I believe you’re right. They were all lucky enough to avoid cancer.
The numbers are post vaccine and post government mandate.
They would have been much worse otherwise.
OAK - one of the theories is that supercentenarians [those who live to age 110 or older] have LARGER cholesterol molecules, which prevents their arteries from being clogged!!! That makes sense...picture small particles completely blocking a passageway, versus larger particles - there would be space AROUND the larger cholesterol molecules for blood to pass through!
Maybe that is why 84-year-olds live to 92?
But they weren't JUST 84 - most had many underlying viruses.
So OAK - let's say we have a new virus that made EVERYONE live five years less. Ok. Well...mandates CLEARLY haven't stopped it from spreading. Nothing short of an permanent authoritarian lockdown will.
So even IF the mandates worked, they would only be saving the most immunocompromised people a few years.
And they still cause all sorts of problems.
Let's say we could have saved EVERYONE who died, with these mandates. So 634,440 of those 933,000 people who died had SIX or more underlying diseases, and were 84 years old, on average. So we should basically close down the economy to give those people two more years to live?
I don't think that's fair.
Most people know more people injured by the vaccines than by Covid itself at this point, lol.
No chance any of this holds up.
OAK: do you think we will still have mandates in one year time?