Science is a wonderful thing. I'm looking through the historical deaths from global epidemics, the Bubonic Plague was responsible for so many deaths over the course of human history. Thankfully science has developed treatments for it!

Also, I'm reading that there were measure taken in 1918, similar as there has been today, however, the War was deemed more important than the outbreak to countries such as England.
- Pacificgem

Unless it's being used to suppress basic freedoms and fundamental human rights in draconian police states.

I'd be interested to know the age group of the main blog, that could answer a lot of things as well.
- VanHockeyGuy

Age is higher than IQ for some.

I read this morning the global death toll from the Spanish Flu between Feb. 1918 and April 1920, twenty six months, was an astonishing 50 to upwards of 100 million souls, 3-5% of the worlds population at the time. That's unbelievable!!

Twelve months into this thing, 1.8 million people have died thus far globally, which is terrible in and of itself, however, it pales in comparison to the historically worst global pandemics.
- Pacificgem

That's more because we're so far ahead of where we were a century ago in regards to information, sanitation , medicine, nutrition and general well being.

I read this morning the global death toll from the Spanish Flu between Feb. 1918 and April 1920, twenty six months, was an astonishing 50 to upwards of 100 million souls, 3-5% of the worlds population at the time. That's unbelievable!!

Twelve months into this thing, 1.8 million people have died thus far globally, which is terrible in and of itself, however, it pales in comparison to the historically worst global pandemics.
- Pacificgem

Yeah but how many of those 50 million souls counted were suicides or already dead people.

You know you can't trust mainstream media from back then, spanish flu was a conspiracy of the big pharmaceutical companys, JP Morgan got richer because of it...I tried to find a link to where I read this, but the microfiche file has been deleted by the gov't.

Yeah but how many of those 50 million souls counted were suicides or already dead people.

You know you can't trust mainstream media from back then, spanish flu was a conspiracy of the big pharmaceutical companys, JP Morgan got richer because of it...I tried to find a link to where I read this, but the microfiche file has been deleted by the gov't.
- Makita

It's so hilarious (especially in Canada) that the liberals are trying to control you but it's Trump's vaccine. The saviour from the deep state!

these aren't citations to anything that can be looked at and discussed.

let's just leave it there. you believe in herd immunity and i don't.
- RealityChecker

Jesus, must I do everything, you just need to Google the keywords provided, here I'll demonstrate.

Iceland, Covid, antibodies, will provide many links so that you aren't stuck with one source and can instead research and make an informed decision whether it's disinformation or not.

Here's one, not the one I'd originally looked at but same conclusion.

https://www.medpagetoday....iousdisease/covid19/88405
91 percent immune response, 0.3 percent mortality.

Death rate by country, check the 2015 to 2025 for Canada, no changing trend due to covid

https://www.macrotrends.n...ies/CAN/canada/death-rate

The government is not even keeping track of how many people are actually dying of covid.

https://www.google.com/am...5f-b9b5-196b3024628b/amp/

“The mortality data sent to the Ministry and reported in (Ottawa Public Health) dashboard/reports represents the number of Ottawa residents with confirmed COVID-19 who have passed away,” an Ottawa Public Health spokesperson explained via email. “It does not indicate if COVID-19 was the cause of death, and we can’t make that inference.”

“A death that occurs in an active case of COVID-19 is counted as a COVID-19 death.”

This information confirms what the Toronto Public Health Twitter account tweeted back in June 2020: “Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19 are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto.”

https://lakesuperiornews....ms-as-covid-19-fatalities

https://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=ca&v=26
Another death rate chart showing death rate growth is consistent and uniform.


Anyways that's enough for now.

I posted the video of Bonnie talking about the number of deaths outside of care homes a couple blogs ago and guess what, Marwood is right about this one, it's been pulled. Can't find the 5 minute update from her on the 15th. There's now a 55 minute one, but I'm not watching that again to prove a point. Feel free to dig for yourself and if you can find a link where they actually discuss deaths rates both in and outside of care homes, I'd love to see it.

All for now, stay safe, stay sane.

Do you guys realize around 9-10 million people die every year globally from cancer related deaths, that's awful. Sorry, I'm just reading about global death rates. I had no idea it was that high.
- Pacificgem

More people die from drinking or smoking in Canada each year.... people cannot comprehend the big numbers except for feeling that they are big and scary....

Unless it's being used to suppress basic freedoms and fundamental human rights in draconian police states.
- Marwood

Historically speaking, that's dead on. Unfortunately history is littered with people, corporations and governments using science to suppress basic freedoms and what we now would consider fundamental human rights.

Yeah but how many of those 50 million souls counted were suicides or already dead people.

You know you can't trust mainstream media from back then, spanish flu was a conspiracy of the big pharmaceutical companys, JP Morgan got richer because of it...I tried to find a link to where I read this, but the microfiche file has been deleted by the gov't.
- Makita

Your way past your 2 posts this month....

The Spanish flu was far, far more deadly then covid, the research is still out there. Even today it would have filled our ICUs and had a high kill ratio.

