Virus Schmirus

[gil]

It was the CDC that originally instructed all causes of death that could POSSIBLY be linked to Covid 19 to be attributed to Covid 19. PERIOD.
In light of the ridicule / shame that just a handful of conservative news agencies were able to put on the CDC for using this deceptive practice the CDC has very recently [as of beginning of April] announced more strict guidelines for how Covid 19 deaths must be determined.
MDs are no longer allowed to assume that the death MIGHT have been due to Covid 19, especially if not the person has other medical problems that need to be considered.

The difference in death rate 2 weeks ago was 28 times different between the general population and the DoD. I'll bet the gap has done nothing other than widen since I did my research. Don't forget that the Dod's truthful [and not nearly as grim] statistics are lumped in with the tainted statistics that the CDC was collecting all this time. That's a ridiculous amount of difference between 1 group that was instructed to attribute every death they possibly could to Covid 19 and another very sizeable group that carefully weighed ALL THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS of each and every death before making their final determination.

Next.

I have a couple of (genuine) questions: I've read the CDC guidelines and I would not characterize them as described "instructed all causes of death that could POSSIBLY be linked to Covid 19 to be attributed to Covid 19." Are you looking at what the CDC said, or what a third party says they said?

As of today, the CDC says their total case count of 802,583 includes 3,981 probable cases (about 1/2 of one percent) and total death count of 44,575 includes 5,862 probable deaths (about 13.2%). Are you arguing that these "probables," which I understand did not get tested, are not actually COVID? Do you disagree with their "confirmed" case and death counts?

[Donn Beach]

Idaho no less...

https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/12 ... 9113344002

Very uplifting stuff coming in from the Conservative Commenters. Yes, the level of governmental has reached an Orwellian stage. What free thinking people need to do is find out to what extent the Globalist Party's Mass Media Dynasty has been exaggerating the truth about how deadly this virus really is.
The 3.36 million person strong DoD had only 5 Covid 19 deaths as of 2 weeks ago. At the time this represented a gap that was 28 times less than the Covid death rate that is claimed among the general population. Too much of a difference to be explained by the average age difference between these 2 groups.
The main difference is the DoD has no agenda to inflate the death rate that they "self report".
Does anyone wish to argue with me about this...?

I smell Donn Beach coming...........

I don't argue with you, I ask questions about your narrative which you can't seem to answer. You are free to believe whatever the heck you want, you guys come here and spout off about it, just curious sometimes what exactly it is, but not really all that curious

[Moe Gibbs]

In other words, all you have read so far are the REVISED guidelines. Go find the guidelines that existed BEFORE the latest guidelines were posted.

[Moe Gibbs]

Here..I will help you......

"Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota family physician who is also a Republican state senator, told "The Ingraham Angle" Wednesday that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) guidelines for doctors to certify whether a patient has died of coronavirus are "ridiculous" and could be misleading the public.

Host Laura Ingraham read Jensen the guidelines, which say: "In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVID cannot be made but is suspected or likely (e.g. the circumstances are compelling with a reasonable degree of certainty) it is acceptable to report COVID-19 on a death certificate as 'probable' or 'presumed.'"

In response, Jensen told Ingraham the CDC's death certificate manual tells physicians to focus on "precision and specificity," but the coronavirus death certification guidance runs completely counter to that axiom.

Back when I got curious to learn what the DoD death rate was..there were 14,000 deaths due to COVID19 in our general population. The DoD population is almost exactly 1/100 of the USA's general population..so if you could expand the DoD population 100 times their death toll would have only amounted to 500. Imagine that.... 1 out of every 100 US Citizens works for the DoD yet their death rate lags the general population by a factor of 28 or more.
Since I last checked these totals the claimed death toll in the USA has risen to over 40,000 and I'm willing to bet the DoD's death count still lags by a factor or 28 or more. Wanna bet...?

[Sibelius Hindemith]

It sounds like they are supposed to report deaths of people with pre-existing health problems that were exacerbated by Covid19, as well as people who died of other causes and may have shown no symptoms of Covid19 but tested positive for the virus, as SARS-CoV2 deaths. And that is inaccurate and dishonest.

