[SeekAndFind]

OK,I’ll bite and admit the 600,000 exaggerates the DIRECT Covid death numbers. But by how much??

Let’s say 300,000 of them were coded wrongly, does that diminish the seriousness of the disease?

What in your estimation is the closest number for deaths DUE TO COVID ?

[alexander_busek]

OK,I’ll bite and admit the 600,000 exaggerates the DIRECT Covid death numbers. But by how much?? Let’s say 300,000 of them were coded wrongly, does that diminish the seriousness of the disease? What in your estimation is the closest number for deaths DUE TO COVID ?

So you're admitting that the numbers are probably cooked or at least highly suspicious and that it is thus legitimate for two random FReepers with no real background in statistics or credentials as actuarial experts to "spit-ball" and attempt to perform their own "back-of-the-envelope" calculations here on an Internet forum?!

Case closed!

Regards,

[T.B. Yoits]

Let’s say 300,000 of them were coded wrongly, does that diminish the seriousness of the disease?

The mis-coded numbers are higher than 300,000 and yes it does diminish the seriousness of the disease. We don't quarantine healthy people and lock down economies for the yearly flu.

We also don't force injections of a life-altering experimental treatment on people for the seasonal flu.