COVID-19 Threads

[Wexahu]

I think this is what you want from the CDC:

COVID-19 Provisional Counts - Weekly Updates by Select Demographic and Geographic Characteristics

Tabulated data on provisional COVID-19 deaths by age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, and comorbidities. Also includes an index of state-level and county-level mortality data available for download.

www.cdc.gov

You can select for all sorts of variables. Here is the age breakdown for the us- you can also look by state, by sex, by year etc:

View attachment 15200

Here are the comorbidities/ contributing conditions which is also selectable
View attachment 15201

So there have been 311,863 COVD deaths in people 85+ years old, and 277,943 in people between 0-64. We don't hear about this statistical anomaly near enough. And we haven't even taken account pre-existing health conditions. And roughly 1 out of every 17,190 people under the age of 30 have died from COVID. That's 0.0058% of those people.

These numbers are staggering, and not in the way you think they are.

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

So there have been 311,863 COVD deaths in people 85+ years old, and 277,943 in people between 0-64. We don't hear about this statistical anomaly near enough. And we haven't even taken account pre-existing health conditions. And roughly 1 out of every 17,190 people under the age of 30 have died from COVID. That's 0.0058% of those people.

These numbers are staggering, and not in the way you think they are.

There's no doubt that age and comorbidities really increase risk of severe disease and death. But In the first screenshot, even in in 40-49 age group covid accounted for a little less than 10% of all deaths- 46,260 of 511,478. That's about the same % of deaths for 50-64, 65-74, 75-84 and 85 and up age groups from 2020-2023. So it was a significant source of mortality at a wide age range, not just over 65 and older or whatever cutoff you pick. It isn't until you get to the 20-29 age group that the % and absolute #s really drop off (7030/231382) or 3% of deaths.

 

[Wexahu]

There's no doubt that age and comorbidities really increase risk of severe disease and death. But In the first screenshot, even in in 40-49 age group covid accounted for a little less than 10% of all deaths- 46,260 of 511,478. That's about the same % of deaths for 50-64, 65-74, 75-84 and 85 and up age groups from 2020-2023. So it was a significant source of mortality at a wide age range, not just over 65 and older or whatever cutoff you pick. It isn't until you get to the 20-29 age group that the % and absolute #s really drop off (7030/231382) or 3% of deaths.

View attachment 15204

But it's very rare for someone in their 40's to die. In any given year, about 0.3% of people in the their 40's pass away from something. 10% of that number is virtually insignificant. You're getting to the point where it affects maybe one out of more than a thousand people. That's the point. % increases and % change doesn't really matter if the number you are starting with is so small to begin with.

Said it before, but we basically temporarily went back to mortality rates we were seeing in the mid-late 1990's. I remember those times, it wasn't sickness, death and despair. It was life as usual.

 

[HFrog1999]

But it's very rare for someone in their 40's to die. In any given year, about 0.3% of people in the their 40's pass away from something. 10% of that number is virtually insignificant. You're getting to the point where it affects maybe one out of more than a thousand people. That's the point. % increases and % change doesn't really matter if the number you are starting with is so small to begin with.

Said it before, but we basically temporarily went back to mortality rates we were seeing in the mid-late 1990's. I remember those times, it wasn't sickness, death and despair. It was life as usual.

The 90's were awesome!

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

But it's very rare for someone in their 40's to die. In any given year, about 0.3% of people in the their 40's pass away from something. 10% of that number is virtually insignificant. You're getting to the point where it affects maybe one out of more than a thousand people. That's the point. % increases and % change doesn't really matter if the number you are starting with is so small to begin with.

Said it before, but we basically temporarily went back to mortality rates we were seeing in the mid-late 1990's. I remember those times, it wasn't sickness, death and despair. It was life as usual.

This is definitely where we our opinions differ. For me no matter how you slice it was a major health crisis. During the pandemic phase Covid was just behind heart disease and cancer as the leading cause of death in most age groups. Went from 0 to #3 in one year (actually 3/4 of a year). It was the equivalent of adding all deaths from accidents and stroke in 2020. I think talking about the cost of interventions and waht the best approach was is important. But you can do that and still recognize the enormity of the impact on health pandemic Covid was.

