Grey, I appreciate the time you put into helping me understand by providing research. But my objection posted here was limited to the text that he posted - it was wrong. I didn’t want to see the same sentence, which is faulty, used to back 20% infection.
I myself just checked on Asian susceptibility to respond to someone else and see the article I found was Chinese. Now, I’m not suggesting that every bit of info from China is wrong, but they are our enemies and if they are purging their population of protesters, I’m not accepting their demographics and cure rates etc. Research is more likely to be accurate because it can be peer researched world wide. And as I said, it was “early reports” so I have said in another post, I’ll stop posting Asians more susceptible until I see better data, which in this case is “more current” and “validated internationally.”
I will continue to contradict faulty statements like the one I posted about to DouglasKC but I don’t have time to spend on the Corona thread. I wasn’t taking on the entire thread re the research you are doing here - the thread he posted was deleted before I clicked “Post” so I replied to him here.
My post to DouglasKC here brought me 11 responses in addition to his ( and climbing at a time when I’m not keeping up on the other thread so I don’t have time to respond to all the other available data you peeps are sharing - just pointing to flawed data and asking it not be spread, while myself agreeing not to post “Asians more susceptible” unless i come across better data. Thank you, Grey. :)
Sorry!!!!!!