ADVERTISEMENT

OT: USA COVID-19 Vaccination Updates

Your 10-15% "guess" is not unreasonable but I think your 20-35% guess is. You have to have something more/better than random tidbits. You'd think, considering the massive cottage industry of data-twisting studies available these days, would have come with SOMETHING by now that supports the "with" and "from" argument. I'm not arguing that this argument is totally wrong or nonexistent, I just believe that the excess death numbers show/prove that it's insignificant.
Here you go. So some pretty good examples.


 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
Here you go. So some pretty good examples.



I'm aware of those, they were already mentioned. They are one-off data adjustments, hardly valid indicators of widespread nationwide reporting errors. You've got a long way to go to get to 350k wrongly reported deaths, and again, how do you explain those 350k as excess deaths.
 
How does one know the death count when it hasn't been a fixture on the MSNBC or CNN screen for a year and half? The CDC is captured and their data is deeply flawed. If you want transparency, you have to look elsewhere like the UK.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski
I'm aware of those, they were already mentioned. They are one-off data adjustments, hardly valid indicators of widespread nationwide reporting errors. You've got a long way to go to get to 350k wrongly reported deaths, and again, how do you explain those 350k as excess deaths.
It's like when the one Supreme Court judge said that he couldn't define pornography, but he knew it when he saw it. After two and half years of this garbage, you'd have to be either intellectually naive or intentionally dishonest to believe that the reported numbers have not been enlarged for nefarious purposes.

Also, with all of the other existing and impending problems that this country now is facing because of absolutely terrible and incompetent leadership, this virus and its million or so strains are very low on the list. When people have to make decisions about putting gas in their cars or buying food, a virus that now is almost three years old and has become endemic becomes a less important.

Finally, what I do now is believe the exact opposite about what the so-called "experts" tell me about this virus, and that usually leads to the truth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psualt and bison13
I'm aware of those, they were already mentioned. They are one-off data adjustments, hardly valid indicators of widespread nationwide reporting errors. You've got a long way to go to get to 350k wrongly reported deaths, and again, how do you explain those 350k as excess deaths.
so when presented with a few places that actually did a deep dive into the numbers you just pass them off as outliers. I guess that is up to you to believe that these are exception and not the rule. And the fact that both hospitals and families had economic incentive to code Covid as the reason for death also would have nothing to with inflating some numbers. again, up to you to not believe it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
so when presented with a few places that actually did a deep dive into the numbers you just pass them off as outliers. I guess that is up to you to believe that these are exception and not the rule. And the fact that both hospitals and families had economic incentive to code Covid as the reason for death also would have nothing to with inflating some numbers. again, up to you to not believe it.
I guess about every month or two I need to repeat what my buddy from the national Institute of health told me, that by the time you account for the decrease in average deaths from things like the flu and respiratory failure etc. that the actual Covid deaths ran about 30 to 40% of what the media tells you. And this is a guy who was one of the people first working on mRNA vaccines when it was at the University of North Carolina.
 
so when presented with a few places that actually did a deep dive into the numbers you just pass them off as outliers. I guess that is up to you to believe that these are exception and not the rule. And the fact that both hospitals and families had economic incentive to code Covid as the reason for death also would have nothing to with inflating some numbers. again, up to you to not believe it.

They didn't do a deep dive and correct faulty numbers, they adjusted the way they were counting. In Almeda's case, in order to be consistent with other counties in CA, in MA's case in order to be consistent with CDC requirements. Once again, you can't reasonably explain away the excess death numbers.
 
I guess about every month or two I need to repeat what my buddy from the national Institute of health told me, that by the time you account for the decrease in average deaths from things like the flu and respiratory failure etc. that the actual Covid deaths ran about 30 to 40% of what the media tells you. And this is a guy who was one of the people first working on mRNA vaccines when it was at the University of North Carolina.

Sorry, that bolded statement doesn't make sense and it's certainly not an explanation for EXCESS death numbers.
 
Sorry, that bolded statement doesn't make sense and it's certainly not an explanation for EXCESS death numbers.
Yes it does. Because over the past three years there’s been a lower than average amount of deaths for the flu respiratory failure etc. So if you adjust them to their average yearly totals taking those deaths out of the Covid totals you’re already taking away a third of the deaths attributed to Covid.
 
Sorry, that bolded statement doesn't make sense and it's certainly not an explanation for EXCESS death numbers.
The initial alpha covid and also the beta strains were indeed very dangerous especially to unhealthy older adults. Perhaps you should start a "excess" death count from Omicron to the present and consider that almost all of the hospitalizations now are because those entering the hospital are real sick from other things yet they get tested upon entering the hospital. These other things are most likely because they hadn't gotten any health care for 2+years and are now in trouble.

