Which is better

[rdk4121]

Where is that data? I thought the opposite was true. Seasonal flu doesn't permanantly damage lungs, covid sometimes does, not a disease to fool with

I've attached a graph that should help. Either way, you are right that the flu typically doesn't have an long term effects associated with it like covid does. Both can be true though.

 

[preacherwebb]

Only problem is that it can on occasion kill young healthy people.

Let's get them the vacine as soon as possible.

Oh I totally agree ... I was just answering the question as it was asked.

Not trying to put words in the OP's mouth, but now or later, those were the answers to choose from in the OP, and from those two choices, I'd say get it over with.
The question was posed, as if to say, they're gonna get it one way or the other, so which is better.
Well, if they're gonna get it (if I'm gonna get it for that matter) one way or the other, then get it over with.

Of course, the obvious answer if the scope of the question is broadened:
1) It'd be best to not get it at all.
2) It would be good to not get it and then a vaccine comes out.
3) If one absolutely must get it, then get it and not die, and then with no health repercussions once over it, and have antibodies that never die out or weaken.
4) Well, any other options start to go down hill from here I guess.

Not railing at you HuntlandVolinColo, just clarifying my answer.
Somone else wasn't near as kind as you when quoting me (and they quietly made the list).

 

[chrismc1000]

CDC has said there are false positive tests that happened for the Chinese virus. So much as 50% ish. So I'm not worried about it.

 

[The Original Fade]

Where is that data? I thought the opposite was true. Seasonal flu doesn't permanantly damage lungs, covid sometimes does, not a disease to fool with

COVID does not permanently damage your lungs in all or even a significant portion of patients. Take it from somebody who has had it