They wouldn't though. They would do their job. It's what they do. They are good people he is a bad person. Hopefully, he'll die a lonely, cold, wet, hungry and dark death alone somewhere.

That's why he lost his job at Fox. Can you imagine how vile one would have to be taken off that network?

It's worse than that. Not just the old, but the disabled and infirm, those who have any 'compromising' condition such as diabetes, asthma and hypertension, and any person, young or old, whose immune system was insufficient to overcome the infection. O'Reilly is channeling a fascist interpretation of Spencer's 'survival of the fittest' flaunting his Nazi credentials.

Will the assholery virus help off that O'Really creep.

O'Reilly might end up condemning himself. @morlll

NOT true - didn't you notice this - which is accurate ... "Unfortunately his assumption is flawed, in that about 20% of those who die are young (under 50) and were thought to be healthy. I" And many of the older adults that died were also healthy and free of pre-existing conditions.

It is NOT true, and believing crap like it, and worse yet posting it, should be a crime! STFU!

@AnneWimsey, I will not. You're a little old to be a whiny little brat.

Wishing your govt would silence those you disagree with is proof of your Fascism.

@evergreen Is it 20%, or is that another projection? It's definitely an exaggeration. If the numbers are as bad as you claim, why do you need to embellish your statistics? It undermines any argument you're attempting to make.

It's not 20% or even close. Staaawwwwp!

@BryanLV Not sure your words make sense - by hey, believe what you will - it's of no consequence to me.

@evergreen Not making sense of English, eh?

Now I get it.

@BryanLV WHO & CDC stats are not enough for you?

@AnneWimsey They're fine. Adjusted properly for probable undiagnosed cases and people who actually died from covid-19, and not just people who died while being a carrier.

Many doctors have exposed the inaccuracy of the numbers and how media have been manipulating the narrative to keep people in fear, and watching.

@BryanLV and so you have concluded the numbers are Less........

@AnneWimsey The mortality rate has got to be lower than reported, because a large portion of people are not being tested. Many who contract the virus never know, because they are asymptomatic. If you ayou show no symptoms, you most likely are never diagnosed as a carrier. Multiple doctors have stated that they believe there are 50-100 actual carriers who are never diagnosed as such.

@creative51 Not buying this at all. The vast majority of those who contract the virus are asymptomatic. Which means, no symptoms at all. Including lung damage. It is a certain sector of people who become critically ill that experience lung damage.

But like most parts of your body, lung capacity can be improved by taking care of yourself health-wise. It is well know that a vast majority of those who experience this level of illness due to covid 19 were seriously ill in some way prior to contracting it. Most are either elderly (not a reason not to protect them) or did not take care of themselves prior to this outbreak.

Im going to go ahead and gather that if your name is DJ Black & Mild, that you had health issues to begin with and the flu, turning into pneumonia, would have likely killed this person, as well as many others as it does each year.

@AnneWimsey, @creative51

And for the record. I detest O'Reilly. He is a complete dbag.

@creative51

IF YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT THE DATA IS, HOW CAN YOU SAY WHAT IS AND IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE DATA? Any why would you even admit that while pretending to be knowledgeable? The virus has a mortality rate about the same as influenza and is a "dumb virus" as stated by doctors, because it has not ability to mutate quickly and is easily fought off by a strong immune system.

But here are some facts and stats from articles that you won't read because you've made up your mind to live in fear.

What is the proportion of people with SARS-COV-2 who are asymptomatic?

To answer this we searched LitCovid (a subset of Pubmed), medRxiv, Trip, Scholar and Google. We retrieved 21 reports for analysis.

What did we learn (see the table for the analysis)

That between 5% and 80% of people testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 may be asymptomatic
That symptom-based screening will miss cases, perhaps a lot of them
That some asymptomatic cases will become symptomatic over the next week (sometimes known as “pre-symptomatics&rdquo
That children and young adults can be asymptomatic
We also learnt that there is not a single reliable study to determine the number of asymptotics. It is likely we will only learn the true extent once population based antibody testing is undertaken.

Source: [cebm.net]

A biotech company in Iceland that has tested more than 9,000 people found that around 50 percent of those who tested positive said they were asymptomatic, the researchers told CNN.

Source: [sciencealert.com]

With the addition of asymptomatic patients -- those infected but showing no symptoms of the disease -- raising the count, she said, "this changes the potential dynamics of the models."

asymptomatic people do not appear to be major contributors to the spread of the virus, compared with people who are showing symptoms, Wu said during a State Council Information Office briefing last week.

Source: [nbcnews.com]

@creative51 Clearly.

Um, the fastest-growing sick group is 45-55. A false sense of complacency, and passing on a "comforting " myth, helps no one!

@AnneWimsey The issue isn't infections but deaths. The 45-55 range is consistent with less hearty immune systems and more severe symptoms than younger groups. The overall death rate is still below 1% in the USA; again, most of which is comprised of the elderly with secondary conditions. There is no suggestion to abandon precautions, but to begin opening of the economy and putting people back to work WITH precautions.

Quick testing will soon be available to weed-out potential carriers and further diminish risks. Damage caused by this virus is more determined by immune system vitality, as evidenced by lesser infections with subtler symptoms with the young. Peole are getting over this and as mentioned, duration shortening treatments are preempting onset of secondary and more lethal afflictions that cause deaths attibuted to this virus.

@Silver1wun "duration shortening treatment"...pray tell, what are they? Yyou Have to stop listening to drump. And the death rate is at least TWICE what you state!!!!!! Try WHO or CDC websites for some actual Facts. Or, be part if the problem........for example, the virus removes the elasticity from lung (& sometimes heart) tissue, so they cannot function.

@AnneWimsey WHO is a very BIG part of the problem. If we'd responded to this as they recommended we'd have been hit much harder. They were LITERALLY 'dead wrong'.

Well, today the USA should top 30,000 deaths....that's quite a collection ya got there, Bill....and you

@Silver.1wun oh, and even drump has given up on getting testing available, of course he says "it isn't necessary" to cover the fact there aren't any kits to be had......

@Silver1wun ummm, what?!