The two are not the same. The level of lockdown and talk of limiting rights is right up there though.
Do you not think that pharmaceutical companies and their shareholders stand to profit immensely if there is mandatory vaccinations for covid rather then effective treatment?
Of course they will.

Does that mean that they are conspiring, no, no it doesn't, it's just human nature and greed, nothing surprising about it. Does the lack of conspiracy mean that companies aren't lobbying for more use of there product to advance the companies success? No, of course it doesn't, big money lobbies, that's what they do.

Did that make it OK for money to decide policy?
No, it doesn't and that's what is happening right now.

Jesus, must I do everything, you just need to Google the keywords provided, here I'll demonstrate.

Iceland, Covid, antibodies, will provide many links so that you aren't stuck with one source and can instead research and make an informed decision whether it's disinformation or not.

Here's one, not the one I'd originally looked at but same conclusion.

https://www.medpagetoday....iousdisease/covid19/88405
91 percent immune response, 0.3 percent mortality.

Death rate by country, check the 2015 to 2025 for Canada, no changing trend due to covid

https://www.macrotrends.n...ies/CAN/canada/death-rate

The government is not even keeping track of how many people are actually dying of covid.

https://www.google.com/am...5f-b9b5-196b3024628b/amp/





https://lakesuperiornews....ms-as-covid-19-fatalities

https://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=ca&v=26
Another death rate chart showing death rate growth is consistent and uniform.


Anyways that's enough for now.

I posted the video of Bonnie talking about the number of deaths outside of care homes a couple blogs ago and guess what, Marwood is right about this one, it's been pulled. Can't find the 5 minute update from her on the 15th. There's now a 55 minute one, but I'm not watching that again to prove a point. Feel free to dig for yourself and if you can find a link where they actually discuss deaths rates both in and outside of care homes, I'd love to see it.

All for now, stay safe, stay sane.
- Pres.cup

here's a protip for you: when you make a claim, cite the source and provide the link. when someone doesn't and does what you did, it's clear that they're trying to obfuscate and mislead (or don't understand the information they are presenting themselves.)

speficifically, the mortality rate doesn't matter as much as infection rate. put another way, a high mortality rate wouldn't matter (on a large scale) if the infection rate was low. since the disease is so infectious (confirmed cases in antarctica!), the mortality rate while being low will still cause massive deaths due to it's high infection rate.

it doen't matter that you're 99% likely to survive if a majority of people get it. this was the argument against herd immunity. to get to herd immunity, you need to get to 70% (approx) of people infected. even if you isolate the most vulnerable lots of people will die.

you can't isolate people like you want. "keep the vulnerable away from the general population and allow the young and healthy to go about their lives." if antarctica can't keep it away, do you think that it won't spread here?

with respect to your point re: they are counting all deaths as covid, the explanation is kind of banal and within the article (unless you're trying to find some grand conspriacy.)

“The cause of death of someone with COVID-19 is not necessarily straight forward, as they may have died due to COVID-19 symptom complications, or may have died with COVID-19 but due to another health issue (this is especially true in settings like [long-term care homes] where there are multiple factors simultaneously at play),” explained Ottawa Public Health.

but this innocent explanation doesn't fill the conspiracy laden narrative though. why find the innocent explanation acceptable when a conspiracy is more fun.

Jesus, must I do everything, you just need to Google the keywords provided, here I'll demonstrate.

Iceland, Covid, antibodies, will provide many links so that you aren't stuck with one source and can instead research and make an informed decision whether it's disinformation or not.

Here's one, not the one I'd originally looked at but same conclusion.

https://www.medpagetoday....iousdisease/covid19/88405
91 percent immune response, 0.3 percent mortality.

Death rate by country, check the 2015 to 2025 for Canada, no changing trend due to covid

https://www.macrotrends.n...ies/CAN/canada/death-rate

The government is not even keeping track of how many people are actually dying of covid.

https://www.google.com/am...5f-b9b5-196b3024628b/amp/





https://lakesuperiornews....ms-as-covid-19-fatalities

https://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=ca&v=26
Another death rate chart showing death rate growth is consistent and uniform.


Anyways that's enough for now.

I posted the video of Bonnie talking about the number of deaths outside of care homes a couple blogs ago and guess what, Marwood is right about this one, it's been pulled. Can't find the 5 minute update from her on the 15th. There's now a 55 minute one, but I'm not watching that again to prove a point. Feel free to dig for yourself and if you can find a link where they actually discuss deaths rates both in and outside of care homes, I'd love to see it.