 

[Wexahu]

This is definitely where we our opinions differ. For me no matter how you slice it was a major health crisis. During the pandemic phase Covid was just behind heart disease and cancer as the leading cause of death in most age groups. Went from 0 to #3 in one year (actually 3/4 of a year). It was the equivalent of adding all deaths from accidents and stroke in 2020. I think talking about the cost of interventions and waht the best approach was is important. But you can do that and still recognize the enormity of the impact on health pandemic Covid was.

View attachment 15205

Well, I don't really recognize the enormity of it because so much of it was self-induced. And the numbers speak for themselves. They look bad until you realize there are 330,000,000 people in this country, over 7,000,000,000 in the world and that about 150,000 people die every single day.

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

Well, I don't really recognize the enormity of it because so much of it was self-induced. And the numbers speak for themselves. They look bad until you realize there are 330,000,000 people in this country, over 7,000,000,000 in the world and that about 150,000 people die every single day.

Ok, let me flip it around and ask you this. We all know we put a lot and resources into reducing cancer and cardiovascular deaths. Yet in a given day (or even year), most people don't die from cancer and cardiovascular diseases. You can quote the exact same numbers you like to quote for those diseases. They look bad until you realize there are 330,000,000 people and 9300 deaths a day. If they have similar numbers as Covid, why put up the expense and effort to reduce mortality of those diseases but not Covid?

 

[Wexahu]

Ok, let me flip it around and ask you this. We all know we put a lot and resources into reducing cancer and cardiovascular deaths. Yet in a given day (or even year), most people don't die from cancer and cardiovascular diseases. You can quote the exact same numbers you like to quote for those diseases. They look bad until you realize there are 330,000,000 people and 9300 deaths a day. If they have similar numbers as Covid, why put up the expense and effort to reduce mortality of those diseases but not Covid?

Best I could tell by doing some research, we spend about $200B annually on cancer. So let's call it $400B over 2 years. We spent over $4T on COVID. So we spent 10x more money in our COVID fight than we did cancer over that two-year period. Because when you force people to shut down business and cut off commerce, I guess it's only fair to compensate them for the losses you are forcing on them. And cancer kills just as many people, except it's much more indiscriminate than COVID.

Over a virus. Something that we as humans will develop an immunity to if left alone. A virus that almost exclusively preys on a specific demographic, and yet we thought it was a good idea to close schools, even though we knew this information very early on. We spent about 18% of our annual GDP to fight this almost flu-like virus that almost exclusively preys on the old and sick. We spent as much fighting this virus as we do on all typical annual health care costs for the 330,000,000 people living in this country.

Does that in any way, shape, or form seem like money well spent to you? It was more like a social experiment than a health care crisis.

edit: I had my original cancer $'s wrong. Point remains the same.

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

Best I could tell by doing some research, we spend about $200B annually on cancer. So let's call it $400B over 2 years. We spent over $4T on COVID. So we spent 10x more money in our COVID fight than we did cancer over that two-year period. Because when you force people to shut down business and cut off commerce, I guess it's only fair to compensate them for the losses you are forcing on them. And cancer kills just as many people, except it's much more indiscriminate than COVID.

Over a virus. Something that we as humans will develop an immunity to if left alone. A virus that almost exclusively preys on a specific demographic, and yet we thought it was a good idea to close schools, even though we knew this information very early on. We spent about 18% of our annual GDP to fight this almost flu-like virus that almost exclusively preys on the old and sick. We spent as much fighting this virus as we do on all typical annual health care costs for the 330,000,000 people living in this country.

Does that in any way, shape, or form seem like money well spent to you? It was more like a social experiment than a health care crisis.

edit: I had my original cancer $'s wrong. Point remains the same.

Want to bring it back to comments of yours like this:

And roughly 1 out of every 17,190 people under the age of 30 have died from COVID. That's 0.0058% of those people.

