Just... no....

The first french study that showed some promise? The "study" was done completely wrong. Hence, it had bad results.
https://www.les-crises.fr/the-treme...ical-trial-analysis-by-olivier-berruyer/

Other studies have found that it's actually worse than not using the HCL.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...loroquine-use-finds-no-benefit-increased

This isn't some grand conspiracy. It just. doesn't. work.

Is that the same CDC that said that the general public SHOULDN'T wear face masks. Or is it the CDC that said that we should wear masks? How new is the science on face masks? Is that something so new that it is still in development?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...c-asked-review-mask-guidance/5101884002/

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/diy-cloth-face-coverings.html

So your position is that the CDC is reporting an increase in the death rate for the U.S. at this time and you are attributing that to this virus? Why not, for a change, post a link to your source? I can't find that anywhere in the CDC stats.

In reviewing the data though, I did run across another interesting wrinkle to all of this. The CDC does report more deaths at home than usual in the areas reporting the most Coronavirus cases. Now I am sure that you will interpret that to mean that people are dying at home from the virus. But the speculation at this time is that the hospitals and emergency services are overwhelmed and cannot provide the needed service in a timely manner in no small part because anyone with a cough is calling 911 and being rushed to the hospital.

Many ways to interpret the data. And many ways to collect and analyze the data. He who controls the information, controls. Just ask Kim Jung Un and Xi Jinping.

As to your last question, that very thing happens every single year with influenza. Sometimes, just as bad.

And one needs to ask, if the response to this virus was not as hyped as it is, would some of those folks who died waiting for an ambulance or an emergency room be alive today?

No, that is your interpretation of what I wrote ( what I wrote is a fact as it is written, whether what I wrote about is fact is subjective to one's own understanding), which kinda makes my case, you believe what you want to believe that fist your agenda.

Best if you define and a mutual agreed upon definition of your use of the word "real" as used above, before you respond.

Best if you quote me next time, So I will do it in order not confuse the gallery here:

"So? If they are transparent about that, what is the problem? The listener/reader must see thru the smoke, IN EVERY case.

Person dies after a gunshot, did the gun kill the person, the person that pulled the trigger, the person that deflected the bullet, the bullet, or the person that did not administer first aid and let the deceased bleed out, etc

the legal definition "But for......." is where it gets subjective.

A case can also be made some want to lower COVID death counts, to fit their own agenda.

Altruistic honesty is not a given in today's world it seems."



.
And I don't like Koolaid, and I have no problem sharing that position as often as I see fit

There are some that want to raise the numbers to fit an agenda, and others that want to lower it to fit a different agenda. That is the prime reason there is so much bad data out there.

I do think the overall death rate from ALL causes, compared to recent history, is about as accurate as we can hope for.

Once again, how about supporting your assertions with some evidence for a change? You have yet to refer us to a single source from which you derive your opinions. And without supporting evidence, all you have are......... opinions. How can anyone be taken seriously when they cannot support their assertions with real data?

You have chosen to ignore links to the CDC and Illinois Director of Public Health as to what has been happening. All while repeating 'talking points' from the very officials who would benefit the most from your point of view. That's called 'drinking the Kool-Aid'.

And did you hear that the hospital ship left New York the other day? It was rushed up there preparing to help with the predicted massive case loads caused by the Coronavirus. And do you know what happened? The ship left after less than a month and after treating only 182 patients. Another prediction gone wrong by the Kool-Aid mixers. https://nypost.com/2020/04/30/uss-comfort-departs-new-york-after-aiding-in-coronavirus-battle/

The real tragedy of this pandemic is the totally inept handling of it at all levels of our institutions. The predictions and actions by some of our leaders has been down right awful. Misstep after misstep. And the accounting is their way to cover it up. Exactly the same as it was with the Vietnam War. Ineptitude covered up by accounting practices.

And as long as enough people believe everything reported at face value, it will go on and on and on. But that doesn't make it any more true.

Thousands of people who took it and made a quick turn around beg to differ...

They could have taken sugar pills and had a quick turn around too. Doesn't mean what they took helped. That's why we study stuff, to make sure it actually helps, and doesn't inadvertently hurt them.