All for now, stay safe, stay sane.
- Pres.cup

with respect to no material change in death numbers, that's where i know you don't know much about stats.

you're just looking at numbers but not trying to correct for material changes in years.

let me provide you an example: icbc after many years of losses is set to make a profit this year.

why do you think that is? is it that we've become so much better drivers?

no, it's because lots of things changed in how we live and travel this past year. perhaps there was less snow and better weather?

my point is this: numbers of deaths may not have changed but that can be due to a number of different reasons. less car accidents for example.

however, to look at raw data right now and say "aha, look that shows x, y or z," is simply not a stats nerd.

here's a protip for you: when you make a claim, cite the source and provide the link. when someone doesn't and does what you did, it's clear that they're trying to obfuscate and mislead (or don't understand the information they are presenting themselves.)

speficifically, the mortality rate doesn't matter as much as infection rate. put another way, a high mortality rate wouldn't matter (on a large scale) if the infection rate was low. since the disease is so infectious (confirmed cases in antarctica!), the mortality rate while being low will still cause massive deaths due to it's high infection rate.

it doen't matter that you're 99% likely to survive if a majority of people get it. this was the argument against herd immunity. to get to herd immunity, you need to get to 70% (approx) of people infected. even if you isolate the most vulnerable lots of people will die.

you can't isolate people like you want. "keep the vulnerable away from the general population and allow the young and healthy to go about their lives." if antarctica can't keep it away, do you think that it won't spread here?

with respect to your point re: they are counting all deaths as covid, the explanation is kind of banal and within the article (unless you're trying to find some grand conspriacy.)

“The cause of death of someone with COVID-19 is not necessarily straight forward, as they may have died due to COVID-19 symptom complications, or may have died with COVID-19 but due to another health issue (this is especially true in settings like
- RealityChecker[long-term care homes] where there are multiple factors simultaneously at play),” explained Ottawa Public Health.

but this innocent explanation doesn't fill the conspiracy laden narrative though. why find the innocent explanation acceptable when a conspiracy is more fun.

All of my material i had, multiple times, posted sources, eventually I run out of time to find the same article that says the exact same thing as I've already said. I shouldn't need to relist sources?


If someone has a heart attack and died while they where sick with covid, they should write them down in a covid related death column, heart attack. If they die of pneumonia while they have Covid, write that down, etc.
That way statistical analysis would be able to actually use the data to help determine facts and steer policy.
If they then cross reference for age, all of a sudden you can see that there could be patterns in their deaths. By just writing down covid related deaths(still not releasing deaths by age or mortality by age for some reason) they're doing a disservice to any sort of data collection and analysis that they should be doing now and in the future.
It doesn't take much, if any, more effort to do this and the net positive is that it allows for meta data who's and value could be immense. I cannot think of one single reason for them not to be actively delineating the Covid related deaths.

Well, actually I can think of one reason, but you're not going to like it.
It's easier and makes the total look more alarming to all demographics then the actual broken down numbers. This alarm means that more people will be more likely to listen to policy meant to keep them safe. It's governing to the lowest common denominator the same principle as applying blanket rules because some people are too stupid to listen unless you make the result so scary that they eventually do. To a certain extent this is true, people in general are a dirty bunch of anti mask, selfish, a-holes, myself included, it's a human condition.

Are you going to tell me that a suicide or car accident should be ruled as covid caused in the same way as an incubated patient who's lungs fails?
Is that the standard of accountability we should be expecting from our health authorities? Because, honestly, that's plain stupid and makes zero sense.

You missed the biggest point I derived from the Iceland study. People who've had covid have the same level of anti bodies present as those who have the vaccine. This would fundamentally mean that those who've had the virus shouldn't need to get the vaccine(but that's not the narrative is it?).
So why is the vaccine for all, including those previously exposed, unless for profits by those lobbying for its use?


If the inhabitants and care givers of care facilities, all received the vaccine, couldn't we lift the lockdown. Shouldn't we at least see the data because, as presented, it doesn't make sense.

Some logic points I've had to ponder.

When there is only one outcome that answers questions which actually makes sense, one must ponder the actuality of that outcome being fact, despite how outlandish that outcome may be.

When in doubt, follow the money, 9 times out of ten, it'll lead to the truth.
(The money is easy to follow, I've laid out its route multiple times)

Apply the philosophy of critical thinking to the issue of the virus.

Accept that it's real and the hard statistics that are known truths to be the only truths.

Align that which you are told about these numbers but do not know to be self evident (things like mortality rates by age, mandatory vaccinations, actual death rates[I include this because it's not self reticent as they are not being provided]).

Look for discrepancies in the flow of information. I've provided a few, there are still more, and I'm not even touching the deep conspiracy ones, just following the truth.

Apply plausible reasons for the discrepancies until you find one that's both reasonable and sensible.

An example here would be the pharma lobby pushing for everyone to get vaccinated for profit.

If all that you have left after discarding different theories are either gross negligence or ?
Then as a critical thinker you must either consider it incompetence or explore other more outlandish theories until one satisfies the dilemma.

That is how I got to where I am at. I am continually looking at and for more data in order to apply critical thinking and update my synopsis. As it stands, with the data being withheld(either through incompetence or other nefarious means) as it is, logic has drawn me to several, well documented end points.

Honestly, I followed logic and used critical thinking and slowly came to the mind I'm at.

I thank you for attending my Ted talks, have a great evening.