I think this comment lacks perspective of mortality numbers. That is a similar number to the number of people who died of cancer in that age group. At almost all age groups Covid had a mortality in the 50-60% range of cancer and more than most other causes of death. Most people don’t die from cancer or cardiovascular disease or accidents or whatever in a given year because most people don’t die in a given year. The percentage of people who die of any cause is always going to be a very small number.

Yet we make a lot of effort to reduce cancer deaths, reduce cardiovascular deaths, reduce accidental deaths, etc. And none of those had such an impact on life expectancy overnight like Covid (3 years decrease in life expectancy). So to me the question is not whether we should have had a strategy to reduce Covid deaths- that’s a no brainer. The question is how and at what cost. That’s a valid debate. But you can have that debate without resorting unnecessarily minimizing its health impact.

 

[Jet Set Frog]

View attachment 15204

Do you not find it suspicious that the chart lists these as deaths "INVOLVING COVID-19" instead of deaths FROM COVID-19?

 

[Frog79]

Looks like the dam is starting to break regarding the covid "vaccine" scam:

Surge in vaccine lawsuits forces Biden admin to hire more attorneys

Vaccine side effects came under new scrutiny during COVID-19, but frustrations with the claims process have been years in the making.

www.newsweek.com

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

Do you not find it suspicious that the chart lists these as deaths "INVOLVING COVID-19" instead of deaths FROM COVID-19?

Not at all. All you need to do is look at excess death data during the pandemic that matches up almost exactly with Covid deaths. If anything we were likely undercounting Covid deaths and attributed them to other causes, especially early in the pandemic when there wasn’t widespread testing available. Even as testing and awareness became better, some countries way undercounted Covid deaths when you look at excess death data (particularly China, Russia and poorer countries).

 

[Bob Sugar]

This is definitely where we our opinions differ. For me no matter how you slice it was a major health crisis. During the pandemic phase Covid was just behind heart disease and cancer as the leading cause of death in most age groups. Went from 0 to #3 in one year (actually 3/4 of a year). It was the equivalent of adding all deaths from accidents and stroke in 2020. I think talking about the cost of interventions and waht the best approach was is important. But you can do that and still recognize the enormity of the impact on health pandemic Covid was.

View attachment 15205

These are the people who were deciding if something was a "Covid death."

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

These are the people who were deciding if something was a "Covid death."

I'm sure there were individual cases misattributed and maybe certain jurisdictions where they were overestimated, but for me proof is in the pudding. You take a step back and look at excess deaths during case surges in the pandemic and it exactly matches reported covid death surges, maybe even underestimates them. Then in between surges excess deaths goes to baseline. This narrative of "died with covid not from covid" is one of the bigger head fakes out there, IMO. The big surges of deaths during the pandemic were from Covid.

 

[Wexahu]

Want to bring it back to comments of yours like this:



I think this comment lacks perspective of mortality numbers. That is a similar number to the number of people who died of cancer in that age group. At almost all age groups Covid had a mortality in the 50-60% range of cancer and more than most other causes of death. Most people don’t die from cancer or cardiovascular disease or accidents or whatever in a given year because most people don’t die in a given year. The percentage of people who die of any cause is always going to be a very small number.

Yet we make a lot of effort to reduce cancer deaths, reduce cardiovascular deaths, reduce accidental deaths, etc. And none of those had such an impact on life expectancy overnight like Covid (3 years decrease in life expectancy). So to me the question is not whether we should have had a strategy to reduce Covid deaths- that’s a no brainer. The question is how and at what cost. That’s a valid debate. But you can have that debate without resorting unnecessarily minimizing its health impact.

It had roughly the same impact as cancer does on an annual basis, but it was only temporary because it was a virus. And we spent $4T. Let's debate that. I'll start. It was idiotic. They closed down schools, I don't have to list all the reasons that is idiotic. They recommended people walk into a restaurant with a mask on. Idiotic. They strongly recommended (even required in many cases, and bullied/shamed in most cases) EVERYONE get a vaccine, even after it was very clear the vaccine didn't stop the spread and that people under 40 years old are basically immune to the effects of the virus anyway. Idiotic, if not sinister.

