RE: we're not

Posted on: May 28, 2020 at 21:46:14 CT

The virus only hastens death in those cases, if at all, it doesn't "cause" it This isn't the 1918 Pandemic which did kill young, healthy people. Those types of cases here are disproportionately less, much less, just look at the charts (even assuming the 100k death count)

The accident and murder "examples" are much different from deaths from comorbidities, you know that. The former is a direct causation of death, the End of Life situations were medical conditions that caused someone to die. CV didn't kill them, it just hurried up the process.

I believe I've seen stats that accounts for at least 1/3 of the deaths.


But let's be honest about our differences here. I'm of the mindset that this issue has been so politicized that there's bias in the numbers. From the "models" to the mortality rate, to the "cause of death" to the 30,000 ventilators, to moving the flatten the curve goalposts, to total lockdowns of unaffected or low affected areas, to the age and health demographics (which I noticed you failed to address) etc. how can anyone reasonably presume these numbers are accurate? It's easy for journalists to throw out the 100,000 plus numbers because no one likely knows the true deaths attributable to the virus. Nevertheless, there's plenty of reason to question them, in particular when comorbidities are involved. It's my observation there's a bias to attribute deaths to CV. Just too much political and perhaps $$$ BS

BTW my next door neighbor is Top Dog at a nursing home. She's lost 3 residents, all of whom were End of Life status, but death certificates listed CV as "cause of death" She rolled her eyes and snickered when I asked her what she thought of that. Just an anecdotal FYI, but I'm sure this is happening elsewhere.

Seriously, you got upset over my "cute name"? LOL Cmon man. It did originate in Communist China, right? :)

Edited by CPA at 21:34:16 on 05/28/20