A well done illustration on how you can spin facts to make a point. Notice on the flu vs. COVID-19 death chart, they have US data for the flu and then throw a giant line of COVID-19 death's WORLDWIDE. Sleight of hand that David Copperfield would be proud of!
The video didn't hide that fact, so, there's no sleight of hand at all.
There's been over 7,000 deaths from COVID19 in the U.S., and that's in just a few months without the contagion fully peaking yet. And that's with all the things we're doing to slow it down. So, yes, it's worse than the flu. Deaths from flu in the U.S. is 3,000 - 49,000. The projected number of deaths from COVID19 is 100,000 - 240,000 in the U.S., as much as a million without abatement measures.
The worldwide death figures for the flu are between 250K - 500K depending on which strain. For COVID19, we're already at 59K worldwide with several thousand more dying each day... and the world hasn't peaked yet.
So, yes, it would have been nice to get apples to apples, but the point isn't 'spun' to give a false reading on COVID's greater severity.
The (possibly contagious) pre-symptomatic graphic is also an illustration of this. While it is stating a fact, the fact is already accounted for in the Ro discussion earlier. Using this graphic later in the video implies that it spreads more easily than they already talked about.
The illustration just shows why CV has a higher R0. Don't know why you think you're being tricked into thinking otherwise. But the illustration is a clear point regarding the thesis of the video: CV is different from the Flu. The reason why the R0 is higher is because of 'spreaders' who aren't symptomatic yet.
Same with the lack of immunity animation. That animation also makes it look like everybody exposed will develop an infection which is not true even without immunity. There needs to be a critical mass of virus transferred for the transferee to develop an infection.
Simplified graphics for educational purposes are just simplified graphics for educational purposes.
Also, speaking of spin, you have no scientific data to back up this statement:
There needs to be a critical mass of virus transferred for the transferee to develop an infection. What is that critical mass for COVID? Scientists don't know yet and it may be less than the flu, which is part of COVID's higher R0. You say this as a fact without knowing the details, which is the kind of not-going-into-details that you bemoan of the video and say that's *spin*. You're doing the same thing as the video by not going into very specific detail. Is that then *spin* on your part?
I mean, we can all see it spreading and doing so faster than the flu. You're arguing a point which the video is purposefully avoiding and not *hiding*. It spreads from person to person. That's the point of the video. It's not meant to go into the weeds of amount of exposure to viruses before an infection take hold.
The hospitalization percentage for COVID-19 is completely wrong. Even without considering asymptomatics in the equation it is under 20% and nowhere near the 30% they quote. They credit CDC for the flu hospitalization data but don't cite any source for COVID-19 (the CDC has not published any data on hospitalization rate).
This is from CDC.gov...
So yes, it is a very well done video that shows how you can mix facts with predictions and spin something that nobody disputes (that COVID-19 is worse than the flu) and make it as scary as possible to justify "social distancing" actions.
So, we all agree that COVID is worse than the flu. So it's different from the flu. The video was trying to explain in lay terms why. I don't see any false or 'spinny' use of facts that you see.