I'll spell check later, that was alot on a cell phone to put down.

with respect to no material change in death numbers, that's where i know you don't know much about stats.

you're just looking at numbers but not trying to correct for material changes in years.

let me provide you an example: icbc after many years of losses is set to make a profit this year.

why do you think that is? is it that we've become so much better drivers?

no, it's because lots of things changed in how we live and travel this past year. perhaps there was less snow and better weather?

my point is this: numbers of deaths may not have changed but that can be due to a number of different reasons. less car accidents for example.

however, to look at raw data right now and say "aha, look that shows x, y or z," is simply not a stats nerd.
- RealityChecker

Sigh... not trying to fight or rule you up, sorry for the initial jab about doing research.

I agree completely, as shown by my last post, the more data input into the equation the clearer the picture. That's why it's so infuriating that the good damn health authority would be so incompetent as to not record actual causes of covid related deaths. Why can't you find mortality rates by age? Why can't you find deaths inside care homes vs outside?

It's only a small portion of the bigger picture I didn't link it all in that previous essay, but I'd previously linked to un data on expected death rates and compared them to actual death rates.

Sadly, Marwood will laugh about this, some of the data have disappeared, some of the story's have changed slightly. If you think this is conspiracy, Google Italy, who, pandemic plan, 2006, 2016, whistle-blower. It's real and is happening to prevent the rich and powerful(includes countries) from being embarrassed.
Here I'll do it for you.

https://www.google.com/am...2020/12/21/1_5240839.html

That's just an example of an organization trying to cover up a previously published document to avoid embarrassment, nothing more. It is also proof that these things do happen and is a warning to apply critical thinking.

I'm not an idiot, I'm very well learned, I do wish I also had a degree in economics, alas my skills lay in logic, philosophy and critical thinking. But I make do.

I also change my mind and am flexible of belief by necessity.

with respect to no material change in death numbers, that's where i know you don't know much about stats.

you're just looking at numbers but not trying to correct for material changes in years.

let me provide you an example: icbc after many years of losses is set to make a profit this year.

why do you think that is? is it that we've become so much better drivers?

no, it's because lots of things changed in how we live and travel this past year. perhaps there was less snow and better weather?

my point is this: numbers of deaths may not have changed but that can be due to a number of different reasons. less car accidents for example.

however, to look at raw data right now and say "aha, look that shows x, y or z," is simply not a stats nerd.
- RealityChecker

Ps

With critical thinking as a base.

If the only statistics available support only one possible conclusion, but a breakdown of said statistics supports a very different conclusion, which conclusion is truthful.

Easy answer is the first.

To apply critical thinking you'd need to place outcomes on both conclusions and ask who stands to gain by having only one data set providing only one conclusion?

The difficult answer, and the correct answer is, not the first answer.

Then you apply critical thinking to the input to find an as yet undetermined outcome with the first answer being rejected as a possible outcome.

That's where I'm at and why I'm extremely skeptical of many many, disingenuous claims and policies.

All of my material i have posted sources for more then once, eventually I run out of time to go try to find the same article that says the exact same thing as I'm saying. If you choose not to look the first 2 times, it's not my onus to provide it a third time. Standard debate protocol.


If someone had a heart attack and died while they where sick with covid, write them down in a covid related death, column heart attack. If they die of pneumonia while they have Covid, write that down.
That's how statistical analysis is able to actually use the data to determine facts.
You cross reference for age and all of a sudden you can see that there are patterns in the deaths. By just writing down the deaths(still not releasing deaths by age or mortality by age for some reason) as covid related they're doing a disservice to any sort of data collection and analysis that they should be doing now and in the future.
It doesn't take much, if any, more effort to do this and the net positive it allows for meta data use is immense. I cannot think of one single reason for them not to be delineating the Covid related deaths. Well, actually I can think of one reason, but you're not going to like it. It's easier and makes the total look more alarming to all demographics then the actual broken down numbers. This alarm means that more people will be more likely to listen to policy meant to keep them safe. It's governing to the lowest common denominator, same as applying blanket rules because some people are too stupid to listen unless you make the result so scary that they must. To a certain extent this is true, people are anti mask, selfish, a holes.

Are you going to tell me that a suicide or car accident should be ruled as covid caused in the same way as an incubated patient who's lungs fails should? Is that the standard of accountability we should be expecting from our health authorities? Because, honestly, that's plain stupid and makes zero sense.

You ironically miss the biggest point derived from the Iceland study.
One, people who've had covid have the same level of anti bodies present as those who have the vaccine. This would fundamentally mean that those who've had the virus shouldn't need to get the vaccine(but that's not the narrative is it?).
So why is the vaccine for all, including those previously exposed, unless for profits by those lobbying for its use?

Some great philosophical points to ponder including some art of war.

When there is only one outcome that answers questions which actually makes sense, one must ponder the actuality of that outcome being fact, despite how outlandish that outcome may be.

When in doubt, follow the money, 9 times out of ten, it'll lead to the truth.
(The money is easy to follow, I've laid out its route multiple times)

Apply the philosophy of critical thinking to the issue of the virus.

Accept that it's real and the hard statistics that are known truths to be the only truths.

