Actual Numbers versus Statistical Projections: Another Look at Flu and Covid-19 Death Counts

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

In some respects I'm surprised this article (and this larger argument) hasn't gained more traction, because it reveals some critical information regarding the nature and quantity of Covid-19 deaths especially when compared to oft-quoted flu statistics. Additionally if the arguments made here are sound, it completely belies the naysayer's claims that this manifestation of Coronavirus is little more than a robust version of the flu.

Personally, I think there's a great irony here in the fact that flu deaths have been grossly inflated. And why?

Those that have followed the flu story in recent years have learned that there's little money to be made by the pharmaceutical companies in the production of flu vaccine. Thus, the government has agreed to purchase the shots and promote the vaccines. This is why we are barraged with an endless stream of 'flu shot' propaganda.

I am not a vaccine sceptic by any means and yet I have no interest in the flu shot. I was forced to receive it while in the military but apart from those occasions (one of which made me sick) I've never received the shot and I've had the flu only once. Many of the hygiene protocols that are presently being advocated have been normal practice for me. I always wash my hands and avoid touching my face and I don't get sick very often. I was sick in February for a few days (maybe it was Covid-19) and that was the first time I'd been sick and missed work in many years.

I'm just not convinced of the science surrounding the flu shot. If you look into you'll find it's basically guesswork and they're often wrong. The virus changes every year and what they're calling a vaccine is not a vaccine in the traditional sense. The 'science' around the flu has lost its way and has become a case of profits – and I'm not buying. While I'm not a sceptic with regard to Covid-19 (though I think the entire shutdown of society is an overreaction) nor am I sceptical of vaccines in general, I am sceptical of flu shots and the claims surrounding them. I guess I'm a partial sceptic – too accepting of the mainstream for some and too sceptical (and probably cynical) for others.

And now in light of Covid-19, the vaccine sceptics and those who would politicise the pandemic are using these probably inflated flu numbers to make their case that Covid-19 is nothing unique. It could be said the scare campaign with regard to the flu has backfired. And yet if the CDC or FDA walk back the flu numbers they will lose all credibility. But if they hadn't inflated them to begin with, then perhaps more people would be shocked (and rightly so) at the number of Covid-19 deaths – death counts which would have probably been higher if counter actions had not been taken – a point the sceptics continue to ignore. Even with all the lockdowns the nearly 80,000 deaths have far exceeded the worst flu seasons we've seen – at least since the 1918 pandemic. And unlike the sceptics who insist the numbers include thousands of non-Covid deaths, I would argue the numbers are actually low and don't reflect the real toll which hasn't actually been tabulated as of yet. If the actual average number of seasonal flu deaths is more like 5,000 – then 80,000 dead in a couple of months is clearly not the flu, and not something to be dismissed.

And the sceptics continue to ignore what's happening in places like New York and Italy. They just won't address it. Instead they want to focus on the 'macro' questions and the nationwide statistics – but based on this article I think they're using the wrong statistics. They're using statistical projections with regard to flu deaths while the 80,000 Covid dead (as of 9 May 2020) are actual numbers.

I will grant – it all needs to be questioned and I continue to assert that there's much with regard to Coronavirus that is not understood, including how it is transmitted. We need to question but this is a far cry from the kind of blatant lies and absurdities that are being expressed in the sceptic community. I'm all for forms of scepticism but I would argue these sceptics aren't really sceptics as much as they're activists promoting a highly politicised counter-narrative.

Are we being lied to? To some degree we are but only a fool would answer lies with lies.

Update 30 Oct 2020:

But don't the flu numbers then include comorbidity? If the Covid numbers should include comorbidity, then that's also legitimate when it comes to considering the flu and therefore the 40,000 death statistic is accurate.

That may be true. People don't die of 'the flu' but rather the flu is the catalyst or contributing factor that in combination with other conditions leads to their death.

And yet even if that's the case, the regular flu season doesn't result in a quarter million deaths – in a seven month period. Covid is obviously something much more potent and widespread. Does it warrant an economic shut-down? Well, that could be asked or debated.

But again I'm astonished that the 'pro-life' factions seem to argue that the old and those with pre-existing conditions should just be 'on their own' so to speak – in other words, 'let them die'. And yet if the virus ran rampant in society or we went for 'herd immunity' then the statistics suggest that 2-3 million people might die. I guess they don't understand how self-defeating that argument is – not only from a so-called 'life' perspective but from an economic one. Three million dead would have dire consequences for the economy. The health care system would break along the way and the stock market would collapse as the major insurance carriers would implode from health care costs, not to mention the life insurance payouts.

Comorbidity grants some validity to the flu statistics but I'm still sceptical about the commercial aspects of the flu industry. And Covid is obviously an altogether different creature.