Technically George Floyd could be labeled a COVID death if you went by mainstream media standards. He had the Rona and other serious underlying health conditions.

 

George Floyd didn't die in vain. He cured the Wuhan Flu.

 

42% of Covid deaths are from nursing homes (underreported in NY because if you're taken from the nursing home to a hospital and die, you aren't counted) it was two thirds in PA. The median stay in a nursing home is 5 months. How many of these covid deaths would have died anyway in that time period?

Covid death count is massively over representative of what it really is

 

You believe in the Easter bunny don't you Pop?
What is it about snowflakes?

 

Dont poke poppy it (he/she) will start sending you private messages. .....yer.... Weird.

oh well at least the meme stopped.

 

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/...m-15317152.php

 

funny how you guys only ever rely on anecdotes and personal stories without sourcing your claims. your feelings don't matter here. If you think the article is wrong, post an article with empirical information instead of getting butthurt and whining about facts you wish weren't true. I also have friends in the medical profession, but knowing doctors and nurses doesn't mean your opinion counts for squat.

also, what political pressure is compromising Yale? I don't know if this is a symptom of America's cult of ignorance or tinfoil hat ranting, but why do you think Yale would put out research to satisfy political pressure? political pressure from who? and for what end?
the idea that Yale, one of the most respected higher education institutions in the world, which is also a private institution with a $30 billion dollar endowment (ie no need for uncle sam's money), would compromise its reputation and put out false information is frankly laughable. I think it's more likely that you don't have facts to dispute their claim.

Here are some more articles that suggest covid deaths are undercounted. Note that these are based on facts and figures, not feelings and emotions, which seems to be how yall like to debate:

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/05/13/854873605/fauci-says-u-s-death-toll-is-likely-higher-other-covid-stats-need-adjusting-too

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/12/fauci-puts-it-bluntly-coronavirus-deaths-are-undercounted/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...avirus-deaths/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ed/2973481001/




If covid deaths are being overreported, then there shouldn't be any excess deaths outside of Covid19 deaths. In other words, the number of reported covid fatalities does not entirely account for the unusual increase in deaths this year vs last year. From the WaPo article: "The Post looked at one way of evaluating the full death toll from the virus last month, comparing the number of reported deaths from any cause through early April to historic figures for the same time period. Our research suggested that there were more than 15,000 more deaths than normal, twice what was attributed to the virus at the time. In New York, we counted about 8,000 more deaths than normal."

From USAtoday: "Experts say that COVID-19 deaths are likely not being overinflated. That list includes by Dr. Anthony Fauci, who is leading the U.S. response to the coronavirus. Instead, many experts say the nation is likely amid an undercount of the death toll due to the disease due to factors like false negatives on tests, a lack of testing and people who have died in their homes without receiving a positive test."

also as an aside, the instinct to attack anyone who offers a dissenting piece of information is pretty pathetic Upintheair.

We all want this pandemic to be over, but sticking your head in the sand and believing what you want to believe in the face of contrary evidence is childish and will only prolong the pain.

 

Including a knee on his neck.

 

Hey I will not try to change anyone’s opinion via the internet. This is what I do for a living and isn’t “anecdotal evidence”. It would be like if I sent you scientific studies about the danger human error causes in aviation and how we should immediately move to unmanned aircraft, even though I know how often humans have to save the computers from crashing an airliner. Do you put this much stock in the media and “experts” when they report on aviation? Especially after an accident when they are just pushing click bait? This whole thing was overblown and anyone with a shred of intelligence and integrity is walking back on the whole initial Covid Worse case scenarios. By all means stay afraid and be sure and convince all your friends and family how dangerous it is. Make sure they don’t travel or fly because that is just too risky. It’s your career and furlough, not mine anymore.

 

"Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes: evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony."

Like it or not, your evidence is anecdotal. This isn't to say that anecdotal evidence is always wrong or can't be relied on, but rather that it cannot be used to extrapolate the bigger picture. Your evidence is anecdotal because it is entirely based on your personal experience. That's what anecdotal means.


First, I don't think you could find a scientific study that advocates for an immediate transition to unmanned aircraft. Automation isn't there yet and couldn't be applied at that level to existing airframes. Show me an example of a scientific article getting it this wrong. Secondly, this is a false parallel. There's a big difference between the Channel 7 news reporting on an aviation incident and an epidemiologist from Yale offering his assessment of data from the pandemic. Thirdly, I choose to use critical thinking when assessing a source. That means being suspicious of what they argue. This does not mean rejecting news sources with information I don't like simply because I don't like it. I also don't think any of the articles I posted qualify as clickbait

The Covid worst case scenarios were based on society continuing on as normal during the pandemic. Of course the estimates are off, because society drastically altered course and there has been a prolonged shutdown. That doesn't mean the models are wrong, just that the assumptions underpinning them are no longer accurate. It's disingenuous and dishonest to point to those models as being so far off when they were meant to predict what was going to happen if nothing was done.

In any case, I don't understand how 100,000+ deaths over the course of three months can be looked at as something insignificant. We started a 19 year long war in Afghanistan after 9/11, which resulted in 2,000 deaths, but now these 100,000 don't matter? Fewer people died in Vietnam, so I guess we can get rid of the memorial and forget about that conflict because it was just a blip in the grander scheme of things, right?

And the final strawman. Because I care about the unnecessary loss of my countrymen's life and relying on data rather than emotion, I'm a coward? Really? Nothing I've said has advocated that we all need to be afraid. I've merely disputed the notion that the death toll is inflated, because the data does not bear that out.

In fact, I'm all for starting the economy backup, and I think the shutdowns should be lifted. I am not afraid, but I also think reasonable precautions should be taken, such as wearing masks and social distancing when possible. There is a middle ground between hysteria and denial, but it seems like you guys think it has to be one or the other. Things don't have to be so black and white, and just because I don't think 100,000+ dead Americans is insignificant doesn't make me a coward.