COVID-19 death toll rises in some states where cases have surged, signaling possible end to months of declining US fatalities

As soon as I read “leaving behind grieving families” in the first sentence I stopped. (I know, I should have stopped after reading it was from the NYT and it had 4 authors.)

Exactly- they said NOTHING About Cuomo causing 10’s of 1000’s of families to grieve by denying HCQ early on, and by sending sick people to nursing homes knowing the virus would kill the elderly there

They are trying very hard to keep people scared. Yesterday I listened to the governor of NJ read eulogies with peoples photos. All these people supposedly died OF COVID19. In reality it was probably WITH it. This was an attempt to humanize the numbers.

You won’t hear a word about this after the election.

News reporting has become sensationalist propaganda for one purpose only: destroy this country...

yet all the mortality rate of all those states is still a quarter of the NY’s/NJ’s/CT’s of the world...

Wait! The last author's name is GIULIA MCDONNELL NIETO DEL RIO? What a joke.

Here's her bio: Giulia McDonnell Nieto del Rio is a bilingual journalist from Los Angeles who graduated from Columbia Journalism School and Williams College. She has worked for CNN in New York and Washington, D.C., and is an alumna of The New York Times Student Journalism Institute. Giulia has previously interned at the Los Angeles Times and The Berkshire Eagle in Massachusetts.

Can't get any worse than that.

This B$ posing as science is exactly what the article below points out:

Why We Can’t Trust Anything ‘The Science’ Says Any More
The Federalist ^ | 07/10/2020 | Joy Pullman
Posted on 7/10/2020, 8:21:25 AM by SeekAndFind

Despite standing behind their data and method used to conclude there is “no evidence of anti-Black [sic] or anti-Hispanic disparities across [fatal police] shootings,” a study’s authors want to retract their work because it contradicts left-wing politics.

“Although our data and statistical approach were valid to estimate the question we actually tested (the race of civilians fatally shot by police), given continued misuse of the article (e.g., MacDonald, 2020) we felt the right decision was to retract the article,” Michigan State University’s Joseph Cesario and the University of Maryland at College Park’s David Johnson wrote in their retraction request, according to the blog Retraction Watch.

Cesario and Johnson link to work by the Manhattan Institute’s Heather Mac Donald, who is often viciously protested for publicizing data indicating that racial disparities in policing and crime are typically due not to racism but to higher rates of criminal behavior among blacks and Hispanics as compared to whites and Asians.

Some research finds black Americans are more likely to be involved in physical altercations with police, although it is currently not established whether that is due to racism, behavior differences, or something else. Research also has found that black officers shoot black suspects at the same rate white officers do, and that police are if anything more reluctant to shoot nonwhites. The latter is the main conclusion of the study Cesario and Johnson want to retract due not to scientific error but to politics.

Their finding directly contradicts the left-wing narrative fomenting riots across the nation after George Floyd, a black man with illicit drugs in his blood, died after a nearly nine-minute chokehold from a Minneapolis police officer. Floyd, a multi-time convicted criminal who once held a gun to a pregnant black woman’s belly during a robbery, was used as a pretext to revive the narrative that all U.S. police officers are racist and so is the country and the rule of law they represent.

‘The Science’ Is a Mask for Arbitrary Power
These researchers are attempting to hide information that doesn’t support policies roving violent mobs are attempting to impose at the blunt ends of bricks, sticks, and guns. This bias and cowardice is only the tip of the iceberg of the scientific corruption we’ve been seeing increase since, perhaps, the scientific method became accepted as a valid way to perceive reality.

Another pervasive recent example is, of course, the use of “science” as a shield for politicians to make largely arbitrary, ill-informed, and oftentimes abusive decisions about how to handle COVID-19. In recent months, we’ve been told that “science says” so many contradictory and even flat-out false things, it’s hard to even keep track of them all.

Science says don’t wear a mask. Except that you absolutely should wear a mask. Even though it isn’t recommended by medical scientists using data from other respiratory disease outbreaks. But it’s still helpful. Or actually it’s not really, according to the Centers for Disease Control in 2017. Yet you should still wear a mask, or else. Who knows?

Science says gathering in groups will spread coronavirus. Except if those groups are thousands of anti-America protesters crowding together on hot streets. Oh, wait, yes, that actually does spread the disease. And so does attending church. But not going to the grocery store. While going to the beach is dangerous. Except being outside is actually about the safest place you can be.

