Posted on 12/03/2021 8:32:12 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
( 5,261,659 deaths worldwide / 7,911,098,750 ) x 100 = circa 0.067 %
In plain words, the “pandemic” dead comprise less than one-hundreth of one percent of the general population worldwide. That's a numerical definition of the “pandemic.”
Additionally for the US:
( 808,116 deaths nationally / 333,793,935 ) x 100 = 0.242 %
In plain words, the “pandemic” dead in the US comprise less than 1/4 of one percent of the nation's population.
Additionally, given the disparity between the worldwide percentage and the US’ national percentage of “officially” dead over almost two years, only a few explanations are likely.
1) The US’ Fauci-led response to the “pandemic” is among the WORST in the world statistically, and the global response including third world countries is significantly BETTER than the Fauci-led response in the US or,
2) The data taxonomy, collection, analysis and reporting are massively INCORRECT, and these data reporting sites are to some large degree misinformation.
Given that China and India together represent a population of 2,846,982,644 — Worldometer data as of today — the combined population of these two countries shows less than half the dead of the “official” USA/CDC/FDA/JHU/Worldometer numbers.
The US at about one tenth the size of the two largest nations on the earth has tallied more than twice the number of “official” deaths.
This whole exercise in numbers — from a rational point-of-view — proves with a preponderance of Worldometer evidence that the COVID-19 “pandemic” in the US us fraudulent.
“Death rate” is an interesting game.
Does one compare deaths to cases, given the assertion that there are a high number of asymptomatic cases? If so, the various rates and computations are a matter of a priori choices and structures.
It is interesting to watch prognostications for the future, such as what the world will warm to in a decade or a century, and such as what the pandemic “death rate” would be in a year (as Imperial College UK and the WHO did almost two years ago as forecasts of coming inflation). When the news headlines “experts say,” it seems clever to look behind the curtain at who is pulling the data levers.
Taking Worldometer’s “cases” compared to “deaths,” one may calculate 1.98 percent. Taking Worldometer’s global population compared to the same number of deaths, one calculates 0.067 percent. Very different results. The WHO's original forecast was for 3.4 percent. The Imperial College original forecasts was for 2.2 million dead in the US alone, and in a very short period of time. Almost two years later.... wrong by a wide margin.
It becomes an argument between “death rate” based on reported cases and death rate based on population. So one's choice for numerator and denominator evidence what data one accepts and what data one rejects.
“Asymptomatic” and “not found when not tested” and “false positives” alongside “false negatives” play a part in the whole, and as a result there are unknown variables enough to wonder at forecasts, conclusions and the media's hyperbole. A bonus question: who counts for statitical analysis how many are recovered, asymptomatic and immune or at least not ill from the SARS CoV2 virus?
“ Omicron would be quite hard to avoid once it is rolling in my region”
That is my guess as well. I went and got a booster yesterday (J&J, for a more varied immune response). I am guessing that Omicron will be ripping through my urban area by Christmas, so it’s a good time to start the surge of circulating antibodies, which takes a week to get going.
Yes. Very good. My choice of phrase was incorrect. I meant death count, not death rate.
I’ve objected for some time to dividing deaths by total population. The total population was never vulnerable. The talk is usually 65+ . . . with a quote of 80% of dead are 65+. Useful to know that remaining 20% is also skewed upwards in age. Most are 55-65.
Point being, there is really not much point including sub 55 yrs in any population denominator. One does not compute fertility rates including men in the denominator. It’s children per woman, because men can impregnate multiple women.
The inaccuracy of the numbers is well known. Covid death counts are likely grossly low because of the very common scenario of the old man or lady who lives alone and tries to tough out any symptoms. They die and are only discovered days or weeks later, never tested and never recorded as a Covid death.
See “Physics Helps Test the Makeup of Viruses.” NYT, 1/26/21.
That is an assertion with which I agree, but the narrative is that an entire population was/is “at risk.” Ergo the push for inoculations for those under 65 years of age. Down to children in the US now and to infants in the UK.
But the available and official sources like JHU and Worldometer use similar metrics for deaths, cases and population. Therefore one can use that data for the purpose of comparisons.
In that regard, with the US at about 0.23 % compared to China at far less — 0.0033 % — the comparison stands irrespective of your objection,
Current;y, as to deaths alone in the US and China, the comparative numbers are “officially” 788,180 and 4,849 respectively.
The far larger nation exhibits the massively smaller death count.
How do you propose to resolve the great difference?
The public health rationale would be that children can pass it along. They could function as a no symptoms reservoir.
Maybe.
The Chinese numbers are much more ominous. I noticed the curves for Asia in general were very low until variants evolved. I would suspect the Wuhan lab found vulnerabilities in US lung cells and designed accordingly. I thought for a while White and Black vs Asian lung cells. I encountered a guy who said San Francisco Asians were falling along with other races, so maybe not, though I never found numbers on this.
Another puzzle is South Africa’s population is very young. So mild Omicron symptoms is not useful data — except that pre Omicron South Africa had 3% of cases dying and the US 1.6%. Big difference in vax rates. Maybe that.
Given what you have responded with, the question as to the great disparity between official numbers from official sources for US and China remains.
How do you propose to resolve the great difference?
“Maybe” and “maybe that” are not a response, as best I read it. And in what way are the “official” numbers from China “much more ominous?”
“…I am guessing that Omicron will be ripping through my urban area by Christmas…”
*****************************************************************
I’ve noticed that even in Florida the 7 day daily case rate has been trending up for the last week. Of course we don’t know yet if Omicron has contributed to that rise …it’s likely too early for that.
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#trends_dailycases
I went and got a booster yesterday (J&J, for a more varied immunity from my original Pfizer). I figure it takes a week for antibodies to rev up, and circulating levels should stay high for the next couple of months, while the peak of the season (and Omicron) rages.
My only side effect was yawning today, but maybe because I took melatonin last night. Not even a sore arm. I exercise (push ups, arm circles) after injections, to flush them right into circulation. I find it reduces soreness at the injection site.
I am not interested in your sophomoric insults. They are not welcome.
It is nothing but harassment.
Stop messaging me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.