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

It had roughly the same impact as cancer does on an annual basis, but it was only temporary because it was a virus. And we spent $4T. Let's debate that. I'll start. It was idiotic. They closed down schools, I don't have to list all the reasons that is idiotic. They recommended people walk into a restaurant with a mask on. Idiotic. They strongly recommended (even required in many cases, and bullied/shamed in most cases) EVERYONE get a vaccine, even after it was very clear the vaccine didn't stop the spread and that people under 40 years old are basically immune to the effects of the virus anyway. Idiotic, if not sinister.

Yeah I think these are the places to debate. I definitely agree the costs of closing down schools for an extended period was too high. I don't agree that pushing vaccines, even for young people was a mistake. They were most certainly not "immune" and even though most did not have severe disease some did that would have benefitted from the vaccine. I do think there is good evidence that an approach more like Sweden was probably a better one. They kept schools open but also went heavy vaccine (way more doses/ person than the US). But remember, it was very costly for them too. They poured a bunch of money into the economy, had a huge decrease in GDP and a huge decrease in mobility similar to countries that "closed down".

 

[Bob Sugar]

Yeah I think these are the places to debate. I definitely agree the costs of closing down schools for an extended period was too high. I don't agree that pushing vaccines, even for young people was a mistake. They were most certainly not "immune" and even though most did not have severe disease some did that would have benefitted from the vaccine. I do think there is good evidence that an approach more like Sweden was probably a better one. They kept schools open but also went heavy vaccine (way more doses/ person than the US). But remember, it was very costly for them too. They poured a bunch of money into the economy, had a huge decrease in GDP and a huge decrease in mobility similar to countries that "closed down".

You that that’s bad, just wait until the climate change “national emergency” and the totally necessary policies they’ll try to enact.

 

[froginmn]

I'm sure there were individual cases misattributed and maybe certain jurisdictions where they were overestimated, but for me proof is in the pudding.

I'm also sure that if a public health official knowingly and intentionally misrepresented health data, that's a fireable offense, if not criminal.

It's also exhibit A of why people have lost trust in the government.

 

[Frog79]

Some good news about slowly decreasing cardiac deaths in athletes over the last 20 years (with no increase since covid). Highest incidence in male, black and basketball athletes.



Here is all causes of death in NCAA athletes over the time period-
View attachment 15197

Utter nonsense posted by Jeffrey Morris, a notorious vaccine shill on Twitter. There have in fact been huge increases in sudden collapses/deaths since the "vaccines" were deployed if you just look for them:

Airtable | Everyone's app platform

Airtable is a low-code platform for building collaborative apps. Customize your workflow, collaborate, and achieve ambitious outcomes. Get started for free.

airtable.com

 

[Frog79]

I'm sure there were individual cases misattributed and maybe certain jurisdictions where they were overestimated, but for me proof is in the pudding. You take a step back and look at excess deaths during case surges in the pandemic and it exactly matches reported covid death surges, maybe even underestimates them. Then in between surges excess deaths goes to baseline. This narrative of "died with covid not from covid" is one of the bigger head fakes out there, IMO. The big surges of deaths during the pandemic were from Covid.

You are truly a misinformation machine my friend. Even the CDC director said that at Covid deaths were overcounted mainly because of the perverse financial incentives involved:

User Clip: CDC Director acknowledges possible inflation in COVID-19 death count

There is monetary incentive for hospitals to report deaths as COVID-19 (C-19) even when the actual cause is not C-19. This type of inaccurate number reporting has also happened in the past with HIV/AIDs per CDC director.

www.c-span.org

By the way, I know a lady who was denied an accidental death insurance claim when her husband's death was officially declared "covid" because he had a positive PCR test in the previous 30 days before his fatal car crash but he was completely healthy at the time of the accident. He died instantly at the scene. Do you want to tell her that this was a "head fake" and that her husband actually died from Covid and not the car crash?