Align that which you are told about these numbers but do not know to be self evident (things like mortality rates by age, mandatory vaccinations, actual death rates
- Pres.cup[I include this because it's not self reticent as they are not being provided]).

Look for discrepancies in the flow of information. I've provided a few, there are still more, and I'm not even touching the deep conspiracy ones, just following the truth.

Apply plausible reasons for the discrepancies until you find one that's both reasonable and sensible.

An example here would be the pharma lobby pushing for everyone to get vaccinated for profit.

If all that you have left after discarding different theories are either gross negligence or ?
Then as a critical thinker you must either consider it incompetence or explore other more outlandish theories until one satisfies the dilemma.

That is how I got to where I am at. I am continually looking at and for more data in order to apply critical thinking and update my synopsis. As it stands, with the data being withheld(either through incompetence or other nefarious means) as it is, logic has drawn me to several, well documented end points.

Honestly, I followed logic and used critical thinking and slowly came to the mind I'm at.

I thank you for attending my Ted talks, have a great evening.

I'll spell check later, that was alot on a cell phone to put down.

This is bordering on nonsensical bullsh!t.

Sorry but your use of "statistics" is simplistic at best. Causes of death are not simplistic like "car accident," or "cancer," because there is no such medical diagnosis. The injuries that lead directly to the cause of death is listed. When the data is then compiled, it can collated but if it isn't done right away, it doesn't mean that it's being hidden.

That is what the Ottawa med officer was saying. When there are several factors, they cannot say specifically if it was covid or if it was covid exacerbating another factor leading to death.

You've brought up car accidents and suicides being listed as covid but you haven't provided any proof.
The issue is with people having co-morbidities along with covid so it's hard to discern if the actual cause if death is covid or if it's diabetes/heart failure etc made worse due to the covid.

Example a person jumps out of a 100 story building. He is certainly commiting suicide but 1 story before pavement someone shoots him in the head. Cause of death is still the bullet to the noggin.

Further, you state that virtually all the deaths are old people but the government is including car accidents and suicides. Are the old people offing themselves? Are they getting into car accidents leading to death? Also, when are these people being tested for covid? Before or after their death? Are lots of people going through the difficulty of getting covid tested and then grabbing the noise?

Lastly, of course pharmaceutical companies will make money off this. That's a great trope... Follow the money.

But, in the same vain, I'll ask you, why are all the politicians who said that covid was a hoax, that it's not serious and that are generally anti-vaxxer the first ones to get vaccinated?

You tell me to follow the money; I tell you: don't listen to the words, watch what they do.

I know that conspiricies are fun but sometimes you gotta adult. That's it for me. Stay as safe as you can.

(Btw, the ferry thing is an insurance thing. Follow the money. They made the rule because it was foisted on them by the insurer. It's cost savings on liability insurance because from an actuarial perspective there really is a fractional increase in liability. Force everyone up top and you get a few dollar savings on insurance. It's dumb but the insurer don't care.)

Ps

With critical thinking as a base.

If the only statistics available support only one possible conclusion, but a breakdown of said statistics supports a very different conclusion, which conclusion is truthful.

Easy answer is the first.

To apply critical thinking you'd need to place outcomes on both conclusions and ask who stands to gain by having only one data set providing only one conclusion?

The difficult answer, and the correct answer is, not the first answer.

Then you apply critical thinking to the input to find an as yet undetermined outcome with the first answer being rejected as a possible outcome.

That's where I'm at and why I'm extremely skeptical of many many, disingenuous claims and policies.
- Pres.cup

I don't think you understand statistics like you think you do. It's a little more complex than that.

But we're all allowed to think what we want.

At least for now....

This is bordering on nonsensical bullsh!t.

Sorry but your use of "statistics" is simplistic at best. Causes of death are not simplistic like "car accident," or "cancer," because there is no such medical diagnosis. The injuries that lead directly to the cause of death is listed. When the data is then compiled, it can collated but if it isn't done right away, it doesn't mean that it's being hidden.

That is what the Ottawa med officer was saying. When there are several factors, they cannot say specifically if it was covid or if it was covid exacerbating another factor leading to death.

You've brought up car accidents and suicides being listed as covid but you haven't provided any proof.
The issue is with people having co-morbidities along with covid so it's hard to discern if the actual cause if death is covid or if it's diabetes/heart failure etc made worse due to the covid.

Example a person jumps out of a 100 story building. He is certainly commiting suicide but 1 story before pavement someone shoots him in the head. Cause of death is still the bullet to the noggin.

Further, you state that virtually all the deaths are old people but the government is including car accidents and suicides. Are the old people offing themselves? Are they getting into car accidents leading to death? Also, when are these people being tested for covid? Before or after their death? Are lots of people going through the difficulty of getting covid tested and then grabbing the noise?

Lastly, of course pharmaceutical companies will make money off this. That's a great trope... Follow the money.

But, in the same vain, I'll ask you, why are all the politicians who said that covid was a hoax, that it's not serious and that are generally anti-vaxxer the first ones to get vaccinated?

