Why did God create Coronavirus (COVID-19)?

[Donray]

If you belive God create it, then God at least does nothing to stop it. Is God killing many humans again to be spiteful? To teach us a lesson? Just because he can?

OR

IS God testing us to make sure we still have faith as he kills your parents, spouse or kids?

[benchwarmer]

.

I think this whole pandemic is fake and the virus is no more dangerous than common influenza, it has just been shown in a way that would scare people and make it easier for governments to be more fascistic.

Your location indicates Finland.

March 31, 2020. As of Monday, the coronavirus cases in Finland stood at 1,313 with 13 deaths, according to the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL). http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-0 ... 936343.htm

Since you think the Corona virus is a hoax, perhaps you can volunteer to care for people infected – without any need for personal protection equipment. Caring for others would be a good Christian thing to do, wouldn't it?

Actually I would not want a person who thinks this is all a hoax coming in contact with infected people. They will likely spread the virus all over the place because they have no concept of how dangerous this really is. Now, if they want to sequester themselves and remain in isolation with those who are infected to help care for them, that's another matter.

[Zzyzx]

.

Actually I would not want a person who thinks this is all a hoax coming in contact with infected people. They will likely spread the virus all over the place because they have no concept of how dangerous this really is. Now, if they want to sequester themselves and remain in isolation with those who are infected to help care for them, that's another matter.

Good point. Those who cannot understand that the pandemic is NOT a hoax are likely to be exposed and to transmit the virus to others.

[Danmark]

.... I think this whole pandemic is fake and the virus is no more dangerous than common influenza, it has just been shown in a way that would scare people and make it easier for governments to be more fascistic.

And you base these beliefs on what? Faith?
This new virus is much more easily transmitted.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/ ... vs-the-flu

[AgnosticBoy]

Maybe, however, if it would not be from them, I don’t think there would be any other probable reason for this pandemic, if we look how this started and what explanations were give and how they changed.

But, I don’t have any reason to make you to believe government is behind this and actually at this point I think this whole pandemic is fake and the virus is no more dangerous than common influenza, it has just been shown in a way that would scare people and make it easier for governments to be more fascistic.

The pandemic is not fake but rather the reactions to it are overblown. Covid-19 is certainly more contagious than the flu, but not deadlier. The flu is deadly to a greater age range than covid-19. Covid-19 is more deadly to the older population.

Either way, we should only be isolating the older population and not the younger and those already immune to covid-19.

[Danmark]

Maybe, however, if it would not be from them, I don’t think there would be any other probable reason for this pandemic, if we look 19 this started and what explanations were give and how they changed.

But, I don’t have any reason to make you to believe government is behind this and actually at this point I think this whole pandemic is fake and the virus is no more dangerous than common influenza, it has just been shown in a way that would scare people and make it easier for governments to be more fascistic.

The pandemic is not fake but rather the reactions to it are overblown. Covid-19 is certainly more contagious than the flu, but then again the flu is more deadly to a greater age range. Covid-19 is more deadly to the older population.

Either way, we should only be isolating the older population and not the younger and those already immune to covid-19.

This is a completely false and dangerously ignorant statement. The SARS 2 virus that causes COVID-19 is dangerous to people of all ages. Also, people of younger age who may be less likely to die, are just as
likely to pass it on to those more vulnerable.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... ba62e57_10

"The new data show that up to one-fifth of infected people ages 20-44 have been hospitalized, including 2%-4% who required treatment in an intensive care unit."
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/cor ... nvincible/

[JehovahsWitness]

....you admit the your God does not answer prays how is that Satan's fault?

Emphaisi MINE


Where did I {quote} "admit the your God does not answer prays"?



JEHOVAHS WITNESS

[AgnosticBoy]

The pandemic is not fake but rather the reactions to it are overblown. Covid-19 is certainly more contagious than the flu, but then again the flu is more deadly to a greater age range. Covid-19 is more deadly to the older population.

Either way, we should only be isolating the older population and not the younger and those already immune to covid-19.

This is a completely false and dangerously ignorant statement. The SARS 2 virus that causes COVID-19 is dangerous to people of all ages. Also, people of younger age who may be less likely to die, are just as
likely to pass it on to those more vulnerable.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... ba62e57_10

We can both agree that a person of any age can get covid-19 but having the virus does not make it "dangerous". The simple reason for this is that lot of people who have covid-19 experience little to no symptoms so why would that be called "dangerous"? Having a runny nose or sore throat is not dangerous and certainly nothing to be hospitalized for.

Now going by your own source, which group(s) of people are likely to experience "severe" symptoms?
"The COVID-19 virus infects people of all ages. However, evidence to date suggests that two groups of people are at a higher risk of getting severe COVID-19 disease. These are older people; and those with underlying medical conditions."
Source: Danmark's cited source.

Lets check out your other source.

"The new data show that up to one-fifth of infected people ages 20-44 have been hospitalized, including 2%-4% who required treatment in an intensive care unit."
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/cor ... nvincible/

Fortunately, I am familiar with the CDC report that your source refers to (it is the hyperlinked text in the same paragraph). Interestingly, your source leaves out the stat for 0-19 age range, and that's because the stat is very low for hospitalizations in that age range (it's less than 3%). That certainly doesn't fit the narrative that young people are suffering just as much as the elderly.

