Coronavirus: Pandemic, Hype, or "Much-to-do about nothing"?
Comments
-
@Wolfgang posted:
And how many people die on an average worldwide over a period of 4,5 months (January - mid May)? In Germany alone,, that many people have died on an average within 3 months on an average every year ...
Of what possible relevance to our discussion of the mortality rate of one specific virus is the number of people who "die on an average worldwide," whatever the period of time reviewed? How are the deaths related to one specific condition during a given period AT ALL comparable to ALL the deaths, of whatever causes, during the same period? Of course more people die from other causes than die from COVID-19. But that's true of EVERY cause of death! Do you therefore claim that NO cause of death should ever alarm us since more people die of all other causes?
COVID-19 is a highly contagious virus that has killed 315,000 people worldwide. Why WOULDN'T you want governments everywhere to take every reasonable action to slow the spread of such a contagion?
As for Johns Hopkins University figures, over here even the mainstream media have changed their reporting to now use figures from Germany's RObert-Koch-Institute instead of JHU - as they did for months - when news spread that JHU's figures for Germany had been "estimates"" (rather than actual fact figures).
To my knowledge, we've had no such reporting in this country, and the JHU numbers are highly reliable.
Warning: I am at times considered to be a conspiracy theorist ....
In my view, at times you SHOW yourself to be a conspiracy theorist, but I take your point. 😋
-
Of what possible relevance to our discussion of the mortality rate of one specific virus is the number of people who "die on an average worldwide," whatever the period of time reviewed?
Looking at figures in an overall context is very relevant to not fall for panic ... figures here rather clearly show that the "corona panic" about a "super dangerous and extremely deadly" and "more than ever infectious" virus from hell is in essence non-existent as what panic propaganda tries to make it .... How does propaganada panic do it? Simple ... by isolating figures in their mainstream fake media announcements, giving people a false impression. ....
What is the average person "guided" to think if I talk "panic" and say by now 100 have died?
A rather well known professor with expertise stated not long ago here, "IF someone had not given this virus a name and then developed a (not even realiable and fully approved and certified) test, we would not have even noticed anything out of the normal seasonal disease situation, as all the figures overall show average figures or even below average figures in comparison to recent decades and years ..."
-
Yeah and according to John Hopikins they show deaths that include PRESUMPTIVE cases. Sorry, the death rate and toll is not nearly as high as claimed.
There are all sorts of reports of locations revising their death tolls DOWN because they were wrongly attributed to COVID-19.
#stopthelockdown
#nomasks
#freethepeople
-
@reformed posted:
Yeah and according to John Hopikins they show deaths that include PRESUMPTIVE cases. Sorry, the death rate and toll is not nearly as high as claimed.
According to the JHU website, it includes "presumptive" cases in accordance with CDC guidelines in effect on April 14. According to the CDC website, "presumptive" cases are those that have tested positive in a public health lab, but await confirmation by the CDC:
"Cases reported to CDC include those confirmed by CDC as well as presumptive positive cases reported by states. A presumptive positive result is when a patient has tested positive by a public health laboratory, but results are pending confirmation at CDC. For public health purposes, a presumptive positive result using the CDC test is treated as a positive."
"Presumptive" cases are not the result of coin flips or random draws of cards; they are products of positive public health lab tests. Please demonstrate how the presence of "presumptive" cases justifies your claim that "the death rate and toll is not nearly as high as claimed."
There are all sorts of reports of locations revising their death tolls DOWN because they were wrongly attributed to COVID-19.
How many reports are "all sorts of reports"? Please provide links to information that supports your claim and definition of the phrase.
-
Google it Bill. Not that hard. It's all over the place. The death toll in America to Covid-19 is not I repeat not 90,194. That's just a lie.
-
@reformed posted:
Google it Bill. Not that hard. It's all over the place. The death toll in America to Covid-19 is not I repeat not 90,194. That's just a lie.
