Something to be thankful for!
"These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States."
Something to be thankful for!
"These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States."
Oh my... What will the fear mongering crowd say now?
Gee! Ya think???
suree wrote:
Something to be thankful for!
"These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States."
https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR0EVA8IwN8E5GG8rGb-FmMP0I9AJCgPUJZCdPbM5MqOn7NmUjKD7eutOnk
But, science! All of my social media dissertations say "science!" You have to trust the science!
The source of this claim is a webinar created by a program director?
Is this a scientific paper that has been peer-reviewed? It doesn't appear to be.
I'm not against independent analysis, but I'm wondering if it would stand up to peer review.
If her conclusions are accurate, this means that COVID is either zero percent deadly or the behavioral changes in people since March have somehow reduced deaths (by staying home and avoiding danger, stress, and over-exertion).
According to the CDC (the source of this data), "An estimated 299,028 excess deaths have occurred in the United States from late January through October 3, 2020, with two thirds of these attributed to COVID-19."
Who are we to believe? The CDC, or this program director who used CDC data to disagree with CDC conclusions?
Barbara Curtis wrote:
The source of this claim is a webinar created by a program director?
Is this a scientific paper that has been peer-reviewed? It doesn't appear to be.
I'm not against independent analysis, but I'm wondering if it would stand up to peer review.
If her conclusions are accurate, this means that COVID is either zero percent deadly or the behavioral changes in people since March have somehow reduced deaths (by staying home and avoiding danger, stress, and over-exertion).
Do you apply these same standards to everything? Do you apply them to lockdowns, masks inside and /or outside? Masks at all?
I'm not an 'anti-masker', just wondering if you apply the same standards to these issues most of the world are being forced to comply with?
A scientific study isn’t a study until institutionalized scientist come and approve it.
It would be like a child doing something good or bad but not knowing how good or bad till it’s doting mother came and made her judgement.
You mean peer review as my standard? Meh. I'm just curious if anyone has checked her work. The thread subject misleads by suggesting Johns Hopkins (as an institution) has signed off on her conclusions. This doesn't appear to be the case.
Queue up the “science” believing leftists who will dismiss this out of hand because it goes against their narrative.
suree wrote:
Something to be thankful for!
"These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States."
https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR0EVA8IwN8E5GG8rGb-FmMP0I9AJCgPUJZCdPbM5MqOn7NmUjKD7eutOnk
You missed the point of the graphic. It's not that the number of deaths has not gone up, it's that the distribution of deaths by age has not changed. It means that mostly old people die! Also, note that there is an increase in the percentage of deaths of people aged 85+ in weeks 12 and 13 when covid deaths were peaking.
See below from the article:
From mid-March to mid-September, U.S. total deaths have reached 1.7 million, of which 200,000, or 12% of total deaths, are COVID-19-related.
Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.
“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” Briand said.
This part was rather telling:
These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.
When Briand looked at the 2020 data during that seasonal period, COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases. This was highly unusual since heart disease has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths. However, when taking a closer look at the death numbers, she noted something strange. As Briand compared the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to 2018, she noticed that instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising, as seen in the graph below, this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes.
Then there's the DEATH CERTIFICATES themselves:
The majority of people who died had significant comorbidities, such as Alzheimer’s, cancer, cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Counting death certificates with a ‘mention’ of covid as being a death caused by covid is a gross misrepresentation of the facts and has vastly over exaggerated the death toll.
The rules for the signing of death certificates have been changed solely for "Covid" by the Coronavirus 2020 Act.
Doctors do not even need to have physically seen the patient in order to sign death certificates.
The Act has removed the need for a confirmatory medical certificate for cremations.
Autopsies have virtually been banned, no doubt leading to misdiagnosis of the true cause of deaths; and also reducing our understanding of the disease itself.
Worse still, care home staff who largely have no medical training are able to give a statement as to the cause of death.
"Covid" was put on death certificates merely on the ‘suspicion’ of people having "Covid." This may well be unlawful, since it is a crime to falsify death certificates.
People who die within 28 days of a positive PCR test are deemed to have died from "Covid", even if they die in a car crash or from a heart attack; clearly over inflating the death toll.
Not surprisingly, the woman has an agenda.
https://kemmerergazette.com/article/letter-to-the-editor-without-risk-that-are-no-rewards
And although she *said* she followed the CDC data, apparently she skipped the CDC's data that say there've been 300k+ more deaths in the USA this year than would be expected, based on the previous several years (from 2013 on). Funny how that works...but hey, you can claim anything is true, if you're willing to lie.
(Note: Despite this link's title, the chart ~40% of the way down the page tallies *total* American deaths from all causes.)
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
Just ignore the "excess" part and you can fudge the numbers however you want.
She missed the boat - this was cool and contrarian back in June - now it's just dumb.
An agenda which doesn’t seem to involve interest groups who stand to gain from this manufactured crises. Everyone has an agenda, however, it would appear, her agenda belongs to her and hasn’t been bought yet.
sophomoric Kaiser wrote:
An agenda which doesn’t seem to involve interest groups . . .
It's perfectly possible to have an indivdual agenda, without any "interest groups" involved.
But as a wise fool you of course already knew that.
Holy crap this is idiotic.
The linked publication is put out by JHU students. It's not a journal or something run by adults at all.
And the person being cited is "assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program." She has no medical background. Her PhD is in agricultural economics from Washington State. She's just one more idiot economist who thinks they know everything. She's not tenure-track faculty at Hopkins, she's a lecturer. Nothing wrong with that, but she's ridiculously unqualified to be making these kinds of statements about Covid-19.
Take a hike, son. wrote:
Not surprisingly, the woman has an agenda.
https://kemmerergazette.com/article/letter-to-the-editor-without-risk-that-are-no-rewardsAnd although she *said* she followed the CDC data, apparently she skipped the CDC's data that say there've been 300k+ more deaths in the USA this year than would be expected, based on the previous several years (from 2013 on). Funny how that works...but hey, you can claim anything is true, if you're willing to lie.
(Note: Despite this link's title, the chart ~40% of the way down the page tallies *total* American deaths from all causes.)
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
She did not "skip" the CDC's estimate of excess deaths. Nor did she dispute the claim that more people are dying this year than in previous years. Her argument, and the data that she cites, shows that the distribution of deaths among age groups has remained relatively stable. This contradicts what one might expect given that the vast majority of Covid victims are elderly. Thus, she concludes that attributing the increase in mortality solely to Covid may be exaggerating its effect (with the unsaid implication that perhaps other factors related to lockdowns, economic turmoil, etc. carry more responsibility than is popularly thought).
You might not agree with her conclusion, but to suggest that she is ignoring blatantly obvious data and "lying" is inaccurate.
don't mind me., I'm just here for all the liberals angrily defending their fear-mongering narrative
hook and reel! lol