Idk dude. I like percents?

I think they are lumping into broad categories to let everyone know they should be careful bc no one is immune. I think the main idea is clear; it's not like it used to be with just old people dying from the flu.

You don't have to believe it if you don't want to.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by LNCHBOX

70448

Member since Jun 2009

84297 posts

Posted on 11/20/14 at 9:07 am to Sir Drinksalot

quote:
I think the main idea is clear; it's not like it used to be with just old people dying from the flu.

I think there should be smaller range than 18-64. What conclusion can you really draw from that, ecially with only percentages?

I think there should be at least one more division in that range, and ideally probably two.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by TeddyPadillac

Member since Dec 2010

25787 posts

Posted on 11/20/14 at 9:15 am to Sir Drinksalot

quote:
Idk dude. I like percents?

what do they even mean though?
Did these people actually have the flu, or flu like symptoms?

biggest thing with that is, you can't lump 18 year olds with 60 year olds and give data to scare the 18 year old.
if the number was simply 18-50 i'd feel better about it.
This is what i'm talking about though in researching flu data. They seem to only give data that fits their agenda of making everyone take the shot.
It is difficult to find actually data on a breakdown of age groups and who actually died from the flu and not from something else bothering their immune system at the time.

Why would a healthy 18-40 year old with no kids need a flu shot? They don't. But if they don't, someone misses out on some money.

1 ...

Report Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board