So I get it, the excess deaths early on were indeed covid. Now however, any excess deaths are the result of little to no health care being available.

It would be nice if "89" would refresh his model. I'd like to see the data modified so that (actual deaths = predicted deaths) for the data from January 2020 through December 2021. This way we could see excess deaths from Omicron till now without the model using the early covid data to predict the future.
 
The initial alpha covid and also the beta strains were indeed very dangerous especially to unhealthy older adults. Perhaps you should start a "excess" death count from Omicron to the present and consider that almost all of the hospitalizations now are because those entering the hospital are real sick from other things yet they get tested upon entering the hospital. These other things are most likely because they hadn't gotten any health care for 2+years and are now in trouble.

So I get it, the excess deaths early on were indeed covid. Now however, any excess deaths are the result of little to no health care being available.

It would be nice if "89" would refresh his model. I'd like to see the data modified so that (actual deaths = predicted deaths) for the data from January 2020 through December 2021. This way we could see excess deaths from Omicron till now without the model using the early covid data to predict the future.
Well, according to the CDC excess deaths have been near 0 for the last 3 and a half months after declining from the significant omicron peak in January.
 
How does one know the death count when it hasn't been a fixture on the MSNBC or CNN screen for a year and half? The CDC is captured and their data is deeply flawed. If you want transparency, you have to look elsewhere like the UK.
Those UK numbers have been great for the last year plus. They have basically said what anyone with an ounce of commonsense thought this was by April of 2020.

Thank God for the Brits!
 
Those UK numbers have been great for the last year plus. They have basically said what anyone with an ounce of commonsense thought this was by April of 2020.

Thank God for the Brits!
yeah, cdc is sort of a joke. I cannot find data on fatality versus age with co-morbidity status but I can find all kinds of data on race and equity and ethnicity. so playing the race card is now more important than actual medical and scientific facts.

One simple chart would tell everything and yet the CDC does not have it which says it all.

Give me the fatality information by age group which I can find on the CDC website. But then break down each age group by Zero, One, Two, and Two plus co-morbidity. And then give me the percenatages of the major co-morbidity within in each square (ie....obesity, diabetes, heart condition, dementia, etc...). And give me that same chart with hospitalizations admitted to intensive care (which means you got covid real bad). If you have the above two data sets, then you literally know about everything with respect to managing your own risk. Yet we don't have it even though it is the MAJOR data set that would give people (and doctors) the information to make informed decisions.

And an interesting data point while snooping around a little in the CDC website. Since March 1st (when most cases starting being BA2/4/5 variants) the fatality numbers for those below 50 are essentially zero (the ine is literally just at the bottom of the graph) the 50-64 age group is just slightly above the zero line. The 65-74 is a little bit above that but starting in early June started to go down (when BA4/5 really starting taking over) and is trending towards the zero line. So basically what you have right now is the vast majority of people dying with covid are 75+ and I bet if we had the co-morbidity data are those with multiple co-morbidities (ie...the people dying right now have life expectancy of less than 6 months).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski and bison13
Yes it does. Because over the past three years there’s been a lower than average amount of deaths for the flu respiratory failure etc. So if you adjust them to their average yearly totals taking those deaths out of the Covid totals you’re already taking away a third of the deaths attributed to Covid.
Further, the entire medical system was turned upside down which resulted in many additional all cause deaths that may have otherwise been prevented. It was covid or nothing for the medical community which meant that likely 1 million or more people did not get diagnosed for heart disease or cancer (you know, the most prevalent causes of death).

Now we've already experienced the deaths of many of these million plus not diagnosed as in normal times including a 48 year old buddy of mine from school who died of undiagnosed sudden heart failure this past year and my friend's 49 year old husband with the same cause of death. I can't say their issues were due to vaccination, that I don't know, but both were not diagnosed and probably would have been if we hadn't collectively lost are minds.

But here's the deal, there are still many of those undiagnosed yet to pass. Our covid only focus did that and it isn't accounted for in all cause excess deaths. We literally changed all of medical care to include removing much of it. That comes with a huge cost in excess deaths that isn't being reported.
 
Further, the entire medical system was turned upside down which resulted in many additional all cause deaths that may have otherwise been prevented. It was covid or nothing for the medical community which meant that likely 1 million or more people did not get diagnosed for heart disease or cancer (you know, the most prevalent causes of death).

Now we've already experienced the deaths of many of these million plus not diagnosed as in normal times including a 48 year old buddy of mine from school who died of undiagnosed sudden heart failure this past year and my friend's 49 year old husband with the same cause of death. I can't say their issues were due to vaccination, that I don't know, but both were not diagnosed and probably would have been if we hadn't collectively lost are minds.