You tell me to follow the money; I tell you: don't listen to the words, watch what they do.

I know that conspiricies are fun but sometimes you gotta adult. That's it for me. Stay as safe as you can.

(Btw, the ferry thing is an insurance thing. Follow the money. They made the rule because it was foisted on them by the insurer. It's cost savings on liability insurance because from an actuarial perspective there really is a fractional increase in liability. Force everyone up top and you get a few dollar savings on insurance. It's dumb but the insurer don't care.)
- RealityChecker

I've provided links of the Ontario health deportment saying that they are counting those things as covid deaths! That is fact.

This is bordering on nonsensical bullsh!t.

Sorry but your use of "statistics" is simplistic at best. Causes of death are not simplistic like "car accident," or "cancer," because there is no such medical diagnosis. The injuries that lead directly to the cause of death is listed. When the data is then compiled, it can collated but if it isn't done right away, it doesn't mean that it's being hidden.

That is what the Ottawa med officer was saying. When there are several factors, they cannot say specifically if it was covid or if it was covid exacerbating another factor leading to death.

You've brought up car accidents and suicides being listed as covid but you haven't provided any proof.
The issue is with people having co-morbidities along with covid so it's hard to discern if the actual cause if death is covid or if it's diabetes/heart failure etc made worse due to the covid.

Example a person jumps out of a 100 story building. He is certainly commiting suicide but 1 story before pavement someone shoots him in the head. Cause of death is still the bullet to the noggin.

Further, you state that virtually all the deaths are old people but the government is including car accidents and suicides. Are the old people offing themselves? Are they getting into car accidents leading to death? Also, when are these people being tested for covid? Before or after their death? Are lots of people going through the difficulty of getting covid tested and then grabbing the noise?

Lastly, of course pharmaceutical companies will make money off this. That's a great trope... Follow the money.

But, in the same vain, I'll ask you, why are all the politicians who said that covid was a hoax, that it's not serious and that are generally anti-vaxxer the first ones to get vaccinated?

You tell me to follow the money; I tell you: don't listen to the words, watch what they do.

I know that conspiricies are fun but sometimes you gotta adult. That's it for me. Stay as safe as you can.

(Btw, the ferry thing is an insurance thing. Follow the money. They made the rule because it was foisted on them by the insurer. It's cost savings on liability insurance because from an actuarial perspective there really is a fractional increase in liability. Force everyone up top and you get a few dollar savings on insurance. It's dumb but the insurer don't care.)
- RealityChecker

Shorter

Very true on the ferry thing, it's all an insurance thing these days.

I don't think you understand statistics like you think you do. It's a little more complex than that.

But we're all allowed to think what we want.

At least for now....
- RealityChecker

I wish I did, *not an economist* good chat, stay safe.


This is why they need to collect the data accurately, why does it need to be collated later? It would not take much to do now while they're releasing the data.

I'm also not a antivaxer, not a right wing nut. There's too many red flags, incompetence, blanket solutions, etc... to not be alarmed.

Believe what you choose to believe, but don't be told what to believe, think about it first, critically.

I've provided links of the Ontario health deportment saying that they are counting those things as covid deaths! That is fact.
- Pres.cup

This is the relevant section as you quoted:

“The mortality data sent to the Ministry and reported in (Ottawa Public Health) dashboard/reports represents the number of Ottawa residents with confirmed COVID-19 who have passed away,” an Ottawa Public Health spokesperson explained via email. “It does not indicate if COVID-19 was the cause of death, and we can’t make that inference.”


“A death that occurs in an active case of COVID-19 is counted as a COVID-19 death.”

This information confirms what the Toronto Public Health Twitter account tweeted back in June 2020: “Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19 are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto.”

Again, this means that co-morbidities along with covid will be listed as covid. If someone with a heart disease etc gets covid and dies, the hospital won't determine if it was ultimately the heart or the the covid. I can see that as a reasonable measure (not wanting to do a full autopsy.)

For some reason you think this proves that suicides and car accidents are listed as covid. That's where I'm asking for proof.

This is the relevant section as you quoted:

“The mortality data sent to the Ministry and reported in (Ottawa Public Health) dashboard/reports represents the number of Ottawa residents with confirmed COVID-19 who have passed away,” an Ottawa Public Health spokesperson explained via email. “It does not indicate if COVID-19 was the cause of death, and we can’t make that inference.”


“A death that occurs in an active case of COVID-19 is counted as a COVID-19 death.”

This information confirms what the Toronto Public Health Twitter account tweeted back in June 2020: “Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19 are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto.”

Again, this means that co-morbidities along with covid will be listed as covid. If someone with a heart disease etc gets covid and dies, the hospital won't determine if it was ultimately the heart or the the covid. I can see that as a reasonable measure (not wanting to do a full autopsy.)

For some reason you think this proves that suicides and car accidents are listed as covid. That's where I'm asking for proof.
- RealityChecker

Well, the possibility exists that the media outlets reporting, on Ontario using those counting practices, are corrupt and spreading information that is falsified.... generally the media doesn't do that.

