1/300K chance of dying if 65 and younger.

Meaningless unless time interval is attached.

@Viking Why does it need a time interval? 1 in 300K who get Covid die. Maybe it takes a day for 300K to get Covid, maybe a year. It doesn't matter. One dies.


I think you're wrong, that the 1 in 300K is communicated as "Your chance of dying from COVID if under 65", not conditional on getting infected.


16% of the US population (330 million= is over 65, lets say 50 million out of 330. We now have 280 million below 65.

45K deaths younger than 65:

45000/280million ~ 1/6K have died by now among the below 65 population.

1/300K is correct for some kind of time interval, but I have no idea what interval.

@Viking I think you are confusing yourself. Btw, various people here suddenly kept mentioning the 1 in 300K die statistic, but I have no idea where it came from (MSM?).

We also know they all get paid very well per COVID case and PCR sucks for testing. We will never know who really got what and what they actually died from.

I like this CDC graph. Assuming most Covid deaths reported are fake in the first place, it shows your very tiny risk of dying by the Wuhan flu. It’s all about perspective 🤔


One of Adam's clips mentioned one in 300K.

PCR works for what it is designed to do, improve signal to noise ratio for specific gene sequences.

For example detect latent viral infections.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
No Agenda Social

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!