Did Covid 19 kill off Influenza???

I am curious as to why there have been very little Influenza cases this year. We are in the middle of Dec. and I have not heard of any cases. Did Covid 19 also do away with the flu?

www.cdc.gov...

y/index.htm

a reply to: Locutis1704

People will say the flu is lower because of masks and social distancing.

But then they'll say Covid is higher because people aren't wearing masks and social distancing.

It's confusing.

a reply to: Locutis1704

That’s what they want us to believe apparently.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Locutis1704

People will say the flu is lower because of masks and social distancing.

But then they'll say Covid is higher because people aren't wearing masks and social distancing.

It's confusing.

Was about to say the same thing...

They are just lumping it all together and calling it Covid.

They get government money for Covid cases. Not for the flu.

I have an employee out with the flu right now. Second one in 3 weeks.

That being said, yes. The numbers are really low so far. For years now our hospital and doctors offices in this town have a box of masks by the door, and encourage you to wear one if you're exhibiting flu symptoms this time of year. Wonder why that is?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Locutis1704

People will say the flu is lower because of masks and social distancing.

But then they'll say Covid is higher because people aren't wearing masks and social distancing.

It's confusing.

You may be confused because you don't understand exponential growth. I wrote about this yesterday. I'll repeat the short version here.

The course that an infectious disease in the population will take at any particular time is determined by a parameter known as the basic reproduction number (Rt) at that particular point in time. If Rt is larger than 1.0, that means that on the average an individual who has the infection will pass it on to MORE than 1 other individual, and the disease will grow exponentially over time. If Rt is less than 1.0, that means that on the average an individual who has the infection will pass it on to LESS than 1 other individual and the disease will die out exponentially.

In the absence of any actions to control the spread of respiratory diseases (mask wearing, social distancing) Rt for COVID-19 is somewhere between 2 to 6 (depending on the population density of where you live) and Rt for seasonal influenza is between about 1 to 2. The reasons for this difference in Rt is because COVID-19 viruses are about twice as contagious as influenza viruses and because about half the population already has some immunity to influenza viruses, while only about 5% now has immunity to COVID-19.

Let's say a location does enough mask wearing and social distancing to reduce the transmission of respiratory droplets to 1/2 of its normal value. That would bring Rt for influenza down to less than 1.0 in most cases, so influenza will die out exponentially. However that will only bring Rt for COVID-19 down to somewhere between 1 to 3, so COVID-19 will continue to grow exponentially--although at a slower rate than it would if there was no mask wearing and social distancing at all.

That's the situation we're in right now. The amount of mask wearing and social distancing we're doing is enough to stop influenza but only enough to slow COVID-19 down.

a reply to: 1947boomer

That's the situation we're in right now. The amount of mask wearing and social distancing we're doing is enough to stop influenza but only enough to slow COVID-19 down.

Again....that’s what they want us to believe apparently.

originally posted by: 1947boomer

That's the situation we're in right now. The amount of mask wearing and social distancing we're doing is enough to stop influenza but only enough to slow COVID-19 down.

I don't believe you.

Flu is being reported as Covid.

Don't sell derp.

a reply to: 1947boomer

I disagree only because we've seen an increase in Covid after mask wearing became mandatory.

Mentioned this in a thread a few days ago, some said well flu season isn't in full force yet, but the article clearly states in the same time span as 2019. To go from 20,000 to 36 isn't just from people wearing a mask. It's a combination of reasons and misdiagnosis is highly likely one of them.


San Diego county has a population of nearly four million people. Last year there were nearly 20,000 reported cases of the flu. This year, there is only 36. Thoughts?

www.kusi.com...


SAN DIEGO (KUSI) – COVID-19 cases continue to increase across California, and here in San Diego County, but flu cases remain extremely low in comparison to this time in previous years.

We are well into flu season, but San Diego County’s data for flu infections only shows 36 reported cases so far this year. Carl DeMaio tweeted out this shocking revelation, comparing it to this time in other years saying, “In a typical year we get over 17,073 on average!”