And YET AGAIN you make a claim that you're not willing (able) to back up. Help me understand how, at least in practice, you have come to the conclusion that OTHERS have to back up YOUR claims. In your view, why don't YOU have to back up YOUR claims? If I offered an unsupported claim in one of my posts, I'd expect you to ask me to ask ME to back it up because it was MY claim, not yours. But in some distortion of what I consider common practice, you have decided that OTHERS are responsible for backing up YOUR claims. In THIS POST, however, you asked CM for the "evidence" upon which he based one of his claims. Why did you do that when, by your own practice, it was up to OTHERS - in that case, YOU - to back up his claim?
If backing up YOUR claim is actually "(n)ot that hard," and information supporting it is as "all over the place" as you say it is, then why don't YOU back it up? If I thought YOUR claim was correct, I wouldn't have asked YOU to back up YOUR claim.
Remember YOUR specific claim: The fact that Johns Hopkins University includes "presumptive cases" in its count contributes to what YOU say is the fact that "the death rate and toll is not nearly as high as claimed." I claimed (and showed) that "presumptive" positives are results from tests run by public health clinics that have yet to be confirmed by the CDC. As a result, I claimed they do NOT significantly distort the count. YOU claim otherwise. Please back up YOUR claim.
-
Some more on vaccines and those behind the vaccine campaigns:
And here, "off" course, my disclaimer: Sometimes I am put in the "conspiracy theorist" corner
-
How is it that with the help of the WHO just about "the whole world" has been manipulated into pulling at the same string with the same type of restrictions dressed with Draconian penalties?
Well, starting out you have the "official declaration of a pandemic" by the WHO general secretary Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus on 11 March (1). At that time, there were a total of 4.300 deaths that were counted as being related to Covid-19. Does that sound a lot and like a worldwide catastrophe? One must view this number in some scale of appropriateness or commensurability or reasonableness, which can be easily done by comparing the WHO's own figures for deaths in connection with influenza/flu epidemics, and those figures can be about 650.000 (2) or even more (up to over 1 million in some years).
Since the WHO general secretary was acting knowingly and willingly, the WHO obviously did not have in mind to point out that there might be a medical virus related crisis ... else, why did they not do so all the other years for influenza/flu with thousands time more deaths?
-
The 24% decrease in the Colorado COVID-19 death count (from 1,150 down to 878) due to the department's change in reporting methods at first glance seems significant. But a quick check of the CDC's website reveals important correctives to the decline's significance:
- The CDC's counts of COVID-19 deaths to some degree factor out cases where COVID-19 was present but not the underlying cause of death: "Death counts in this report include laboratory confirmed COVID-19 deaths and clinically confirmed COVID-19 deaths. This includes deaths where COVID-19 is listed as a “presumed” or “probable” cause."
- COVID-19 is the "underlying cause of death" in 94% of the death certificates submitted to the CDC.
Colorado's reporting change produced a next decline of 272 in one of its counts. Point taken. But among 95,000 deaths nationwide, among which the CDC says 94% were COVID-related, a 272 death decline - especially with the undercount almost a certainty caused by the pre-pandemic deaths whose symptoms matched COVID-19 but we never investigated for it, does not - I repeat not - make the 95,000 number a "lie," as you called it.
-
But among 95,000 deaths nationwide, among which the CDC says 94% were COVID-related, ....
Has anyone there ever pointed out that there is a HUGE difference between "infected" and actually "sick (showing symptoms, etc.)"? In Germany, studies have documented that up to 80% of infected (that is, "tested positive" - and not even calculating in the 40-40% error of false positive tests) never get sick or develop only mild symptoms (caugh, etc) ??
Following up on the above, how about pointing out the difference in cases of "corona/covid related deaths" between "died BECAUSE OF / FROM covid" and "died WITH covid positive test but due to other fatal disease" ?? In Germany, after a along period during which government related virologists (RKI, etc) to not do any postmortems, some postmortems were conducted and the results were that by far most these deaths were NOT caused by covid but by other conditions and diseases, as well as wrong treatment (such as artificial respiration in cases where the treatment led to lung failure and should at that stage not have been prescribed)
What are the figures and details on such differences in the USA? Or does nobody care about these important differences in order to make more sound decisions rather than hype up and cause panic in the population with incomplete and thus false figures?