Here's another quote from a different link.
“It hasn’t been routine practice for public health units to get the death certificates or any follow-up physician and/or coroner reports that determine whether COVID-19 was the underlying or contributing cause of death,” said a spokesperson for Peel Public Health. “The Ministry has asked health units, however, to report through our provincial reporting systems: all deaths who have died with COVID-19 whether or not it was the cause of death.”

Have the health authorities have been told to report all mortalities involving a covid case as a covid related death, right?

Yes.

Would that mean that every actual death that occurs, including overdoses, murders, suicide, etc, were the victim has covid, would be reported as a covid death?

Yes.

Until the data is delineated, then the burden is not on me to prove that they are doing it. That is up to the data.

While the data remains in one singular pile, collected and filled as instructed, into one tidy pile. It cannot be divided as it stands, therefore, by logic, it is both an irrefutable proof and cannot be proven nor demonstrated against.

By logic the data is its own proof.

Well, the possibility exists that the media outlets reporting, on Ontario using those counting practices, are corrupt and spreading information that is falsified.... generally the media doesn't do that.

Here's another quote from a different link.
“It hasn’t been routine practice for public health units to get the death certificates or any follow-up physician and/or coroner reports that determine whether COVID-19 was the underlying or contributing cause of death,” said a spokesperson for Peel Public Health. “The Ministry has asked health units, however, to report through our provincial reporting systems: all deaths who have died with COVID-19 whether or not it was the cause of death.”

Have the health authorities have been told to report all mortalities involving a covid case as a covid related death, right?

Yes.

Would that mean that every actual death that occurs, including overdoses, murders, suicide, etc, were the victim has covid, would be reported as a covid death?

Yes.

Until the data is delineated, then the burden is not on me to prove that they are doing it. That is up to the data.

While the data remains in one singular pile, collected and filled as instructed, into one tidy pile. It cannot be divided as it stands, therefore, by logic, it is both an irrefutable proof and cannot be proven nor demonstrated against.

By logic the data is its own proof.
- Pres.cup

Can does not mean will. May does not mean has.

Because something may happen is not evidence that it has.

Example: Hockeybuzz gets rid of the the CoC. Anything is allowed to be posted. Because everything is allowed to be posted doesn't mean that some things are or have been posted. "HB posts porn." "Have you seen the porn posts?" "No, but they allow everything so that means porn is posted." That's not evidence.

Once again, in order for someone to die of suicide and covid or an automobile accident and covid but be listed as covid, they would have to be tested for covid, go home and then go die in some other way.

I find it hard to believe that all these people are getting tested (taking enough care of their health to get tested etc.) and then die some other way. Sure there may be one or two across the country but is it enough to make a statistical difference? No.

Note that at this point, only people with symptoms have been tested by and large.

What you're saying is that there's a statistically significant portion of deaths where persons with symptoms are dying in some other way that is not related to covid.

What the doctors are saying is that covid may exacerbate the severity of underlying conditions so that the body's weakened state can't fight to stay alive. At that point, the doctors are not differentiating between whether the covid caused the person to be so weak that the underlying conditions killed him or the covid itself killed him. Rather than do all the post mortem examinations, they are listing as covid.

To sum up, you can't be listed as dying from covid unless you've tested positive for covid. People without symptoms have generally not been tested (yet.) You want me to believe that there are significant numbers of people testing positive, going out into the community and then dying in some other way but still listed as covid.

I've done some critical thinking and that seems far fetched to me. Are there a few weird ones listed as covid? Sure. Is this an ongoing or widespread issue? No but it is useful as a weapon of information for those with an agenda (not you, I believe you to be the victim not the perpetrator of the misinformation.)

Can does not mean will. May does not mean has.

Because something may happen is not evidence that it has.

Example: Hockeybuzz gets rid of the the CoC. Anything is allowed to be posted. Because everything is allowed to be posted doesn't mean that some things are or have been posted. "HB posts porn." "Have you seen the porn posts?" "No, but they allow everything so that means porn is posted." That's not evidence.

Once again, in order for someone to die of suicide and covid or an automobile accident and covid but be listed as covid, they would have to be tested for covid, go home and then go die in some other way.

I find it hard to believe that all these people are getting tested (taking enough care of their health to get tested etc.) and then die some other way. Sure there may be one or two across the country but is it enough to make a statistical difference? No.

Note that at this point, only people with symptoms have been tested by and large.

What you're saying is that there's a statistically significant portion of deaths where persons with symptoms are dying in some other way that is not related to covid.

What the doctors are saying is that covid may exacerbate the severity of underlying conditions so that the body's weakened state can't fight to stay alive. At that point, the doctors are not differentiating between whether the covid caused the person to be so weak that the underlying conditions killed him or the covid itself killed him. Rather than do all the post mortem examinations, they are listing as covid.

To sum up, you can't be listed as dying from covid unless you've tested positive for covid. People without symptoms have generally not been tested (yet.) You want me to believe that there are significant numbers of people testing positive, going out into the community and then dying in some other way but still listed as covid.