Except that there are second waves of transmission in hot, summery places where lots of people outside. The science said summer would slow the virus. Except now it’s not, and you need to stay inside. Except when you’re going outside. But don’t you dare plant your garden when you’re out there, or go to your cabin. But other people from other states can go to their cabins in your state. Because science!

Plenty of public leaders are insisting “science says” kids shouldn’t go back to school, even though medical organizations point out that not going to school is more dangerous to kids than going, and so is the flu, over which we never close schools. The Centers for Disease Control also never recommended closing schools, yet still schools are closing and only partially reopening and acting like teachers should get special employment privileges that nurses and grocery store workers don’t.

Even when science lines up on one side of an issue like this, it’s discarded in favor of politics. It’s as obvious as the swaddled noses on our faces that science is now just a weapon to be used against people who disagree with the left, or simply want to be able to retain the classic American freedom to run their own lives and families as they see fit.

Replication Crisis Means What ‘Studies Say’ Is Often Junk!

This runs much deeper and longer than coronavirus. Probably the most significant example of scientific corruption is the ongoing replication crisis. It’s summarized in Nature this way: “More than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments.”

In other, other words: What “studies say” aren’t generally reliable. You either have to read a study and evaluate it by the methods that make for a trustworthy one versus an untrustworthy one (the “gold standard” is a double-blind, randomized controlled trial, which is rarely done), or you have to wait until studies have consistently found the same result to be able to trust a certain conclusion.

Obviously, that is simply not possible for many coronavirus-related decisions, let alone any of the other things about which people have to make decisions every single day. How many randomized, controlled, generation-long trials have been done on, for example, every ingredient in all the foods we eat? What about all the medicines we take, or even vitamins? How about the effects of social media, and children having personal screens? Not enough, is the answer.

Open and Hidden Political Bias Corrupts Results:

Even when studies have been done, other serious dangers to their integrity lurk. Open suppression and intimidation campaigns seem to be accelerating in number and depth. The current attempt to cancel Steven Pinker is another in an almost overwhelming series of these episodes.

Social “science” has long been a political manipulation tool due partly to lacking the ability to generate harder data due to its subject matter (you can’t randomly assign, say, thousands of children to divorced parents or a poorer neighborhood). Research on environmental and LGBT issues is, for example, notoriously biased and unreliable. Findings that contradict leftist ideology on these topics (and others) are also frequently suppressed.

For example, when Brown University researcher Lisa Littman found evidence that transgenderism was a “social contagion” driven by social media and peers, her academic journal and university threw her under the bus after a pressure campaign from activists who didn’t like these findings. The episode “raises serious concerns about the ability of all academics to conduct research on controversial topics,” wrote former Harvard University medical school dean Jeffrey Flier. You don’t say.

Another likely part of the reason for this problem is the overwhelming leftism of the academy. “[L]ack of political diversity can undermine the validity of social psychological science via mechanisms such as the embedding of liberal values into research questions and methods, steering researchers away from important but politically unpalatable research topics, and producing conclusions that mischaracterize liberals and conservatives alike,” says a 2014 study.

Essentially every domain of research is overwhelmingly controlled by leftists. A “sample of 8,688 tenure track, Ph.D.–holding professors from fifty-one of the sixty-six top ranked liberal arts colleges in the U.S. News 2017 report,” minus the two military academies, found that there are 13 self-identified Democrat professors for every single self-identified Republican, for example.

People within academia regularly and often anonymously report that it’s common for papers with notable findings to be buried if its conclusions support conservative policy. We’ll never have that information, further skewing our understanding of reality. This all means political corruption is rife in research, and that’s not going to change soon.

Subterranean Bias Can Kill People:
Research suppression and corruption isn’t limited to hot social topics, either. It also occurs in hard sciences. Biologist Bret Weinstein recently recounted in a viral interview on the Joe Rogan podcast his experience as a young researcher.

He found that the mice being used to ground certain medical trials were giving false results, meaning some treatments could be dangerous instead of helpful. Nobody would even test his discovery, likely because millions of dollars were on the line for the therapies supported by bad research.

“I cannot explain it except to say that the culture of science has become so rotten that this sort of thing is maybe standard operating procedure,” Weinstein told Rogan. “…I look at my own medicine cabinet and even though I am aware of what likely happened…the only way to be protected by the downstream consequences of this error is to not take pharmaceuticals.”

Don’t Use Crap Science to Control Me, Bro:

All the above undermines public confidence in universities and research itself, and rightly so, because it indicates today’s science is driven not by truth-seeking but by ideology. Further, it undermines public trust in the people who attempt to use this corrupted means to control our lives.

