What is the infection fatality rate (IFR) of Covid 19 now?

a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

originally posted by: MaxxAction
a reply to: ScepticScot

That's funny...

when those who are opposed to all vaccines tried to argue that they are dangerous, VAERS data was used often to show that in general, vaccines are safe, considering in 30 years, and millions of people took vaccines, only 900k adverse events. Again, you want to have your argument both ways.

Yes the arguments have become desperate currently and the double standards are obvious.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

Yes we know that.
But the standards are standards.
1 in 10,000 for example serious adverse reaction will give you 1000 in 10,000,000 and 50,000 in 50,000,000 including debilitating conditions and deaths.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

Yes we know that.
Bit the standards are standards.
1 in 10,000 for example serious adverse reaction will give you 1000 in 10,000,000 and 50,000 in 50,000,000 including debilitating conditions and deaths.

Do you genuinely not get the point.

Amazing.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

Yes we know that.
Bit the standards are standards.
1 in 10,000 for example serious adverse reaction will give you 1000 in 10,000,000 and 50,000 in 50,000,000 including debilitating conditions and deaths.

Do you genuinely not get the point.

Amazing.

I think I do. If you want to argue by engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of really then you will always try to dismiss deaths as expectable in the name of the greater good.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

Yes we know that.
Bit the standards are standards.
1 in 10,000 for example serious adverse reaction will give you 1000 in 10,000,000 and 50,000 in 50,000,000 including debilitating conditions and deaths.

Do you genuinely not get the point.

Amazing.

I think I do. If you want to argue by engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of really then you will always try to dismiss deaths as expectable in the name of the greater good.

You are the one advocating for more deaths.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

Yes we know that.
Bit the standards are standards.
1 in 10,000 for example serious adverse reaction will give you 1000 in 10,000,000 and 50,000 in 50,000,000 including debilitating conditions and deaths.

Do you genuinely not get the point.

Amazing.

I think I do. If you want to argue by engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of really then you will always try to dismiss deaths as expectable in the name of the greater good.

You are the one advocating for more deaths.

You've been completely shut down. At this point its all nonsense. Just stop.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

Yes we know that.
Bit the standards are standards.
1 in 10,000 for example serious adverse reaction will give you 1000 in 10,000,000 and 50,000 in 50,000,000 including debilitating conditions and deaths.

Do you genuinely not get the point.

Amazing.

I think I do. If you want to argue by engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of really then you will always try to dismiss deaths as expectable in the name of the greater good.

You are the one advocating for more deaths.

You've been completely shut down. At this point its all nonsense. Just stop.

Oh if you say so. When did you become site owner?

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Not an advocate of free speech, then?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The safety standards are not set by myself and/or by vaccine apologists and defenders of the Pharmaceuticals.

A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw the vaccines and in terms of serious adverse reactions 1 to 2 in 10,000 up to 1 in 100,000.
Rotavirus and Swine Flu vaccines had similar profiles.

Rotavirus kills a handful people a year in the UK.

Covid has killed hundreds of thousands.

Not the same thing.

Yes we know that.
Bit the standards are standards.
1 in 10,000 for example serious adverse reaction will give you 1000 in 10,000,000 and 50,000 in 50,000,000 including debilitating conditions and deaths.

Do you genuinely not get the point.

Amazing.

I think I do. If you want to argue by engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of really then you will always try to dismiss deaths as expectable in the name of the greater good.

You are the one advocating for more deaths.

What kind of nonsensical arguments you are making now?!

If you want to argue by engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality then you will always try to dismiss deaths as expectable in the name of the greater good.

a reply to: ScepticScot

The IFR of Covid-19 is around 0.15% and not as much as you get to present it so to support your beliefs and ideology.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Not an advocate of free speech, then?

I wonder how much fun this site would be as the circle jerk certain posters so desperately want it to be .

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The IFR of Covid-19 is around 0.15% and not as much as you get to present it so to support your beliefs and ideology.

Back to this again.

You still haven't answered why the UK would consider the demographics of Afghanistan for its covid policies.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Other opinions than yours are available and are just as, if not more, valid.

About time you realised that.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The IFR of Covid-19 is around 0.15% and not as much as you get to present it so to support your beliefs and ideology.

Back to this again.

You still haven't answered why the UK would consider the demographics of Afghanistan for its covid policies.

I am not the one who brought up the cases of Afghanistan. And I don't even know the demographics of this country. Your question isn't relevant here. You can answer it for me if you want.

IFR of Covid-19 is around 0.15%. Regardless of the attempts made to present it as much higher.

The question in the OP is clear. It never asked what the local IFRs are or the IFRs per age group. It asked what the global average IFR is and this is simple.

It was 0.15% now is even smaller than the Flu.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Other opinions than yours are available and are just as, if not more, valid.

About time you realised that.

Other opinions exist. This don't make them valid though.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Of course not. In your World, only your opinions are valid.

How narrow minded can you get?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The IFR of Covid-19 is around 0.15% and not as much as you get to present it so to support your beliefs and ideology.

Back to this again.

You still haven't answered why the UK would consider the demographics of Afghanistan for its covid policies.

And again your question is irrelevant.

Earlier you have tried to cast doubt on the skills and competence of Dr Ioannidis so to support your beliefs and ideology.

To remind you Dr Ioannidis is the one of the most cited if not the most cited scientists in the world.

I don't know whether you find it fun as you say. But your arguments have been refuted several times and someone else said anything beyond that point is simply disingenuous.

The OP has been answered with two simple posts of mine long time ago.

Conclusions

All systematic evaluations of seroprevalence data converge that SARS-CoV-2 infection is widely spread globally. Acknowledging residual uncertainties, the available evidence suggests average global IFR of ~0.15% and ~1.5-2.0 billion infections by February 2021 with substantial differences in IFR and in infection spread across

A combination of high levels of immunity and the reduced severity of the Omicron variant has rendered Covid-19 less lethal than influenza for the vast majority of people in England, according to a Financial Times analysis of official

[

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

The IFR of Covid-19 is around 0.15% and not as much as you get to present it so to support your beliefs and ideology.

Back to this again.

You still haven't answered why the UK would consider the demographics of Afghanistan for its covid policies.

I am not the one who brought up the cases of Afghanistan. And I don't even know the demographics of this country. Your question isn't relevant here. You can answer it for me if you want.

IFR of Covid-19 is around 0.15%. Regardless of the attempts made to present it as much higher.

The question in the OP is clear. It never asked what the local IFRs are or the IFRs per age group. It asked what the global average IFR is and this is simple.

It was 0.15% now is even smaller than the Flu.

You really don't ger the point do you.

Global IFR doesn't natter for policy decisions in individual countries.

Even if .15% is accurate (doubtfull) its largely irrelevant.