But lets add more perspective to that "20%" or "one-fifth" stat your article brings up. First, only 20-30% of people who get covid-19 required hospitalization according to the CDC report that your source relied on (CDC). This means that 70-80% of those infected do NOT require hospitalization. So when you tell me that "one-fifth" or 20% of an age range requires hospitalization, you're only referring to a minority population (since 80% of hospitalizations outside of that age range) that's already within another minority population (covid-19 cases needing hospitalization). Sorry, but you have a very weak case. Covid-19 infections are not "dangerous" to the vast majority of the population.

Also, people of younger age who may be less likely to die, are just as likely to pass it on to those more vulnerable.

Again, my plan is to quarantine only those who are at high risk for severe symptoms from covid-19. This would exclude quarantining people who are immune and those who are low risk. If people are immune, then they have no infection to pass on to the "more vulnerable". The low risk population would eventually develop immunity, as well. Second, if the "more vulnerable" are isolated, then that means they would have limited to no contact with those the low risk population.

My plan is much better than quarantining an entire population and damaging an economy. I've proven not only that there is a low risk population but also that it is irrational to treat them the same way as you would the high risk population. The low risk and immune population are in no "danger". This group should most certainly get back to work.

[benchwarmer]

The pandemic is not fake but rather the reactions to it are overblown. Covid-19 is certainly more contagious than the flu, but then again the flu is more deadly to a greater age range. Covid-19 is more deadly to the older population.

Either way, we should only be isolating the older population and not the younger and those already immune to covid-19.

This is a completely false and dangerously ignorant statement. The SARS 2 virus that causes COVID-19 is dangerous to people of all ages. Also, people of younger age who may be less likely to die, are just as
likely to pass it on to those more vulnerable.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... ba62e57_10

We can both agree that a person of any age can get covid-19 but having the virus does not make it "dangerous". The simple reason for this is that lot of people who have covid-19 experience little to no symptoms so why would that be called "dangerous"? Having a runny nose or sore throat is not dangerous and certainly nothing to be hospitalized for.

It's pretty simple. Those who contract the virus are a danger to the REST of the population. It's not about protecting yourself, it's about protecting everyone else.

This virus is clearly easy to spread. It is also already overwhelming some hospitals causing a danger to those who need treatment for OTHER issues.

I get your point that your individual risk from dying of COVID-19 is probably not much worse that the flu. However, that's not the real point. The real point is that this virus is easily spread and thus causes a spike in those needing hospitalization. It is also very dangerous to the older population and it's extremely hard to effectively quarantine them since contact with others is often required for their care.

Yes, shuttering businesses is damaging the economy. Doing nothing would overwhelm the health care system, and cause death beyond COVID-19 victims.

[AgnosticBoy]

It's pretty simple. Those who contract the virus are a danger to the REST of the population. It's not about protecting yourself, it's about protecting everyone else.

This virus is clearly easy to spread. It is also already overwhelming some hospitals causing a danger to those who need treatment for OTHER issues.

I get your point that your individual risk from dying of COVID-19 is probably not much worse that the flu. However, that's not the real point. The real point is that this virus is easily spread and thus causes a spike in those needing hospitalization. It is also very dangerous to the older population and it's extremely hard to effectively quarantine them since contact with others is often required for their care.

Yes, shuttering businesses is damaging the economy. Doing nothing would overwhelm the health care system, and cause death beyond COVID-19 victims.

I also addressed this point of yours. Here's from my post:

Again, my plan is to quarantine only those who are at high risk for severe symptoms from covid-19. This would exclude quarantining people who are immune and those who are low risk. If people are immune, then they have no infection to pass on to the "more vulnerable". The low risk population would eventually develop immunity, as well. Second, if the "more vulnerable" are isolated, then that means they would have limited to no contact with those the low risk population.

My plan is much better than quarantining an entire population and damaging an economy. I've proven not only that there is a low risk population but also that it is irrational to treat them the same way as you would the high risk population. The low risk and immune population are in no "danger". This group should most certainly get back to work.

Under my plan, there would be little to no spreading to the high risk crowd since they would be the target of stay-at-home orders. Instead the low risk crowd would spread the virus to others in the low risk population and this would not be dangerous. Many would develope immunity.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 67 by AgnosticBoy]

You have not improved on your completely wrong statement,

Either way, we should only be isolating the older population and not the younger and those already immune to covid-19.

The point you insist on missing is that people of all ages can die from this virus and have. There is no telling who or why some people IN THE SAME AGE GROUP have milder symptoms. Suppose you have 5 kids and one is likely to have severe symptoms or will even die from it. The others will get various symptoms, feeling like they can't breathe, aches, tiredness, but not have to stay in the hospital.
#1 you don't want ANY of them to suffer
#2 You don't know WHICH of 5 will die or go to the hospital.

Your idea is that you only have to quarantine one of them. Which one? Not to mention the fact that ALL of them will carry the virus to others, some of whom will die.

Your notion is the equivalent of having a peeing section in a swimming pool.