Because then we're literally just redefining the word "cause" to a useless meaning
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @bobbywarnsiii and
In this case, the virus clearly exhibits higher mortality when you have the things that he's stating (chronic inflammation, inflammaging, inequity issues, etc.). When you don't have those syndemic parameters, the virus is not more harmful that a common cold.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @davidbautistaqf @bobbywarnsiii and
That is a factually incorrect assertion. In reality, the predominant driver of mortality is age. I also wonder how fatal you think the common cold would be if we solved global inequality and had a vaccine etc?
2 replies 0 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @bobbywarnsiii and
Age is associated with inflammaging which is basically chronic inflammation, so I'm not wrong. It would be less fatal. I actually is less fatal due to the vaccine. Even if those vaccines are actually not so good.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes
-
-
Replying to @davidbautistaqf @bobbywarnsiii and
COVID-19 is many times more deadly than the common cold. Probably somewhere around 100x, depending on the virus. If we were to, say, eliminate global inequity, this would reduce the severity of both the cold and COVID, but COVID would still be much worse
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @bobbywarnsiii and
In absolute terms, would it be problematic enough to cause a pandemic? No. I understand that inherently COVID-19 has a higher mortality than common cold, but the risk factors and age play an important role in this regard.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @davidbautistaqf @GidMK and
Without them, COVID-19 would be still more fatal than common cold yes, but in absolute terms it wouldn't be such a problem as it has been. So why is everyone saying he is not correct? He's just stating that the mortality is heavily associated with those factors
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @davidbautistaqf @GidMK and
Yes if we lived in an entirely different world then we would indeed live in a different world. Read up on the legal definition of "but for" causation. You'll then understand why he's incorrect.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes
If we fixed global inequality and all of our problems it would indeed make infectious disease less of an issue, but it's a truly ridiculous thing to blame COVID-19 deaths on
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @bobbywarnsiii and
I guess the point that I'm understanding is that we need to pay careful attention to those points in order to prevent lots of deaths that are going to be caused in next pandemics if those viruses happen to thrive on chronic inflammation and inequity
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @davidbautistaqf @GidMK and
The response is “obviously”. Social determinants of health are real and something we learn about in first year med school. But they apply to almost ALL illnesses. But most of those folk would be alive today if they hadn’t caught... SARS-Cov2. Ergo, they died of SARS-CoV2.
1 reply 0 retweets 14 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.