I would simply suggest to anybody who cares about truth, to click the linky and scroll down to the summary. It's a short read from there to the end and will give a good idea of where the BS lies. Read the whole thing if it piques your interest.
Interesting about the USC study. It's bad enough that it's lined to the horribly flawed Santa Clara County study where the test kits were, according to the manufacturers data, not reliable (did this study use the same test kits?), but take a look at who they bill as the "lead investigator" in the study. Neeraj Sood, professor of public policy at the USC Price School for Public Policy and senior fellow at the USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics. He's got a Ph.D. in Policy Analysis. He teaches public policy. He writes news stories to shape public policy. Now he's involved in a break through study that is sure to shape public policy. The conflict of interest here is HUGE. On top of that, he's teamed up with people who were publicly writing opinion pieces, pushing the idea of large numbers being infected under the radar long before there was any data on this. These folks clearly had a policy agenda in mind BEFORE doing these studies. The fact that they are not forthcoming about these conflicts of interest is incredibly troubling. Disclosing any conflicts of interest up front is customary for pretty much any professional. Certainly for anyone publishing, whether it's publishing scientific studies, or publishing opinion pieces in the news. They are doing both with no conflict disclosures.
I wonder if this second study also advertised on social media? Same flawed test kits? It's hard to imagine that the methods were very different. They were working in parallel. But if you think this data is golden, that's not my problem. Gold doesn't usually steam like this.
Aesqire, interesting article about the 4 countries. It's a shame though he didn't compare Sweden and Norway, on a per million basis. Sweden right now has a 192 per M death rate vs. only 34 per M in Norway. HUGE difference there. No doubt S. Korea have been the gold standard on how to deal with this. They were also leading the world in recognizing that there was a new virus. They really have learned their lessons from prior epidemics.
BTW, not that anyone cares, but the video series the other night included a rant about why none of the chloroquine studies include zinc. He was slow to the punch on that one IMO, but he was possibly hoping for some good clinical studies that did include zinc. He's talked about the theory of why the cocktail works long ago. I would imagine he's been waiting for some reliable data on it. Seems odd these studies aren't happening.
Some of the studies are misleading when quoted. One of them hat the Chloroquine used in advanced very sick people and the control group was given I believe Azithromiacin.
And this is the kind of thing I was talking about earlier. That in hindsight we should be able to get a good idea of when this started. I can certainly believe a couple of week, as suggested here, but we need some real data before jumping the shark to months. This article got me wondering about how the flu season is currently going with the shut down across our country for the Covid virus. I've mentioned that it virtually disappeared in S. Korea. because of their shut down. Best graphic I found was this...
Granted, it's only a single state, and may not represent the entire country, but, damn! Look how such a bad flu season got chopped off, not trailing off like every other flu season shown. That's another pretty good case for the fact that mitigation works! This shows how well it works! An idiot should be able to see that.
-------------
Just spent some time looking for national data. From the CDC...
Same sharp drop, not trailing off like other seasons. Yep, mitigation works. If you look closely, you can see the tail end is already quite a bit lower than the beginning of the season. Very different from what the typical trail off looks like as can be seen in the PA chart.
BTW, it looks like we are less than a week away from surpassing the high end of the estimates of flu deaths of 61,000. After that, can we stop saying it's just like the flu, or will the goal posts move again?
Actually, I know that answer. They are currently working hard to lower the death rate so that it's just like the flu. The problem with that strategy, other than the fact that it's completely corrupt, is that then it's just WAY more virulent. THAT also makes it NOT like the flu, and far more deadly. Freakin' covidiots!
The CDC has had last years flu data posted for sometime. Are you suggesting they are, absent cause, going to go back and revise the data for dishonest purposes?
Are you suggesting that the entire reporting medical community is in league to falsely report numbers?
If so. . . . Your claims suggest the largest, best coordinated fraud perpetrated in history. I’d guess they couldn’t do that if they wanted to and tried. They’re just not that well organized.
You can certainly understand why we’ve all not cleared our calendars to pour over these charts, graphs, theories and videos.
Maybe so. Maybe not
I envy the amount of idle hours you ha e and can only dream about what I’d do with that time..
The CDC has had last years flu data posted for sometime. Are you suggesting they are, absent cause, going to go back and revise the data for dishonest purposes?
Are you suggesting that the entire reporting medical community is in league to falsely report numbers?
If so. . . . Your claims suggest the largest, best coordinated fraud perpetrated in history. I’d guess they couldn’t do that if they wanted to and tried. They’re just not that well organized.
You can certainly understand why we’ve all not cleared our calendars to pour over these charts, graphs, theories and videos.
Maybe so. Maybe not
I envy the amount of idle hours you ha e and can only dream about what I’d do with that time..
Have fun..
I assume that's aimed at me, but I'm bewildered by where you think I insinuated that the CDC has done anything, anywhere in what I posted, that was intentionally or otherwise incorrect. I'm taking their data as the best available. I have no idea if that's true, but that's how I'm taking it until shown otherwise.
What those charts show is that this year's flu season was going much stronger than previous recent years (that should be no surprise, it's been widely reported in the news), but was dramatically cut short, without the normal tailing off that you see in recent years.
I would say that the sharp downturn is probably part of the natural seasonal nature. During that downward trend though was the mitigation for Covid-19. Given that the flu is not as virulent as Covid-19 (I think we all agree on that), and the flu has a much shorter incubation period, the result will be seen more dramatically in flu data than Covid-19 data. It's pretty clear that mitigation works. That part, somehow, is not agreed on. In fact, it looks to me like there was a substantial change at about week 11. That was my last week of work. I remember talking to a co-worker that week about what was going on and when they would close our schools. Mitigation was ramping up that exact week. Did we over react? Very possibly. Did we react quickly enough? Absolutely not.
...another factor to consider in the drop in flu numbers, would be the unknown numbers of "co-morbidity" that is being attributed to COVID, since those patients show "COVID-like" symptoms.
Could be 1.
Could be 1,000.
Could be 10,000.
We'll never know, because in these cases, true testing is not being done. What we DO know is, governors and other directors are allowing and enabling those types of notations on death certificates. To what end? That is up for speculation...apparently there's a strong chance it's a funding thing, as hospitals get more money if they report more COVID deaths, but it also (potentially dramatically) skews the numbers on both sides of the equation.
P1) Sweden didn't prescribe virus mitigation policies.
P2) Norway did.
P3) If mitigation policies are effective, then Sweden's death rate would be significantly greater than that of Norway.
P4) Sweden's death rate is significantly greater than Norway's.
Conclusion: Therefore mitigation policies are effective.
Fallacy of cherry picked data, and others.
Sweden's death rate is lower than nine other nations, many if not all of which practiced mitigation.
Science requires acknowledgment of ALL pertinent data.
Sweden is not an example either way.
We use the scientific method to keep from fooling ourselves, and we ourselves are the easiest ones to fool. — a slight re vision ofone of renowned physicist, Dr. Richard Feynman's famous quotes.
No, she was just quoting the CDC order to the states/governors...I'm just saddled with that damned "common sense" thing.
That, and a grandfather surgeon (born 1899; UVA med school, class of '23, and a lifetime practice in Miami)...and an uncle surgeon who taught me to play chess at age 4...and a physical therapist mother who taught at UF Athletics when they developed this little thing to help the football team that ended up being called Gatorade...I may have absorbed a little bit of science through family talks as well as biology classes...back when teachers actually TAUGHT, and parents were actually PARENTS.
But around here I guess I'm just a putz who rides a motorcycle sometimes so I guess I don't know anything.