-
And then there is the issue of adding someone who is 102 years old to the COVID-19 death count. I'm sorry, the common cold would have killed that person. We shouldn't be shutting down for that. We are talking about less than one half of one percent of our population and we shut down everything. It's insanity.
Yet babies are being murdered daily while all of this is going on because that is somehow "essential."
-
Yet babies are being murdered daily..."
Reformed,
Where, when, and how are babies " being murdered daily? CM
-
And then there is the issue of adding someone who is 102 years old to the COVID-19 death count. I'm sorry, the common cold would have killed that person. We shouldn't be shutting down for that. We are talking about less than one half of one percent of our population and we shut down everything. It's insanity.
what may appear like insanity to many or most could well be by evil design and orchestrated on purpose .... in other words, what many want to do away with as lunatic conspiracy theory may well actually be a well camouflaged conspiracy.
-
@Wolfgang posted:
Has anyone there ever pointed out that there is a HUGE difference between "infected" and actually "sick (showing symptoms, etc.)"? In Germany, studies have documented that up to 80% of infected (that is, "tested positive" - and not even calculating in the 40-40% error of false positive tests) never get sick or develop only mild symptoms (caugh, etc) ??
Following up on the above, how about pointing out the difference in cases of "corona/covid related deaths" between "died BECAUSE OF / FROM covid" and "died WITH covid positive test but due to other fatal disease" ?? In Germany, after a along period during which government related virologists (RKI, etc) to not do any postmortems, some postmortems were conducted and the results were that by far most these deaths were NOT caused by covid but by other conditions and diseases, as well as wrong treatment (such as artificial respiration in cases where the treatment led to lung failure and should at that stage not have been prescribed)
What are the figures and details on such differences in the USA? Or does nobody care about these important differences in order to make more sound decisions rather than hype up and cause panic in the population with incomplete and thus false figures?
As I noted in my previous post, Wolfgang, according to the CDC, COVID-19 is identified as "the underlying cause of death" on 94% of the death certificates it has processed as a national clearinghouse for the data submitted by individual states. To my reading of it, that designation distinguishes clearly between what you call "'died BECAUSE OF / FROM covid' and 'died WITH covid positive test but due to other fatal disease.'"
-
As I noted in my previous post, Wolfgang, according to the CDC, COVID-19 is identified as "the underlying cause of death" on 94% of the death certificates it has processed as a national clearinghouse for the data submitted by individual states. To my reading of it, that designation distinguishes clearly between what you call "'died BECAUSE OF / FROM covid' and 'died WITH covid positive test but due to other fatal disease.'"
That has been the official government institues reading as well .... just count any death where a test showed positive as "Covid-19 related / underlying cause of death" .... and the people are made to think that Covid-19 was the actual cause of all these deaths. Once some postmortems were done, the reality became obvious. For example. of about 50 cases of postmortems done in Hamburg of said "Covid-19 deaths" the result showed that in NO case was Covid-19 the actual cause of death,. These people all died of other main causes (such as cancer in last stage, heart attacks, or plain weakness of old age where a normal cold would have initiated complications just as much, etc)
The evil behind the panic propaganda is obvious .... but the conspirators of course continue to control the official and public "truth" (more accurately, LIES) via the mainstream media.
-
@reformed posted:
And then there is the issue of adding someone who is 102 years old to the COVID-19 death count. I'm sorry, the common cold would have killed that person. We shouldn't be shutting down for that. We are talking about less than one half of one percent of our population and we shut down everything. It's insanity.
Two responses to your comments:
- Whether a COVID-19 victim is two or 102, the fact that he or she died from the virus matters to our understanding of and mitigation efforts against it.
- I suppose a "common cold" could have killed the 102 year-old you cite as an example, but in the first 102 years of his or her life, it didn't. And one didn't kill him or her at the age of 101, or 100, or 99, or 98, or.... Whatever other ailments that 102 year-old person had weren't enough to kill him or her; it took COVID-19. That matters too.
-
I suppose a "common cold" could have killed the 102 year-old you cite as an example, but in the first 102 years of his or her life, it didn't. And one didn't kill him or her at the age of 101, or 100, or 99, or 98, or.... Whatever other ailments that 102 year-old person had weren't enough to kill him or her; it took COVID-19. That matters too.