Well it has helped bring the murder rate down...
Gang bangers staying inside, & if they shoot someone with covid-19, it's death by plague. Or if the Wife gets Corona, coughs on you in the morning... then you have a massive heart attack, or she stabs you that afternoon. Another Corona death... yep... stats are solid.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm
Dave link
"Based on death certificate data, the percentage of deaths attributed to pneumonia, influenza or COVID-19 (PIC) decreased from 23.6% during week 16 to 14.6% during week 17 but remained significantly above baseline. This is the second week of declines in this indicator, but this percentage may change as death certificates representing recent deaths are processed."
Also please note CDC is headed by Robert R. Redfield, MD, appointed to the position by the President in March 2018.
You can read up on him, he's had a long career. I'm pretty sure we have all the very best working to beat the pandemic.

I did not say all data was bad. I agreed with you that bad data is everywhere. It is. And many lack the ability or desire to weed through it.

The reason the flu vaccine has a low effective rate is that they have to guess which out of many strains is going to be the one that spreads. Flu shots can have 2 or 3 vaccines to try and cover their bases, but sometimes a dark horse flu virus will fool the prognosticators and will be the one to spread - when that happens, the flu shot isn't totally useless but it's definitely not going to knock out the flu. Getting a flu shot and then catching a different strain will usually lessen the impact/duration of the flu to some degree.

For now, since there is little genetic variation in the Covid-19 virus, when vetted, vaccine should be much more effective than a "flu" vaccine.

That link is data about the very subject in the title line; the flu, specifically pneumonia and influenza. Not Corona. And what you quoted is a combination of all three recent epidemics, pneumonia, influenza, and Coronavirus, so there is nothing there specific to the virus.

But here is one of the key parts of your link saying that their data is likely not complete;

"Data collected in ILINet may disproportionally represent certain populations within a state, and therefore, may not accurately depict the full picture of influenza activity for the whole state. Differences in the data presented here by CDC and independently by some state health departments likely represent differing levels of data completeness with data presented by the state likely being the more complete."


Here is the link to the CDC's weekly Corona data; https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/index.html

"Two indicators from existing surveillance systems are being used to track outpatient or emergency department (ED) visits for illness with symptoms compatible with COVID-19.

Nationally, the percentages of visits for ILI and COVID-19-like illness (CLI) decreased compared to last week. Levels of ILI are now below baseline for the second week.

Recent changes in health care seeking behavior are likely affecting data reported from both networks, making it difficult to draw further conclusions at this time. Tracking these systems moving forward will give additional insight into illness related to COVID-19."

Remember that the CDC gets it's data from the states. So if the state's data is padded (which we know at least Illinois' is) then their data will reflect that."

Also note that in the third paragraph they again say that it is difficult to draw further conclusions at this time. That ambiguity is no where to be heard in your posts. But there it is again and again.

I thought that you might prowl about the linked page. Right below the mast head is the below hyper-link to the page with other links where you may be able to find the quote.(cut and paste) that contains the quote.I can't make the same leap you made that only one State is "Padding" It's known that another State just released data on deaths in the nursing homes in their state and there are others. First it was lack of tests, then its false positives/false nagatives, then underlying conditions. What is so difficult to understand (with no ambiguity) that the unusual spike of deaths that may be over/or under reported has a cause and the cause is the with a high levelf accuracy coronavirus.Regarding two weeks of reduced infections,=.: remember the lack of tests, then the back log of tests? Those two facts created a spike, and we are now settling into a pattern. The best statistics would be formulated using a "moving average". One site I utilize maps Californias cases and their data is presented using the moving average. again time will tell the truth, pushing a wagon load of mush is a hap-hazard way to keep people informed. The wheels will ultimately stay on, or fall off. Once the smoke and mirrors clear and curtains are pulled back will we see what actually transpired. In the quote I included above is this: "but remained significantly above baseline". Without prejudice, I believe the Doc is saying Covid is responsible for the significant increase over expected trends.
If you ever want to find a more difficult internet site to extract info check out the cdc data pages. what a maze of un utilizable drivel.
Link Link