I've done some critical thinking and that seems far fetched to me. Are there a few weird ones listed as covid? Sure. Is this an ongoing or widespread issue? No but it is useful as a weapon of information for those with an agenda (not you, I believe you to be the victim not the perpetrator of the misinformation.)
- RealityChecker

Just admit he's smarter than you and knows more than you.

Can does not mean will. May does not mean has.

Because something may happen is not evidence that it has.

Example: Hockeybuzz gets rid of the the CoC. Anything is allowed to be posted. Because everything is allowed to be posted doesn't mean that some things are or have been posted. "HB posts porn." "Have you seen the porn posts?" "No, but they allow everything so that means porn is posted." That's not evidence.

Once again, in order for someone to die of suicide and covid or an automobile accident and covid but be listed as covid, they would have to be tested for covid, go home and then go die in some other way.

I find it hard to believe that all these people are getting tested (taking enough care of their health to get tested etc.) and then die some other way. Sure there may be one or two across the country but is it enough to make a statistical difference? No.

Note that at this point, only people with symptoms have been tested by and large.

What you're saying is that there's a statistically significant portion of deaths where persons with symptoms are dying in some other way that is not related to covid.

What the doctors are saying is that covid may exacerbate the severity of underlying conditions so that the body's weakened state can't fight to stay alive. At that point, the doctors are not differentiating between whether the covid caused the person to be so weak that the underlying conditions killed him or the covid itself killed him. Rather than do all the post mortem examinations, they are listing as covid.

To sum up, you can't be listed as dying from covid unless you've tested positive for covid. People without symptoms have generally not been tested (yet.) You want me to believe that there are significant numbers of people testing positive, going out into the community and then dying in some other way but still listed as covid.

I've done some critical thinking and that seems far fetched to me. Are there a few weird ones listed as covid? Sure. Is this an ongoing or widespread issue? No but it is useful as a weapon of information for those with an agenda (not you, I believe you to be the victim not the perpetrator of the misinformation.)
- RealityChecker

I've enjoyed this back and forth and understand and sympathize with your position.

When we are looking at the majority of deaths in care homes, end of life homes, the final place people will live before death takes them. We are going to be seeing more deaths then the general public.
We are also seeing more testing there, then in the general public. When there is a single case, everyone in the care facility gets tested. Unlike the general population, where you can go get tested if you'd like, or if you have symptoms.
This will inflate the numbers toasted, both positive and negative, within care homes.
It also makes it more likely that if someone dies in a care home they'll be listed as a covid death. This I understand and the fact that it's the driver for a larger portion of deaths is understandable.

I spent some time in health care as a paramedic, generally doctors didn't attend our fatalities. It was us, the police and then followed up by the coroner's office. What the health authorities are saying is that they've been directed to label any case involving a covid, positive test, patient as a covid death, despite any other factors. Period, full stop, don't think on it further. It's impossible to say whether that is a single person, or multiple people because the data is obfuscated at its collection point.
Do I think the majority of covid deaths are suicides or car accidents? No.

Do I think that seniors in care homes are being killed by covid? Yes.

Do I believe that the data is being presented in a manner that makes the general population more afraid then could be? Yes.

The doctors are not commenting on any specific case, the example of it being hard to tell in some cases is an obfuscating example without data.
Lung failure is relativity easy to tell when dealing with EOL treatment, O2 levels fall despite assisted ventilation and the heart beat is ineffective.

Yes some cases would be hard, but directing health districts to not report cause of death as anything but covid because of difficulty distinguishing cause, logically, doesn't make sense. They could simply put those in covid deaths and leave out the ODs and traumas etc.... the direction from above need not be given.

When we are looking at a death rate of 0.3 percent total (Iceland genome study) and a total death count under a thousand(in BC) then just a single misdiagnosed death increases that total by a whole point, which is huge. If 10 of the, not yet 1000, deaths are misdiagnosed, that increases the total by a whole percentage point, which is significant.

You're right, it's not the end all to be all, it's just another piece to the puzzle which doesn't match the picture we are supposed to be putting together.

Is it incompetence that we're tallying things the way we do, compared to say Japan or Iceland?

Is it the rural nature of our country?

I think our death rates would be a fraction of what they are if we as a society didn't stick seniors into end of life care facilities, drug then and forget about them.

I would love to be able to look at accurate mortality rates by age or other demographic and make an informed decision for my young family, however, the data is to obscured to find.

I don't trust the fact that these numbers aren't released but they're telling me that I have to get the vaccine, whether I've had covid or not, to be a part of society even if my demographic could have a mortality rate less then the regular flu. It's nonsensical.

If you can find those numbers I would really like to see them. Until then, I see fear based propaganda pushing a product that doesn't do anything for me in order to satisfy corporate masters bank account.

The whole thing stinks. They're even testing on children now, not because they get sick from covid, they don't, but to assure people that they're safe. It's ridiculous.

Just admit he's smarter than you and knows more than you.
- Marwood

Just admit that you can't follow what either of us are saying.