Do you mean affect people the same way, or do you mean have the same demographics regarding infection? There's been a lot of research into the demographics aspect over the years. This one was from 24 years ago: science.org/doi/10.1126…
Do you mean affect people the same way, or do you mean have the same demographics regarding infection? There's been a lot of research into the demographics aspect over the years. This one was from 24 years ago: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.288.5474.2153
I guess the different demographics who are "infected."
Why isn't HIV/AIDS a mortality risk to Americans who don't engage in homosexual sex or share used needles?
In the mid-1980s, the narrative was that AIDS was going to be a huge risk to every American. This did not turn out to be the case.
I compare it to the narrative that Covid was a mortality risk to "everyone." This clearly did not turn out to be the case. The average age of a Covid victim is 79 to 82 depending on the country's data you look at.
It's hard to find an example of a healthy person under 40 who definitively died "from" Covid.
I personally knew three people who were said to have died from Covid. They were 70, 80 and 81. That's in four years. So I personally knew/know nobody under the age of 70 who died from Covid.
That tells me Covid was NOT a real mortality risk to people under the age of 70. That's why I question the authorized narratives.
All things being equal, PIV is lower risk in terms of infection than anal, most gay men aren't also having sex with women, untreated STDs in areas with poor heathcare coverage up the risk across the board, and public health messaging in the US was a huge help in keeping the epidemic from completely breaking containment. (Ah, the joys of Gen X sex education and spending your teens being scared that if the nukes didn't get you killed, sex would! Not that it stopped us.)
I know some people under 40 without preexisting conditions who have post-viral issues because of COVID infections, especially those who caught it in 2020 when we were all immunologically naïve, so there are risks (overblown by many on the left, but not trivial) beyond just mortality.
That said, I strongly wish that the public health messaging had been more flexible/honest (just tell us when you don't know enough yet to know and update when you have better information, damn it) and that it hadn't become a political football, which I think happened at least in part because of the boneheaded decision to treat the protests about police brutality as if they were somehow a different risk level than mask protests were. (I ranted at length about this to my spouse at the time. It was such a stupid decision and undermined so much public trust, which was limited as hell in the first place here.)
Do you mean affect people the same way, or do you mean have the same demographics regarding infection? There's been a lot of research into the demographics aspect over the years. This one was from 24 years ago: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.288.5474.2153
I guess the different demographics who are "infected."
Why isn't HIV/AIDS a mortality risk to Americans who don't engage in homosexual sex or share used needles?
In the mid-1980s, the narrative was that AIDS was going to be a huge risk to every American. This did not turn out to be the case.
I compare it to the narrative that Covid was a mortality risk to "everyone." This clearly did not turn out to be the case. The average age of a Covid victim is 79 to 82 depending on the country's data you look at.
It's hard to find an example of a healthy person under 40 who definitively died "from" Covid.
I personally knew three people who were said to have died from Covid. They were 70, 80 and 81. That's in four years. So I personally knew/know nobody under the age of 70 who died from Covid.
That tells me Covid was NOT a real mortality risk to people under the age of 70. That's why I question the authorized narratives.
All things being equal, PIV is lower risk in terms of infection than anal, most gay men aren't also having sex with women, untreated STDs in areas with poor heathcare coverage up the risk across the board, and public health messaging in the US was a huge help in keeping the epidemic from completely breaking containment. (Ah, the joys of Gen X sex education and spending your teens being scared that if the nukes didn't get you killed, sex would! Not that it stopped us.)
I know some people under 40 without preexisting conditions who have post-viral issues because of COVID infections, especially those who caught it in 2020 when we were all immunologically naïve, so there are risks (overblown by many on the left, but not trivial) beyond just mortality.
That said, I strongly wish that the public health messaging had been more flexible/honest (just tell us when you don't know enough yet to know and update when you have better information, damn it) and that it hadn't become a political football, which I think happened at least in part because of the boneheaded decision to treat the protests about police brutality as if they were somehow a different risk level than mask protests were. (I ranted at length about this to my spouse at the time. It was such a stupid decision and undermined so much public trust, which was limited as hell in the first place here.)