This argument makes no sense to me. By this logic, the original viruses that evolved however millions of years ago were the most lethal of all time and each subsequent evolution could only be less lethal and/or more transmissible. It’s a bizarre all encompassing claim to make instead of just looking at the data that shows that delta is approximately as deadly as Covid, like that published from the UK government.
That is a complete lie. In the UK, between Feb 1 and Jun 21, 117 people died from the delta variant. 117 deaths in 4.7 months. That works out as ,less than 1 death per day from the delta variant. In a country of over 60 million people. Again, less than 1 death per day. The delta variant is weak and pathetic.
This is exactly what you would expect from viruses. Viruses need to become less deadly to survive. If a virus kills too many hosts, it dies out.
The other issue with all of this - we're working from seriously flawed data. Remember during early and middle of 2020, with all of the Fauci Birx presentations, the numbers were going wild over 'tested positive', and 'died from' Covid? and the incentives to hospitals to have Covid-diagnosed patients? The captured numbers were such garbage that making comparisons using this data is just leading to making bad conclusions. Additionally, the deaths in the early months of Covid were, arguably, from mis-treatment of the hospitalized patients (remember the doctors who posted videos of themselves discussing how ventilation was overused or pressure exceeded that sustainable by the lungs and this treatment 'blew out' (their phrase, not mine) the lungs)? And, of course, the "died from vs died with" Covid bias of the captured data would lead us, today, to believe that this virus was less deadly than even the "99.56%" survivable rate, or greater, depending on age brackets.
I would think a more accurate 'guess' would center around using the expected flu casualties for 2020, and scrub the actual covid and flu data in 2020 (less physical accidents, homocides, fentanyl overdoses, etc.) and start looking there.
In my understanding, it is not all viruses become less deadly over time.
Rather a virus mutates in an animal, then it has a mutation that humans can catch, that first iteration will be most deadly, then become more contagious and less deadly as it spreads around.
Not all viruses are of the same lineage in that sense.
This argument makes no sense to me. By this logic, the original viruses that evolved however millions of years ago were the most lethal of all time and each subsequent evolution could only be less lethal and/or more transmissible. It’s a bizarre all encompassing claim to make instead of just looking at the data that shows that delta is approximately as deadly as Covid, like that published from the UK government.
"delta is approximately as deadly as Covid".
That is a complete lie. In the UK, between Feb 1 and Jun 21, 117 people died from the delta variant. 117 deaths in 4.7 months. That works out as ,less than 1 death per day from the delta variant. In a country of over 60 million people. Again, less than 1 death per day. The delta variant is weak and pathetic.
This is exactly what you would expect from viruses. Viruses need to become less deadly to survive. If a virus kills too many hosts, it dies out.
The other issue with all of this - we're working from seriously flawed data. Remember during early and middle of 2020, with all of the Fauci Birx presentations, the numbers were going wild over 'tested positive', and 'died from' Covid? and the incentives to hospitals to have Covid-diagnosed patients? The captured numbers were such garbage that making comparisons using this data is just leading to making bad conclusions. Additionally, the deaths in the early months of Covid were, arguably, from mis-treatment of the hospitalized patients (remember the doctors who posted videos of themselves discussing how ventilation was overused or pressure exceeded that sustainable by the lungs and this treatment 'blew out' (their phrase, not mine) the lungs)? And, of course, the "died from vs died with" Covid bias of the captured data would lead us, today, to believe that this virus was less deadly than even the "99.56%" survivable rate, or greater, depending on age brackets.
I would think a more accurate 'guess' would center around using the expected flu casualties for 2020, and scrub the actual covid and flu data in 2020 (less physical accidents, homocides, fentanyl overdoses, etc.) and start looking there.
In my understanding, it is not all viruses become less deadly over time.
Rather a virus mutates in an animal, then it has a mutation that humans can catch, that first iteration will be most deadly, then become more contagious and less deadly as it spreads around.
Not all viruses are of the same lineage in that sense.
HIV did.