But here's the deal, there are still many of those undiagnosed yet to pass. Our covid only focus did that and it isn't accounted for in all cause excess deaths. We literally changed all of medical care to include removing much of it. That comes with a huge cost in excess deaths that isn't being reported.
In the flip side of this, my mother in law postponed her mammogram due to Covid as was scheduled for spring 2020 and didn't end up getting it until fall of 2020. She had a very small cancer detected that was eventually treated and she was told it was non-detect after treatment. Doctor told her she was a lucky one as most likely this would not have been detected in a spring mammogram such that the cancer would have had another 6 months to grow. So she was one of the rare lucky ones where delay actual helped.
 
Yes it does. Because over the past three years there’s been a lower than average amount of deaths for the flu respiratory failure etc. So if you adjust them to their average yearly totals taking those deaths out of the Covid totals you’re already taking away a third of the deaths attributed to Covid.
35k people die of the flu and 15k die of RSV in an average year, so 50k is about 10% of annual covid deaths so far. Total deaths are currently at about 1.2 million and covid deaths are at about one million, you're still a long way from explaining 500-600k deaths based on your 30-40% claim.
 
Last edited:
35k people die of the flu and 15k die of RSV in an average year, so 50k is about 10% of annual covid deaths so far. Total deaths are currently at about 1.2 million and covid deaths are at about one million, you're still a long way from explaining 500-600k deaths based on your 30-40% claim.
Average bad flu year is 50k plus. Last two years total is under 15k, that’s a difference of 85k just from flu. Add in any other cardiovascular or respiratory difference and you’ll figure it out. Again this is directly from nih
 
Average bad flu year is 50k plus. Last two years total is under 15k, that’s a difference of 85k just from flu. Add in any other cardiovascular or respiratory difference and you’ll figure it out. Again this is directly from nih
Dude.... I was at 100k, you're at 85k?? You're NIH buddy needs to publish something, why is it that no one has to back your position?
 
35k people die of the flu and 15k die of RSV in an average year, so 50k is about 10% of annual covid deaths so far. Total deaths are currently at about 1.2 million and covid deaths are at about one million, you're still a long way from explaining 500-600k deaths based on your 30-40% claim.
I don't think you understand science very well.

1) You appear to be comparing cumulative covid death counts over multiple years (3) with a single average year flu and RSV total. An honest and informed approach would explain all data over the same timeframe and annual makes the most sense. So the number of total excess deaths are negative 86k in 2019, 416k in 2020 and 499k in 2021.

2) Do you honestly believe that covid, flu, and RSV are the only all cause deaths that changed to sum to excess deaths? There were 3.4 million total all cause deaths and only 3 of the not even top leading causes were the only variables to change? That is either very naive or dishonest if one actually understands science.

A) Our entire way of life changed. A significant percentage of people went undiagnosed due to at least 2 years of covid-only focus in our medical system. Heart disease and cancer total 1.3 million deaths per year, a large percentage have not been getting screened and have had symptoms but not been diagnosed due to a covid-only health system, and you are not expecting any excess deaths due to these top 2 leading causes of death which were going massively undetected for over 2 years? Excess deaths in heart disease and cancer due to not getting diagnosed and changing lifestyles alone could easily have accounted for all excess deaths.

B) Jobs, Schools, and Gyms were shut down and the average adult in the US gained 29 lbs over the covid pandemic. But you are considering only covid, flu, and RSV contributing to excess deaths? Most all cause death categories are greatly impacted by weight gain. But you don't consider that at all.

So much for science, all other variables must have been held constant and only those you are willing to consider must explain away a 3 year excess death number that you appear to be comparing to annual all cause deaths only from your selected categories. Right? It cannot be that our way of life, our health, our entire healthcare system was changed and most all cause death categories were impacted resulting in the total excess deaths. You either do not understand science or you are intentionally not being honest in your assessment of all cause deaths. You tell me.
 
Last edited:
Dude.... I was at 100k, you're at 85k?? You're NIH buddy needs to publish something, why is it that no one has to back your position?
there is no argument that Covid caused excess deaths, especially in 2020. The question is how many of those deaths that we are talking about that are on the CDC website as 'covid' deaths are actually due to or majority due to Covid and how many were 'with' covid or covid only played a minor role. That is the debate. And then furthermore, how many of those covid deaths were people that had a life expectancy of less than 6 months, ie...were very sick, old people. Nobody wants to see anybody die, but if you are 87 and in a nursing home with a triple co-morbidity and die of covid, might be a covid death but if we are looking at the massive social and economic toll that was played out, those types of covid deaths should be categorized separately also.

