This is a good example of how the news media has been reporting on this particular version of the flu. “The seven-day average of people testing positive for the virus was 7.7%” should be ” 7.7% of the people tested for COVID19 tested positive”. Better to mislead people into thinking 7.7% of the total population, or 3 million people, have it. Here’s the rule: if you can use a large number (329,000 cases) instead of a small percentage (0.83% of the total California population), use the large number because it sounds scarier. But the media is right, this is really a strong case of the flu.
And where is your degree in virology from? Or are you just another social media scientist insisting you know more than the mainstream media because you really like some tin-foil hat wearing right-wing alex jones knockoff? Get a clue.
This is a good example of how the news media has been reporting on this particular version of the flu. “The seven-day average of people testing positive for the virus was 7.7%” should be ” 7.7% of the people tested for COVID19 tested positive”. Better to mislead people into thinking 7.7% of the total population, or 3 million people, have it. Here’s the rule: if you can use a large number (329,000 cases) instead of a small percentage (0.83% of the total California population), use the large number because it sounds scarier. But the media is right, this is really a strong case of the flu.
And where is your degree in virology from? Or are you just another social media scientist insisting you know more than the mainstream media because you really like some tin-foil hat wearing right-wing alex jones knockoff? Get a clue.
God you are an idiot Jon, go troll elsewhere!