No, it did not take Covid-19 ... any other respiratory complication would have ended in the same result.
-
@Wolfgang posted:
No, it did not take Covid-19 ... any other respiratory complication would have ended in the same result.
PLEASE respond to my posts in their proper context, Wolfgang.
LOTS of things - a heart attack, a hit-and-run car accident, a homicidal burglar, etc - COULD have ended the life of the 102 year old to whom reformed referred. But that's exactly NOT the point! The point is NONE of those other things - including the "common cold" reformed posited or "any other respiratory complication" that you cite - ended his or her life. COVID-19 did. When doctors and medical examiners fill out death certificates, they don't fill in the cause of death with "Advanced coronary disease... but this, that, and the other thing would have killed her too." That's not how death certificates work. We die of specific cause(s) and our death certificates report those cause(s), not the universe of other things that could have caused our demise had what actually killed us not actually killed us.
-
My point was we shouldn't be making policy decisions on the deaths of people over 90 for the entire country.
-
It's called abortion.
-
@reformed posted:
My point was we shouldn't be making policy decisions on the deaths of people over 90 for the entire country.
It's called abortion.
So you DON'T want to make policy decisions for the entire country based on the deaths of people over 90, but you DO want to make policy decisions for the entire country based on the deaths of the unborn?
-
PLEASE respond to my posts in their proper context, Wolfgang.
LOTS of things - a heart attack, a hit-and-run car accident, a homicidal burglar, etc - COULD have ended the life of the 102 year old to whom reformed referred. But that's exactly NOT the point! The point is NONE of those other things - including the "common cold" reformed posited or "any other respiratory complication" that you cite - ended his or her life.
that is exactly the point. People die of old age in connection with respiratory complications of various kinds ... there is nothing special about covid-19 in such case, a common cold / different type of virus, etc. would have had the same effect. The deadly problem would not have been covid-19 or the other cold, flu, etc, but the old age or other severe disease precondition ...because the presence of covid-19, cold or other in younger persons or persons with no previous severe illness did not result in their death and in most cases people do not even fall sick aside from minor symptoms.
IF indeed covid-19 was the cause of death and such a deadly disease, then it would be irrelevant whether an infected person was young or old, had heart problems or not, etc .... the virus makes no distinction and it attacks in equal manner and with equal force in all cases. Why is the virus not causing death in all or in by far most cases and people? Because it is NOT such a deadly killer as the governments and panic media are making it. Some expert recently mentioned in an interview that it could well be that the outrageous fear and panic installed in people by the government with its lockdown restrictions, etc. and the main propaganda media has killed more people than the virus did.
-
It seems - unfortunately - that the higher powers have achieved what they intended ... and on a far wider scale than just on university campus locations
-
One picture says more than how many words? how effective was the lockdown??
how about this one
Among these countries only Sweden operated without lockdown ... as one can easily see, there were countries with lockdown with less deaths and with more deaths than Sweden, showing clearly that the lockdown was ineffective in regards to preventing infections and deaths.
SOme realistic relations of figures for average of deaths in general for 32 weeks, for covid-19 and seasonal flu ,,, in 20 European countries which provide official data to EuroMOM
Data source for graphis: EuroMOMO ....
You can read the fullarticle with further graphicss of statistical information here: https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/die-todesfalle
-
@Wolfgang posted:
IF indeed covid-19 was the cause of death and such a deadly disease, then it would be irrelevant whether an infected person was young or old, had heart problems or not, etc .... the virus makes no distinction and it attacks in equal manner and with equal force in all cases.
This is quite the argument. A pandemic is "such a deadly disease" only if it "makes no distinction and...attacks in equal number and with equal force in all cases."
Let's examine the age distribution of deaths in the U.S. and Canada in another outbreak:
[I've covered up with a white box the legend that's in the upper right corner of this graphic because it identifies the outbreak, which I don't want to do yet.]
Was the outbreak depicted in this graph "such a deadly disease"? According to the metric you propose in your response, Wolfgang, the answer is clearly no since it struck persons in their mid-to-upper 20's FAR more than any other age group (BTW, in the study from which this graph comes, the authors say their findings "did not disappear" when they looked at death rates rather than totals).