And when you look at the fatality numbers now and who is dying from Omicron via the information we have, I think 80-90% of people are 'with' covid or have a life expectancy of less than 6 months (ie....are very sick people that were going to die regardless).
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13

there is no argument that Covid caused excess deaths, especially in 2020. The question is how many of those deaths that we are talking about that are on the CDC website as 'covid' deaths are actually due to or majority due to Covid and how many were 'with' covid or covid only played a minor role. That is the debate. And then furthermore, how many of those covid deaths were people that had a life expectancy of less than 6 months, ie...were very sick, old people. Nobody wants to see anybody die, but if you are 87 and in a nursing home with a triple co-morbidity and die of covid, might be a covid death but if we are looking at the massive social and economic toll that was played out, those types of covid deaths should be categorized separately also.

And when you look at the fatality numbers now and who is dying from Omicron via the information we have, I think 80-90% of people are 'with' covid or have a life expectancy of less than 6 months (ie....are very sick people that were going to die regardless).
We will know more when we see how excess deaths really pan out from 2021 and even more from 2022. If as we suspect covid took out the weak, then after 2022 we should have death numbers lower then normal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
We will know more when we see how excess deaths really pan out from 2021 and even more from 2022. If as we suspect covid took out the weak, then after 2022 we should have death numbers lower then normal.
I don't agree with your assumption that the dry tinder will be burnt through. The way we changed life, the unhealthy responses to covid, and especially the undiagnosed heart disease and cancer toll will be paid for many, many years. While more dry tinder was burnt through, it is not necessarily more than the new dry tinder that the public response to covid created.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 and bison13
I don't think you understand science very well.

1) You appear to be comparing cumulative covid death counts over multiple years (3) with a single average year flu and RSV total. An honest and informed approach would explain all data over the same timeframe and annual makes the most sense. So the number of total excess deaths are negative 86k in 2019, 416k in 2020 and 499k in 2021.

2) Do you honestly believe that covid, flu, and RSV are the only all cause deaths that changed to sum to excess deaths? There were 3.4 million total all cause deaths and only 3 of the not even top leading causes were the only variables to change? That is either very naive or dishonest if one actually understands science.

A) Our entire way of life changed. A significant percentage of people went undiagnosed due to at least 2 years of covid-only focus in our medical system. Heart disease and cancer total 1.3 million deaths per year, a large percentage have not been getting screened and have had symptoms but not been diagnosed due to a covid-only health system, and you are not expecting any excess deaths due to these top 2 leading causes of death which were going massively undetected for over 2 years? Excess deaths in heart disease and cancer due to not getting diagnosed and changing lifestyles alone could easily have accounted for all excess deaths.

B) Jobs, Schools, and Gyms were shut down and the average adult in the US gained 29 lbs over the covid pandemic. But you are considering only covid, flu, and RSV contributing to excess deaths? Most all cause death categories are greatly impacted by weight gain. But you don't consider that at all.

So much for science, all other variables must have been held constant and only those you are willing to consider must explain away a 3 year excess death number that you appear to be comparing to annual all cause deaths only from your selected categories. Right? It cannot be that our way of life, our health, our entire healthcare system was changed and most all cause death categories were impacted resulting in the total excess deaths. You either do not understand science or you are intentionally not being honest in your assessment of all cause deaths. You tell me.
I understand it just fine thank you.

1. There's nothing wrong with my numbers, slow down and absorb the words. I mentioned flu and RSV in response to another poster, it was certainly not intended as an in-depth all-encompassing analysis.

2. Of course not, but rather than rely on gut feel or opinion, I'm looking at the big picture using excess deaths, which you're avoiding like the plague. You're getting sidetracked, the whole "argument" is determining if "with" covid deaths are 40% or that covid deaths are 40% over-reported. There are 1.2 million excess deaths with one million covid deaths, so the burden of proof is on you to explain 600k deaths to something other than covid. We know that a relatively small number of those are overdoses and suicides, we know that cancer deaths will show up over years, and we know that covid killed many that were already close to the end of their lives. That pretty much leaves heart-related deaths as the remaining major killer. The tracking of excess deaths tracks covid cases and deaths amazingly well, why do you ignore that? Common sense tells you that deadly heart issues and hospitalizations would not show up quickly and in large numbers, except due to covid, while neatly tracking the peaks and valleys of covid cases and deaths. Your theory that we have 100's of thousands of heart-only excess hospitalizations because our "entire way of life changed" is ludicrous and death certificate data doesn't support it either.

Yes, our way of life changed, but to the extent that it killed an extra 600k is simply your egotistical hard-headed opinion which is certainly not supported by science or facts. You're the one not being honest here and ignoring the best facts available.
 
I understand it just fine thank you.

1. There's nothing wrong with my numbers, slow down and absorb the words. I mentioned flu and RSV in response to another poster, it was certainly not intended as an in-depth all-encompassing analysis.