[D-train]

It sounds like they are supposed to report deaths of people with pre-existing health problems that were exacerbated by Covid19, as well as people who died of other causes and may have shown no symptoms of Covid19 but tested positive for the virus, as SARS-CoV2 deaths. And that is inaccurate and dishonest.

This is a total hunch and speculation but my guess it the splits are something like this.

% of deaths for people not even testing positives: 1%
% of deaths for people testing positive that would have died that day anyway: 10%
% of deaths for people that would have died that week anyway: 20%
% of people that would have died that month anyway: 24%
% of people that would have died that year anyway: 40%
% of people that would have went on to live long and healthy lives: 5%

[gil]

It sounds like they are supposed to report deaths of people with pre-existing health problems that were exacerbated by Covid19, as well as people who died of other causes and may have shown no symptoms of Covid19 but tested positive for the virus, as SARS-CoV2 deaths. And that is inaccurate and dishonest.

This is a total hunch and speculation but my guess it the splits are something like this.

% of deaths for people not even testing positives: 1%
% of deaths for people testing positive that would have died that day anyway: 10%
% of deaths for people that would have died that week anyway: 20%
% of people that would have died that month anyway: 24%
% of people that would have died that year anyway: 40%
% of people that would have went on to live long and healthy lives: 5%

Interesting breakdown, dt. How do you think that would compare with deaths from season flu? (Curious because the number of deaths from Covid-19 is often compared with annual deaths from flu.)

[TLO Idaho]

It sounds like they are supposed to report deaths of people with pre-existing health problems that were exacerbated by Covid19, as well as people who died of other causes and may have shown no symptoms of Covid19 but tested positive for the virus, as SARS-CoV2 deaths. And that is inaccurate and dishonest.

This is a total hunch and speculation but my guess it the splits are something like this.

% of deaths for people not even testing positives: 1%
% of deaths for people testing positive that would have died that day anyway: 10%
% of deaths for people that would have died that week anyway: 20%
% of people that would have died that month anyway: 24%
% of people that would have died that year anyway: 40%
% of people that would have went on to live long and healthy lives: 5%

D-Train Are you shut down completely are you able to still work from home?

[D-train]

It sounds like they are supposed to report deaths of people with pre-existing health problems that were exacerbated by Covid19, as well as people who died of other causes and may have shown no symptoms of Covid19 but tested positive for the virus, as SARS-CoV2 deaths. And that is inaccurate and dishonest.

This is a total hunch and speculation but my guess it the splits are something like this.

% of deaths for people not even testing positives: 1%
% of deaths for people testing positive that would have died that day anyway: 10%
% of deaths for people that would have died that week anyway: 20%
% of people that would have died that month anyway: 24%
% of people that would have died that year anyway: 40%
% of people that would have went on to live long and healthy lives: 5%

D-Train Are you shut down completely are you able to still work from home?

It is ironic because my life is actually far more like my life in Kirkland because of the virus. I am working from home as I did from March 2008 through Jan. of 2019. We really didn't go out to eat a lot so that isn't a big deal. We can still go grocery shopping, to the parks to walk the dogs, and even spent Easter weekend at our friends beach house a few blocks from the ocean on Cape Cod. Biggest issue is no sports for me and no dog showing for my wife. Should couldn't work her anyway because all of her clients are in WA and would have had to go through a bunch of craziness to get her MA Cosmo license.

[D-train]

It sounds like they are supposed to report deaths of people with pre-existing health problems that were exacerbated by Covid19, as well as people who died of other causes and may have shown no symptoms of Covid19 but tested positive for the virus, as SARS-CoV2 deaths. And that is inaccurate and dishonest.

This is a total hunch and speculation but my guess it the splits are something like this.

% of deaths for people not even testing positives: 1%
% of deaths for people testing positive that would have died that day anyway: 10%
% of deaths for people that would have died that week anyway: 20%
% of people that would have died that month anyway: 24%
% of people that would have died that year anyway: 40%
% of people that would have went on to live long and healthy lives: 5%

Just saw that over 10k deaths have been in Nursing Homes..about 25%