reporting information. I guess that only applies to sources that other people who don't share his same views posts, not his. Now all of a sudden rather than it being an indicator of a bad source, he acts as if it's some commonplace phenomenon and they are all prone to "getting things wrong". I think we have a double standard here. What a turd.
FFS, for the fourth time: i didn’t quote from THAT article. I cited data from the sciencedirect article you linked.
From now on maybe post a disclaimer with your linked sources?
*This information may not be relevant to the topic at hand and is mainly provided for the purpose of distraction.
Yes, the fear-mongering quote was from the business article.
The. NUMBERS cited, however, were take directly from the sciencedirect article. You know they refute your bullshit narrative so you keep attempting to do the runaround.
Same crap, different day.
Remember when @Joes Place told us there was a 6% case fatality rate in kids 0-4 year old?
Included a lot of charts, graphs and links to try to make you believe him.
Of the Iowa deaths this past year, kids 0-17 amount to 0.04% of that number.
https://coronavirus.iowa.gov/pages/outcome-analysis-deaths
Included a lot of charts, graphs and links to try to make you believe him.
Of the Iowa deaths this past year, kids 0-17 amount to 0.04% of that number.
https://coronavirus.iowa.gov/pages/outcome-analysis-deaths
Which would include more deaths. If they happened. 6% some told us.
But, they have not happened.
0-4 had a higher rate at the time, 4-17 had an extremely lower rate at the time and still does. Just stating that you compare apples to apples.
Iron, you think kids 0-4 are dying from Covid at a 6% rate? Is that what you're telling me?
Because in this very thread even Joe had to admit he was wrong (eventually).
But, he did also tell us Mis-C was going to be a big problem.
Because in this very thread even Joe had to admit he was wrong (eventually).
But, he did also tell us Mis-C was going to be a big problem.
Last edited:
No I don’t think that. I’m just saying you can’t compare 0-4 and then 0-17 a year later.
Imagine all those kids born at Sturgis. Poor bastards never had a chance.
Per the data on the CDC site, when I posted it, the numbers I posted matched the information, spud.
#TheyCorrectedIt
Similar threads