2. Of course not, but rather than rely on gut feel or opinion, I'm looking at the big picture using excess deaths, which you're avoiding like the plague. You're getting sidetracked, the whole "argument" is determining if "with" covid deaths are 40% or that covid deaths are 40% over-reported. There are 1.2 million excess deaths with one million covid deaths, so the burden of proof is on you to explain 600k deaths to something other than covid. We know that a relatively small number of those are overdoses and suicides, we know that cancer deaths will show up over years, and we know that covid killed many that were already close to the end of their lives. That pretty much leaves heart-related deaths as the remaining major killer. The tracking of excess deaths tracks covid cases and deaths amazingly well, why do you ignore that? Common sense tells you that deadly heart issues and hospitalizations would not show up quickly and in large numbers, except due to covid, while neatly tracking the peaks and valleys of covid cases and deaths. Your theory that we have 100's of thousands of heart-only excess hospitalizations because our "entire way of life changed" is ludicrous and death certificate data doesn't support it either.

Yes, our way of life changed, but to the extent that it killed an extra 600k is simply your egotistical hard-headed opinion which is certainly not supported by science or facts. You're the one not being honest here and ignoring the best facts available.
1. You mentioned 3 years of covid and excess deaths data the sentence after and directly compared it to 1 average year of flu/RSV data in post #8993 of this thread.

Additionally in that post you seem to say that 30% to 40% of either 1.2 million or 1 million (your writing is not particularly clear as to which number you are applying the percentage) is 500-600k. So even basic math appears to be a challenge for you.

2. No scientist worth their salt would assume excess deaths are due only to covid deaths simply because those 2 values are only off by 20% while simultaneously ignoring the top all cause death categories and assuming those variables are constant and do not contribute to excess deaths. You are trying to fit data by making clearly incorrect assumptions to engineer your desired result. That isn't science, that's advocacy, it's intentional systematic error.

A. Why do you assume that heart disease only shows up due to covid when we

i. Changed normal life and routines keeping workers and students home

ii. Shut down Gyms and other normal outlets for exercise, social interactions, and we'll being

iii. For a couple of years, stopped checking for heart disease and discouraged to outright rejected those experiencing heart disease symptoms from seeking medical evaluation and care

iv. The average weight gain for US adults was 29 lbs significantly changing their heart disease risk

B. Why do you ignore cancer assuming that all cancers are slow and those not diagnosed during the covid-only medical era were all going to be caught in the earliest stages? There are most certainly a significant number of excess cancer deaths in the 2020 and 2021 data due to pausing regular cancer screenings particularly for those that would have fast developing cancers or that would not have been early stage diagnoses.

C. Why do you basically throw out all other all cause death categories as if those not #1 or #2 in leading causes do not sum to an appreciable number?

Look, you came to your conclusion and then went back to make invalid assumptions to best fit your data to within 20% error. Outside of climate "scientists" that is not how science is done.

And there is no burden of proof for anyone to prove some exact number of other cause deaths to prove that your pseudoscience is wrong. Your methods are amateurish and would be rejected at a high school science fair. No one has to use your method and show where it doesn't add up. You started at the desired result and worked backwards. Maybe that's what they do in politics or sales but not in science.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
there is no argument that Covid caused excess deaths, especially in 2020. The question is how many of those deaths that we are talking about that are on the CDC website as 'covid' deaths are actually due to or majority due to Covid and how many were 'with' covid or covid only played a minor role. That is the debate. And then furthermore, how many of those covid deaths were people that had a life expectancy of less than 6 months, ie...were very sick, old people. Nobody wants to see anybody die, but if you are 87 and in a nursing home with a triple co-morbidity and die of covid, might be a covid death but if we are looking at the massive social and economic toll that was played out, those types of covid deaths should be categorized separately also.

And when you look at the fatality numbers now and who is dying from Omicron via the information we have, I think 80-90% of people are 'with' covid or have a life expectancy of less than 6 months (ie....are very sick people that were going to die regardless).

How can you make that claim?

Help me out here, maybe we're talking past each other, let's say a 70 yo has already been dealing with some heart issues (or one or more co-morbidities), gets covid, is hospitalized then dies in the hospital, in your opinion, is that a "with" or "of" covid death? Rhetorically, would this person live one more month, one more year, or ten more years had he not caught covid?
 
How can you make that claim?

Help me out here, maybe we're talking past each other, let's say a 70 yo has already been dealing with some heart issues (or one or more co-morbidities), gets covid, is hospitalized then dies in the hospital, in your opinion, is that a "with" or "of" covid death? Rhetorically, would this person live one more month, one more year, or ten more years had he not caught covid?
If the 70 year was in reasonable shape and typical medical treatment and heart medications would have been given such that statistically that person would continue to live on for years, then it was a Covid death.