Science has been bastardized and taken out of its rightful place to run all sorts of scams on people. That’s because it has earned an authority from being trustworthy and replicable, for revealing useful truths about the world for centuries, contributing to the West’s many civilizational triumphs.

Mass manipulators seize this earned authority as a tool for controlling people. Decent people follow right along for a time, unaware of how science has been hijacked, and that’s how the mass manipulators win for a time.

But the more they use this trick, the more they erode the authority science developed for itself through honesty and patience. Citizens are increasingly aware that what “the science says” is a lie, even if they aren’t always aware of exactly what’s causing this. Instead of taking these legitimate concerns seriously, elites sneer at Americans for being ignorant rubes and “science deniers.”

These elites shouldn’t be surprised that their lack of concern for scientific integrity undermines not only one reliable way for learning truth, but also the legitimacy of their governance based on lies.

Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Her newest ebooks are”Classic Books for Young Children” and “32 Classic Games You Can Play Anywhere.” @JoyPullmann is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/07/10/why-we-cant-trust-anything-the-science-says-any-more/

Yep GEEZE the QUEEN of fake journalism!!!

I heard about two people dying early on, but since then only one person who did not die of Covid but the hospital claimed they did and also claimed they used a ventilator (which they did not) the family told me the hospital billed 70k in a fraudulent way and told them (its not your money (medicare), why do you care? )

NYT pfft! I went past a hotel today on my way back from an early trip to the supermarket, and the parking lot was at pre-pandemic levels, which says to me people are not buying the BS.

You knew it was going to start going back up as the cases increased. However I don’t think we’re going to see numbers like we had in April and May. Treatments have improved too much.

Same article, with modest changes, that you'll never see in the Chicago Sun-Times:

The daily number of deaths from black-on-black shootings has risen recently in Chicago, leaving behind grieving families with no letup in sight.

In Chicago, officials announced 20 deaths Wednesday, surpassing a daily record for deaths in the shooting epidemic that the city had set only a day earlier. In West Englewood, more than 200 deaths have been announced already this week, and the daily death toll in the city reached higher than ever. Englewood, Riverdale and Auburn Gresham, also set single-day death records this week.

Among those who died of the virus in recent days was a 30-year-old man from West Englewood who played the organ in church; a 39-year-old mother from Fuller Park, who told her six children goodbye on a hospital speaker phone; and a 91-year-old grandmother from Gage Park, who played a mean game of dominoes.

The seven-day death average in the city reached 498 on Thursday, up from 72 earlier in July but still a fraction of the more than 2,200 deaths the city had last year, when the situation was at its worst.

“...signaling POSSIBLE Bubonic Plague Pandemic!

“...signaling POSSIBLE Joe Biden win.

“...signaling POSSIBLE Sky falling.

Anything is “POSSIBLE”.

It is all BS, lies and $$$. I am in Miami FL right now and just got done talking to my son’s neighbor who is a nurse. She says all the numbers are fake and the cases and deaths are reported as Covid to collect the 30-60% extra money for Medicare. She even said she had one patient tell her they actually came to her in person and offered the patient $3000 if she would agree to saying she had Coronavirus even though the patient was there for a completely different reason.

Dishonest article. The article quotes Birx saying that cases and hospitalizations over the last three weeks and now deaths have gone up in FL, TX, AZ and CA.

What the article leaves out is that Birx also said that we're seeing early indications of a percent of positive testing, cases and hospitalizations, flattening in those states.

I was going to post this. We are seeing it flattening our in my surge state. We either are at Apex or plateau and will be I think heading definitely down in the next 10 days

Wow and just shortly after the protests

Thanks for this excellent BOL!

Wait! The last author's name is GIULIA MCDONNELL NIETO DEL RIO? What a joke. Here's her bio: Giulia McDonnell Nieto del Rio is a bilingual journalist from Los Angeles who graduated from Columbia Journalism School and Williams College. She has worked for CNN in New York and Washington, D.C., and is an alumna of The New York Times Student Journalism Institute. Giulia has previously interned at the Los Angeles Times and The Berkshire Eagle in Massachusetts. Can't get any worse than that. 7 posted on 7/11/2020, 11:02:21 AM by norcal joe

idiots, it’s common sense that when you curtail people mingling, then start allowing them to mingle, along with limited testing then speed up and increase testing, you will get more positive antibody and active cases.

This really isnt rocket science. and all the govs and leaders and medical “experts” fear hyping, all i can say is they will get their moment before The LORD.