So what was this outbreak that wasn't "such a deadly disease"? The Spanish Flu of 1918. It infected an estimated 500 million people (one-third of the earth's population at the time) and killed in the area of 50 million. BUT it clearly didn't "[attack] in equal manner and with equal force in all cases," so in your view, it must not have been "such a deadly disease."
Your argument is obviously highly suspect. Most physical ailments (but not all of them, as the Spanish Flu showed) - whether viruses, infections, cardiac conditions, or others - are harder on older persons simply because most of us as we age experience a decrease in our ability to fend off such conditions. In this current pandemic, therefore, it is not at all surprising that older folks are disproportionately represented in the statistics. But the fact that a condition is harder on older persons than it is on younger persons does NOT mean it's not a crisis. My goodness, in 2017, 46% of all cancer deaths occurred in people age 70 and older. Does that mean cancer is not "such a deadly disease"? Of course not.
COVID-19 is a deadly disease because it's highly contagious and because it spread across the globe within a month or two. A little more than two months ago in the U.S. we had fewer than 100 deaths from the virus. Within a few days our death count will top 100,000. In my view, that's "such a deadly disease."
-
IF indeed covid-19 was the cause of death and such a deadly disease, then it would be irrelevant whether an infected person was young or old,
Yes, age is irrelevant being that the coronavirus is clearly no respecter of age (ethnicity, pigmentation, social status, social-economic back ground, and the like) for not all whom have died or whom were effected were the same age nor any another category.
And, even if all were the same age or category that would not make it a wonderful series of events now, would it?
-
Hmn ... I just learned that one the largest and leading car-rental companies, Hertz Global Holdings Inc., has died on Friday because of Covid-19.
For some strange reason, the company has never had any serious virus infection over the about 100 years existence,, even though just about every year there have been virus infection waves spreading over the various countries in the world where Hertz was present. In several years, there were virus waves with millions (!) of deaths worldwide, many times more than during the wave this year 2020. Something unprecedented and very strange must have happened this year ... ??
Instead off taking measures as in all previous years with virus infection waves, today's smarties authorities did not take measures for protection the group of people especially susceptible to possible infection (a very small % of the whole population) they decided to lock up the whole population and shut down any normale life and regular work, etc. And being especially smart (or would that be called something else?), they enforced such large scale when the virus wave curve had already reached its peak .... The liars and lobby driven regimes have propagated panic and fear via their mainstreama media trumpets that EVERYONE could die from covid-19. That's been their "logic reason" to justify their deadly lockdown / shutdoiwn .... "it saves lives" has been the tune, and the sleep sheep herd believed it.
Well, I suppose when there is a wasp's nest at the corner of the house under the roof edge, the modern day scientific smartie authority simply removes it by taking a firebrand and burning down the house .... "it saves you from being stung by a wasp" / "eh, you could die from being stung by a wasp (yes, some people have died from such".
-
If, one can't not trust the media and the professional scientists/researchers as you claim who do you suggest they turn to? and why?
-
If, one can't not trust the media and the professional scientists/researchers as you claim who do you suggest they turn to? and why?
I turn to a wider variety of media and compare ... and I keep in mind which media have propagated what and to whose benefit. I also notice that regimes / governments do not necessarily have the common good of the population in view and ever too often act in other greedy interests (as comes to light when comparing information from different media sources and comparing regime actions and policies) Their deeds reveal truths not found in their words ...
As for scientists, the situation is similar ... gather information from a variety of equally qualified professional sources ... and pay more attention to those scientists who are no longer on any government or other lobby institution payroll when evaluating what the experts claim to know and what they suggest with the facts at hand .... and, PLEASE, don't dump your common sense, life experience and reasoning being awe struck by what an expert or president proclaims.
You know, I have experienced similar situations now for decades in the field of theological and biblical matters ... "scholar", "prof. dr.", "expert of such and such" ... they may gladly claim and publish and propagate whatever they want ... I am not spellbound by their "name fame", but have come to evaluate and examine and dismiss what I deem incorrect or or accept what I arrive at being convincingly correct.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