If the person was 85 years old, multiple co-morbidity, in a nursing home and poor health such that statistically that person was going to die within a few months (look up the stats, standard nursing home stat is 2 years pretty much split between people dying in year one, year two, and year three) then I would say that should be a separate category of fatality that might have been death due to covid but that person was going to die of their co-morbidity or the flu or cold or pneumonia pretty soon anyway.

And then there is the obvious car accident who tested positive for covid that should not be covid. and most doctors would know whether or not covid was the main cause of death or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
1. You mentioned 3 years of covid and excess deaths data the sentence after and directly compared it to 1 average year of flu/RSV data in post #8993 of this thread.

Additionally in that post you seem to say that 30% to 40% of either 1.2 million or 1 million (your writing is not particularly clear as to which number you are applying the percentage) is 500-600k. So even basic math appears to be a challenge for you.

2. No scientist worth their salt would assume excess deaths are due only to covid deaths simply because those 2 values are only off by 20% while simultaneously ignoring the top all cause death categories and assuming those variables are constant and do not contribute to excess deaths. You are trying to fit data by making clearly incorrect assumptions to engineer your desired result. That isn't science, that's advocacy, it's intentional systematic error.

A. Why do you assume that heart disease only shows up due to covid when we

i. Changed normal life and routines keeping workers and students home

ii. Shut down Gyms and other normal outlets for exercise, social interactions, and we'll being

iii. For a couple of years, stopped checking for heart disease and discouraged to outright rejected those experiencing heart disease symptoms from seeking medical evaluation and care

iv. The average weight gain for US adults was 29 lbs significantly changing their heart disease risk

B. Why do you ignore cancer assuming that all cancers are slow and those not diagnosed during the covid-only medical era were all going to be caught in the earliest stages? There are most certainly a significant number of excess cancer deaths in the 2020 and 2021 data due to pausing regular cancer screenings particularly for those that would have fast developing cancers or that would not have been early stage diagnoses.

C. Why do you basically throw out all other all cause death categories as if those not #1 or #2 in leading causes do not sum to an appreciable number?

Look, you came to your conclusion and then went back to make invalid assumptions to best fit your data to within 20% error. Outside of climate "scientists" that is not how science is done.

And there is no burden of proof for anyone to prove some exact number of other cause deaths to prove that your pseudoscience is wrong. Your methods are amateurish and would be rejected at a high school science fair. No one has to use your method and show where it doesn't add up. You started at the desired result and worked backwards. Maybe that's what they do in politics or sales but not in science.

Seriously, that's a BS/wrong take on what I'm saying, where in the hell are you getting three years? I'm clearly citing approximate two-year numbers, you're miserably failing at nit-picking. Here's what I said...

"35k people die of the flu and 15k die of RSV in an average year (nothing wrong with those numbers), so 50k is about 10% of annual covid deaths so far (50k is 10% of 500k, those are correct ONE year numbers). Total deaths are currently at about 1.2 million and covid deaths are at about one million, you're still a long way from explaining 500-600k deaths based on your 30-40% claim (these are correct two-year numbers).

1. false.
2. BS, not what I said.
A. Your exaggerated opinion.
iv. provide a link to support that weight gain number.
B. BS, I'm not ignoring cancer. Heart disease and Cancer clearly cause the most death among the 65+
C. More BS, I already explained to you.

... keep bloviating.
 
If the 70 year was in reasonable shape and typical medical treatment and heart medications would have been given such that statistically that person would continue to live on for years, then it was a Covid death.

If the person was 85 years old, multiple co-morbidity, in a nursing home and poor health such that statistically that person was going to die within a few months (look up the stats, standard nursing home stat is 2 years pretty much split between people dying in year one, year two, and year three) then I would say that should be a separate category of fatality that might have been death due to covid but that person was going to die of their co-morbidity or the flu or cold or pneumonia pretty soon anyway.

And then there is the obvious car accident who tested positive for covid that should not be covid. and most doctors would know whether or not covid was the main cause of death or not.
Good way of thinking about that question. Although the doctor may well know if covid was the main cause or not but it's worth tens of thousands of dollars to their employer (at a time when many revenue generation procedures were stopped I might add) to check that covid was the main cause.
 
Good way of thinking about that question. Although the doctor may well know if covid was the main cause or not but it's worth tens of thousands of dollars to their employer (at a time when many revenue generation procedures were stopped I might add) to check that covid was the main cause.
there are deaths that are obviously due to covid. deaths that are obvious that had nothing to do with covid. then there is the grey area where Covid had some level of cause in the fatality. right now, everything is coded covid.

from a scientific and medical perspective in trying to evaluate risk and from a public policy perspective to understand how to enact emergency laws that will have huge wide sweeping effects some of which are negative, the ability to distinguish the above would be paramount to any decision. Just how knowing the age by co-morbidity and what co-morbidity in those that died is required for the same reason.