The original reason the Comfort was sent to NYC was to treat sick people who had non Covid 19, thereby taking pressure off hospitals overwhelmed with Covid cases. In fact patients were suppose to be tested for Covid 19 before given entry to the ship. I can assure anyone that the situation in NYC with the level of outbreak of Covid 19 is real. Hospitals have been overwhelmed, medical staff have come down sick themselves and PPD's have been in short supply. The dead cant be buried fast enough.
As for the other comment about hospitals been maxed to capacity with people who run there with a "cough" Well two stories one of which is family and the other talking to the parents of a adult Covid 19 victim, again that comment is beyond a doubt false, at least here in the city. Both the people I talk of both who had pneumonia in both lungs were denied hospital admission. Both had extremely high fever for over a week, unrelenting coughing, weak to the point they could hardly walk. One of these people was a healthy 45 year old and when he finally pleaded he couldn't breath did a ambulance take him to a hospital.
I agree that people should not believe everything reported at "face value". What everyone should understand is that door swings both ways

For argument, let's say that every single death has been labeled covid, even if it wasn't. ()

Then where, pray-tell, did all of these unexpected deaths come from? What caused the huge spike? We recognize that car/gang/other deaths are probably down, so what's taking up the slack and adding even more?

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/pdf/covidview-05-01-2020.pdf
Page 10 is a graph that shows two times ('18 and this year) an abnormal? jump above seasonal averages.
The footnote of the graph clearly outlines data needs to be reported.
Do you suppose there is a standardized method being used by all reporting agencies?
One can easily discern that there is currently no way to pin down a precise number, or even within a margin adequate for anyone to really know what is recently amassing.
Since I'm not being graded, or paid to produce links to information the cdc and nchs are two government sites that have recent, but not current data. It's the best data they provide us. I also use regional info and some education websites to satisfy my curiosity about what is actually happening. I abhor any news outlets, other than to get a "heads up on leads". I've found it interesting than there are many, everywhere, whom gravitate to the extremes.
I'd be willing to bet that we will be seeing an increase of infections, and even perhaps an increase in younger populations having more life threatening symptoms within weeks of relaxed distancing measures. This, because the sheer number of total infections provide a greater chance of mutations (no link, but true in virology thus: Phenotypic Variation by Mutations- Mutations can produce viruses with new antigenic determinants. The appearance of an antigenically novel virus through mutation is called antigenic drift. Antigenically altered viruses may be able to cause disease in previously resistant immune hosts). While I'm not a proponent of maintaining a perpetual social vacation, releasing the herd will leave us chasing the cures (vaccine and or treatment) for a longer period of time. So, where is the middle ground? De we keep all seniors locked up and allow the 18 to 49 group back to social petri dish? What happens if infants and toddlers begin experencing severe manifestations?

When I went back to grad school in 1990 one of the new sayings I heard and chuckled at was:

“If you torture the DATA long enough,
it will admit to anything.”

Later this got shortened up to

P-hackin gets ya financial backin

With my experience of 5 years of military style summer camp and four years of military High School/ROTC this jarred with the simple code of:

I will not lie, cheat, or steal and I will not tolerate those who do.

My military history instructors took pains to explain that failure to adhere to this code leads to military defeat, particularly in “The Fog of War” where accurate information is a vital weapon.

The 50 “laboratories of democracy” are trying different policies:

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-quirks-restrictions-states-lockdowns.html

It seems to me that everyone is making essentially the same argument. Well, almost everyone. And that is that there really is not enough reliable data to truly know just where we are in this thing. Then there are those that downplay the risk and there are those that inflate the risk depending on their agenda.

I want to again be clear here, my question is; does the science and data justify the response? And the truth of the matter is that we just don't know. There is not enough information nor is much of that information reliable.

My 91 year old father is in a nursing home. I haven't seen him in over a month because the nursing home is under lock down. That is an unfortunate but prudent step in this situation. Chicago may need something similar to the nursing home that my dad is in. But to shut down much of the activity in our rural area that has very little infection is an overreach.

The response to this or any other threat should be proportional and targeted. Using a sledge hammer for a gnat in many (not all) of these areas comes to mind. One thing that the data does show is that not all places have the same level of risk from this virus. And so the response should reflect that reality.