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Locutis1704

People will say the flu is lower because of masks and social distancing.

But then they'll say Covid is higher because people aren't wearing masks and social distancing.

It's confusing.

You may be confused because you don't understand exponential growth. I wrote about this yesterday. I'll repeat the short version here.

The course that an infectious disease in the population will take at any particular time is determined by a parameter known as the basic reproduction number (Rt) at that particular point in time. If Rt is larger than 1.0, that means that on the average an individual who has the infection will pass it on to MORE than 1 other individual, and the disease will grow exponentially over time. If Rt is less than 1.0, that means that on the average an individual who has the infection will pass it on to LESS than 1 other individual and the disease will die out exponentially.

In the absence of any actions to control the spread of respiratory diseases (mask wearing, social distancing) Rt for COVID-19 is somewhere between 2 to 6 (depending on the population density of where you live) and Rt for seasonal influenza is between about 1 to 2. The reasons for this difference in Rt is because COVID-19 viruses are about twice as contagious as influenza viruses and because about half the population already has some immunity to influenza viruses, while only about 5% now has immunity to COVID-19.

Let's say a location does enough mask wearing and social distancing to reduce the transmission of respiratory droplets to 1/2 of its normal value. That would bring Rt for influenza down to less than 1.0 in most cases, so influenza will die out exponentially. However that will only bring Rt for COVID-19 down to somewhere between 1 to 3, so COVID-19 will continue to grow exponentially--although at a slower rate than it would if there was no mask wearing and social distancing at all.

That's the situation we're in right now. The amount of mask wearing and social distancing we're doing is enough to stop influenza but only enough to slow COVID-19 down.

Thank you for the detailed response. I just have a point of contention:

If that were the case, wouldn't we have seen a decrease in COVID Rt over the course of March through now? As masks have become normal, social distancing enforced, and lockdowns aplenty, the Rt for COVID should have decreased (as we've seen with the Flu being nearly eradicated), though that is not what we're seeing at all. Theoretically, the Rt for COVID would have been at its' highest in March / April / May, when little precautions were being taken and the population had less of an idea of how dangerous this virus was, thus taking the threat less seriously.

Though, we're seeing the highest daily cases ever, right now, some 8-9 months after the first lockdowns / social distancing / mask mandates were put into place. Most mask mandates / social distancing hasn't been laxed, so, what is the reasoning behind the spike, if this was all working to flatten the curve throughout the summer / fall?

Sounds like either misdiagnosis or worse, the virus has mutated and adapted - making masks and social distancing irrelevant in the prevention of spreading COVID.

a reply to: QUANTUMGR4V17Y

The thing to remember about masks is that, over time, they become great incubators for viruses.

a reply to: QUANTUMGR4V17Y

Yeah.
Apparently masks don’t work, but they want us to believe otherwise.
Why?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: QUANTUMGR4V17Y

The thing to remember about masks is that, over time, they become great incubators for viruses.

The mind is a great incubator to believe bullsh!t.

Kind of funny that Trump got raked over the coals by damn near every “expert” for saying this. The data is starting to show that he may just of been right.

That’s cause the COVID is the flu. I know all the simps on the site don’t want to believe it, but it’s the truth. Unless they want to finally admit COVID is a joke and not very dangerous at all and in fact people are dying from other causes like the flu and their real deaths like car accident, etc.

a reply to: Locutis1704
Bottom line. The death toll in America overall, will be about the same number of deaths in 2020, that there was in 2019....2018...etc..

Not seeing an increased number of ambulances rushing around town, tells you all you need to know.

a reply to: Locutis1704

No, but mask, social distancing , kids not being in school, shutdowns. All that would for sure take flu numbers down.

Those steps are taken to combat something much more contagious than the flu.

Flu didn't stand a chance.

a reply to: DBCowboy

But then they'll say Covid is higher because people aren't wearing masks and social distancing.

The amount of mask and distance it takes to combat the flu is lower than what it takes to combat covid.