But we don't have that data nor is it being talked about. hence, this is not about medical science and good public policy making, this is about power and control and money.
 
If the 70 year was in reasonable shape and typical medical treatment and heart medications would have been given such that statistically that person would continue to live on for years, then it was a Covid death.

If the person was 85 years old, multiple co-morbidity, in a nursing home and poor health such that statistically that person was going to die within a few months (look up the stats, standard nursing home stat is 2 years pretty much split between people dying in year one, year two, and year three) then I would say that should be a separate category of fatality that might have been death due to covid but that person was going to die of their co-morbidity or the flu or cold or pneumonia pretty soon anyway.

And then there is the obvious car accident who tested positive for covid that should not be covid. and most doctors would know whether or not covid was the main cause of death or not.

OK, just to be clear, is your 85 y.o. example, in your opinion, is it with or from? LTC/Nursing home deaths are a significant % of all covid deaths, around 25%. So we're on the same page there, but they are down significantly since the beginning of the pandemic when they contributed to ~50% of deaths. The car accident example is clearly "with" and wrongly reported, are there any solid numbers that support that is happening to any meaningful extent?

I still have a problem with your 80-90% "with" number.

 
Seriously, that's a BS/wrong take on what I'm saying, where in the hell are you getting three years? I'm clearly citing approximate two-year numbers, you're miserably failing at nit-picking. Here's what I said...

"35k people die of the flu and 15k die of RSV in an average year (nothing wrong with those numbers), so 50k is about 10% of annual covid deaths so far (50k is 10% of 500k, those are correct ONE year numbers). Total deaths are currently at about 1.2 million and covid deaths are at about one million, you're still a long way from explaining 500-600k deaths based on your 30-40% claim (these are correct two-year numbers).

1. false.
2. BS, not what I said.
A. Your exaggerated opinion.
iv. provide a link to support that weight gain number.
B. BS, I'm not ignoring cancer. Heart disease and Cancer clearly cause the most death among the 65+
C. More BS, I already explained to you.

... keep bloviating.
1. OK then your math was correct but your communication was poor. You stated that the 500-600k deaths was based on some 30-40% claim. You didn't state that it was an approximation of an annualized covid deaths number by taking 27 months of data and dividing by two.

2. Then clarify your position. What % of excess deaths are due to covid (not our government's response to covid)?

A. What did I say that was not true or accurate about our government and the healthcare system's response to covid?

iv. https://www.statista.com/statistics...orted-by-us-adults-during-the-covid-pandemic/

B. You are ignoring it because the only time mentioned of it was "We know that a relatively small number of those are overdoses and suicides, we know that cancer deaths will show up over years.." You lump it in with causes that you clearly state are SMALL and perhaps not significant. So yes, that seems to me that you are ignoring cancer in the excess deaths of 2020 and 2021.

C. Heart disease and cancer made up about a third of all cause deaths. The rest you have either ignored or stated were small. Well, that means that the less dominant causes of death sum to be the majority of causes of death. I don't think they should be ignored. Statistically speaking, that would be insane to ignore the sum of those causes as if they don't add up to much because they are individually smaller than heart disease and cancer.
 
1. OK then your math was correct but your communication was poor. You stated that the 500-600k deaths was based on some 30-40% claim. You didn't state that it was an approximation of an annualized covid deaths number by taking 27 months of data and dividing by two.

2. Then clarify your position. What % of excess deaths are due to covid (not our government's response to covid)?

A. What did I say that was not true or accurate about our government and the healthcare system's response to covid?

iv. https://www.statista.com/statistics...orted-by-us-adults-during-the-covid-pandemic/

B. You are ignoring it because the only time mentioned of it was "We know that a relatively small number of those are overdoses and suicides, we know that cancer deaths will show up over years.." You lump it in with causes that you clearly state are SMALL and perhaps not significant. So yes, that seems to me that you are ignoring cancer in the excess deaths of 2020 and 2021.

C. Heart disease and cancer made up about a third of all cause deaths. The rest you have either ignored or stated were small. Well, that means that the less dominant causes of death sum to be the majority of causes of death. I don't think they should be ignored. Statistically speaking, that would be insane to ignore the sum of those causes as if they don't add up to much because they are individually smaller than heart disease and cancer.

You're not going to flip the script, it's you guys who are claiming 30-40% of covid deaths are over-reported (with covid) without data. The burden of proof is on you, and I've already explained how your claims are overblown and that you're ignoring the underlying reasoning using excess deaths data. So far you've provided nothing but long-winded opinions.
 
