Following up with the CDC comments on their changes, being annoyed that anyone noticed their retroactive resurrection of 10-25% of those killed by covid, only to finish them off by more conventional means.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says its removal tens of thousands of deaths it had attributed to COVID-19 happened because the agency was mistakenly counting deaths not related to COVID-19.
“CDC constantly reviews our COVID-19 data to ensure its accuracy,” Jasmine Reed, a spokeswoman for the agency, told The Epoch Times in an email, adding that the adjustment was made “because CDC’s algorithm was accidentally counting deaths that were not COVID-19-related.”
The CDC had not announced when the change was made. On its website, the agency described the update as a statement from the resolution of a “coding logic error.”
Heart issues, more for the media coverage / spin angle. I think these guys are a bit too far off the deep end, but I guess we’ll see.
We predicted in our new-years post that explaining heart attacks would be a big part of 2022’s news cycle, and only three months in it has been a torrent.
It actually started in December of 2021, with medical doctors theorising that the stress and anxiety of dealing with Covid was going to cause a huge spike in heart problems due to “post-pandemic stress disorder”.
At the beginning of February, a new reason was added to the list. As energy prices began to spike – do remember, that happened before the war – we were told the increased cold and stress could also cause heart disease.
Then, in mid-February scientific papers appeared claiming that “even a mild case of COVID” causes your “heart attack risk to soar” .
In short, and for many reasons, you’re much more likely to have a heart attack this year than you were last year.
And similarly the UK admitting their covid death numbers are at best a guess.
At organisations across Britain, Covid deaths were variously defined as: Due to Covid, Covid as an underlying cause, Covid as an underlying main cause, Covid as a direct cause, death involving Covid, died within 28 days of a Covid test, died within 60 days of a Covid test, Covid mentioned on the death certificate, Covid as sole cause, Covid as only cause, Covid as immediate cause, Covid based on statement of the care home provider and Covid contributing to death.
“All of this means that we don’t really know who has died of Covid, or how severe it is, and this continues to this day. Separating the ravages of the virus from the ravages of human stupidity is not possible.”
Yet had some not spent 2 years so adamantly denying that this was the case, we could’ve revamped reporting and record keeping early on and had somewhat reliable numbers.
Mitt the mask also voted, in committee, against lifting mask mandates for preschool kids age two and older!! Natch, he was again the only Republican voting with the Democrats.
So is there anything wrong with Mitt voting consistently for masking? Decide that for yourself.
What is wrong is Mitt consistently lying about being a Republican.
I know you disagree, but even if I completely disagree with their position, I’ll never criticize a representative for sticking to what they feel is best instead of prioritizing party lines or caving to public pressure. After all, that is how our representative government is suppose to work, instead of the current state of hyper-partisanship.
Nice try. But what I actually wrote is as follows.
I never stated what I feel is best. I left that strictly up to the reader.
I happen to be a (double) mask wearer myself. But no way am I arrogant enough to want to impose that view on others, or on their small children.
And I agree. Mitt is entitled to vote his conscience.
But note carefully what I ACTUALLY wrote:
On too many issues Mitt votes with Democrats. Yet he insists on being mislabelled a Republican. I believe in “truth in packaging”.
If Mitt favors Democrat positions on issues so much, I say let him switch parties and run next time as a Democrat. But the arrogant SOB won’t do that because he knows he would lose!
Bottom line, you twisted, mischaracterized, and in particular attempted to change the emphasis of my post. It didn’t work.
Your commentary had nothing to do with masks. It was entirely about calling out a Republican for not voting with other Republicans. There’s no way to twist or mischaracterize that.
That is obviously wrong, as is your characterization of Romney as a Republican. I am able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
It is your saccharine, kumbaya, can’t we all get along, let’s not offend anyone, post which did not mention masking. You sound like a quintessential, don’t rock the boat, Republican, always seeking to moralize about how government is supposed to work. I call BS on your softness!!
I also make note of the likes you attract from liberal participants here. You are, for them, a welcome target, easily overcome.
Do you believe that Romney voted as he did just to intentionally be anti-Republican? Because unless that is what you think, your mindless ranting has absolutely nothing, zip, zero, nada to do with my comment about the sorry, if not outright embarrassing, state of American politics. We elect (or, we should elect) Representatives to make decisions, not serve a partisan agenda.
Not at all. Again, Romney’s vote reflected his true feelings and beliefs on the matter of masks. All I’m saying is that in this situation, as in others, Romney’s views align better with the Democrat side. And even that would not be a problem if only Romney did not masquerade as a Republican.
Romney is a former Massachusetts Governor. The people there are very liberal and do not vote for real Republicans. But of course they were happy to support a “Republican” like Romney since they realized his true political leanings.
It’s when Romney moves to Utah and pulls the same stunt, though, that this sort of thing really pisses me off. Conservatives need that Utah vote in the Senate. And Romney is surely no Conservative. Want iron clad proof?
Just examine how he consistently has voted on masking . . . . even for little kids for goodness sake. It is disgusting. And it is the Democrat position.
Young children should NOT be forced to wear masks. The matter should be left up to the discretion of their mothers and fathers. Period! And any real, genuine, Republican would support that view.
The “let the kids suffocate in masks” position is that of the teachers’ unions. And there are scant few Republicans in that bunch!!
Opinion on this varies. It is true that at times that is a true fallacy.
But there are other instances when having this or that trait will legitimately disqualify a person from membership in a certain group, in particular when such membership is not inherent. For example:
Declaration that Romney is not, for whatever reason, a true Caucasian would be a tough sell.
At the same time, given his political history, it is not at all challenging to cite him as being at odds with today’s Republicans. Which brings me to 2012:
We Conservatives could reasonably harbor hope that after Romney’s treatment then by the other side that he might perhaps have learned a lesson or two. That hope first faded and now has evaporated completely.
This correction was 8.5%. If I recall correctly, the “us” (you?) kept claiming it was overcounted by 25-50%. And the “us” did it without any evidence. And the “I” (yes I) was saying it was pretty close for the USA numbers based on the approximate excess deaths numbers (but it was a big lie for places like Russia that heavily underreported or undercounted COVID deaths).
Uh, if memory serves, he prefers to li̶e̶ be called a severely conservative Republican. If you call that an obvious lie, he prefers to be called Peter Dilettante, Debutante, or something like that.
The “I” (dont know if it was you specifically) also insisted that the “us” was wrong because the counts were undercounted, because “you’re claiming dead people arent really dead”, etc etc - also without any evidence (or, perhaps more accurately, based on fabricated “evidence”).
And this adjustment was 25% for some demographics. Go ahead and try to gloss over it, but this is a pretty significant “Ooops!”
This correction was not some systematic revision of all “with vs from” deaths, it was just some coding error they hoped no one would notice. As I posted previously, it was estimated from NY hospital evidence that Delta deaths were maybe 20% incidental while with O more like half of them were incidental to the positive covid test.
The US has had another 150k or so deaths, maybe more, in 2022 alone, so half of those being incidental at 75k wouldn’t be out of the ballpark for a correction.
My guess is that the kids’ death number falling (25%) so much more than adults was because some 1/3 and rising of the dead kids have died during the O surge, which probably, due to its widespread and brief spike, means they’re including a good % of whatever kids would have died in a hospital anyway during that time. And since kids rarely die of covid, but do (still rarely) die of lots of other things, many more of those deaths were unrelated.