You're not going to flip the script, it's you guys who are claiming 30-40% of covid deaths are over-reported (with covid) without data. The burden of proof is on you, and I've already explained how your claims are overblown and that you're ignoring the underlying reasoning using excess deaths data. So far you've provided nothing but long-winded opinions.
The problem is that you think there is a script. Burden of proof? No one needs to use your flawed logic and methodology to prove anything.

You started with a conclusion and made poor assumption after poor assumption to fit the data. That isn't science and your script tells me that all you care about is political points. Science is about uncovering truth and describing phenomena. It isn't fitting data by any means necessary to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that you think there is a script. Burden of proof? No one needs to use your flawed logic and methodology to prove anything.

You started with a conclusion and made poor assumption after poor assumption to fit the data. That isn't science and your script tells me that all you care about is political points. Science is about uncovering truth and describing phenomena. It isn't fitting data by any means necessary to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.
NO, you guys started with a conclusion that covid deaths are overreported (with covid) by 30-40%!!

LOL.... keep deflecting and show me some real science or just shut up.
 
Last edited:
OK, just to be clear, is your 85 y.o. example, in your opinion, is it with or from? LTC/Nursing home deaths are a significant % of all covid deaths, around 25%. So we're on the same page there, but they are down significantly since the beginning of the pandemic when they contributed to ~50% of deaths. The car accident example is clearly "with" and wrongly reported, are there any solid numbers that support that is happening to any meaningful extent?

I still have a problem with your 80-90% "with" number.

I think the deaths of 75+ year old people with 3 or more co-morbidity should be it's own column, let's label it the near death column. And then 'with' Covid it's own column. And then 'from' covid it's own column. THis would give the real picture of fatality, especially if you broke down the 'from' covid with zero, one, two and 3 or more co-morbidities.

So if I am making public policy with respect to shutting down society, keeping kids away from school for a year, closing down vast swaths of businesses, etc...then you have to look at the 'from' covid only, not "with" or the "near death" columns. I think if we took out those two columns, the death count would be near 50% of reported.

If I am making medical decisions, then I care about the 'near death' and 'from' covid columns. I think in the 25-35% of the covid deaths counted are in the 'with' column. That is my guess based on some articles read. And 'with' is not only the motorcycle accident case but cases where Covid was not the main cause of death, doesn't mean that it has to be zero percent.

And yes, right now based on looking at the charts, I think 80-90% or more of the people dying are in that 'near death' category.
 
I think the deaths of 75+ year old people with 3 or more co-morbidity should be it's own column, let's label it the near death column. And then 'with' Covid it's own column. And then 'from' covid it's own column. THis would give the real picture of fatality, especially if you broke down the 'from' covid with zero, one, two and 3 or more co-morbidities.

So if I am making public policy with respect to shutting down society, keeping kids away from school for a year, closing down vast swaths of businesses, etc...then you have to look at the 'from' covid only, not "with" or the "near death" columns. I think if we took out those two columns, the death count would be near 50% of reported.

If I am making medical decisions, then I care about the 'near death' and 'from' covid columns. I think in the 25-35% of the covid deaths counted are in the 'with' column. That is my guess based on some articles read. And 'with' is not only the motorcycle accident case but cases where Covid was not the main cause of death, doesn't mean that it has to be zero percent.

And yes, right now based on looking at the charts, I think 80-90% or more of the people dying are in that 'near death' category.

The numbers are available, linked below is the death by month percentages covid deaths for 75 year olds and older - 2/22 - 53%, 3/22 - 54%, 4/22 - 60%, 5/22 - 66%. Nowhere near 80-90% (near death or "with") but the %'s are climbing as the deaths trend down. Some relevant co-morbidity data is also available.

 
NO, you guys started with a conclusion that covid deaths are overreported (with covid) by 30-40%!!

LOL.... keep deflecting and show me some real science or just shut up.
Who is you guys? Look, most of the covid deaths are with covid and have been. You cannot isolate a couple of variables when our entire way of life changed. Thousands of variables changed and the sum impacted excess deaths. Your oversimplification is not an accurate representation of reality. And you can shut up. No one is buying what you are peddling.
 
that's right...it was the "with" and "from" argument. people that died in a motorcycle accident got counted as a COVID death. That case got people to start looking closer and realized anyone who tested positive was counted as a COVID death. And we know how those tests, at least early on, were very unreliable. Even coach CJF lamented on how many players were testing positive. They ended up adopting a policy to test once, if positive, test again. If conflicting, one + and one -, to test a third time. But the average + test was not retested for normal people.

I also believe that there was govt money when someone was + or died who was + so there may have been a finger on the scale.

gym-scale.gif
EDDGBS2.jpg
 
ADVERTISEMENT