@earl-of-trumps saidJesus, you're really eating up MB sources. It's almost sad to see how gullible you and the other right wingers are.
@Metal-Brain
[i]That the CDC isn’t telling the truth to Americans is no conspiracy theory: it’s right out there in the open
for everyone to see. The CDC openly admits that it is fudging the COVID-19 death figures.
We know this because, among other truth-tellers, a plainspoken small-town physician
from Kalispell, Montana, has pulled back the curtain.[ ...[text shortened]... ----------
hehehehe. But here we can trust the CDC. Good lord. 🤔
Politics. Power. Jeeeezus.
The article is BS and over a year out of date. It ridicules the idea that any more than 60,000 in the US will die of COVID-19 and shows only that the CDC used the same method of counting such deaths as it did in the past for any other cause.
@no1marauder saidThe source is the CDC. The article is simply quoting the CDC in their own memo.
Jesus, you're really eating up MB sources. It's almost sad to see how gullible you and the other right wingers are.
The article is BS and over a year out of date. It ridicules the idea that any more than 60,000 in the US will die of COVID-19 and shows only that the CDC used the same method of counting such deaths as it did in the past for any other cause.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf
Here is the accurate quote from that memo:
"Bukacek refers to a March 24 CDC memo from Steven Schwartz, director of the Division of Vital Statistics for the National Center for Health Statistics, titled “COVID-19 Alert No. 2.”
“The assumption of COVID-19 death,” she says, “can be made even without testing. Based on assumption alone the death can be reported to the public as another COVID-19 casualty.”
There is a question-and-answer section on the memo.
One question is, “Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause?”
The answer is: “The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID-19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”
Another question is, “Should ‘COVID-19’ be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test?”
The answer is:
“COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.” [Boldfacing in original]"
That was specifically about Covid 19, not anything before it was known. I'm calling you out on your BS. How could that possibly be consistent with anything else before C19 was known to exist? I'm reminded of an article about a man shot in the head labeled as a C19 death. Has anyone ever gotten shot in the head and had it labeled a flu death?
BTW, I am not a right winger. I am a socialist.
@metal-brain said"“COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.”
The source is the CDC. The article is simply quoting the CDC in their own memo.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf
Here is the accurate quote from that memo:
"Bukacek refers to a March 24 CDC memo from Steven Schwartz, director of the Division of Vital Statistics for the National Center for Healt ...[text shortened]... shot in the head and had it labeled a flu death?
BTW, I am not a right winger. I am a socialist.
That is exactly how flu and other deaths were always reported; no confirmed tests were required.
EDIT: If anything flu deaths were exaggerated, not COVID ones. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/
@no1marauder saidNonsense.
"“COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.”
That is exactly how flu and other deaths were always reported; no confirmed tests were required.
EDIT: If anything flu deaths were exaggerated, not COVID ones. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/
Has anyone ever gotten shot in the head and had it labeled a flu death? You know that has never happened because no incentive was created for it. An incentive was created for C19 though.
Stop pretending falsely labeling Covid deaths was not incentivized. There is your real apples to oranges comparison. The flu was not.
That is not the only example of misinformation from the CDC.
http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/cdc-investigation
My brother is diabetic and he had Covid and recovered. They gave him the vaccine less than 1 month after he got out of the hospital. He had a seizer after his first shot. Why didn't they give that vaccine to people who needed it instead?
I blame the CDC for that. They lied and now they say it was a mistake. How does a mistake like that happen?
@metal-brain saidThat lie has been refuted on this board numerous times; I'm not going to waste my time doing so again.
Nonsense.
Has anyone ever gotten shot in the head and had it labeled a flu death? You know that has never happened because no incentive was created for it. An incentive was created for C19 though.
Stop pretending falsely labeling Covid deaths was not incentivized. There is your real apples to oranges comparison. The flu was not.
COVID deaths were probably significantly undercounted as I have already shown you; the number of reported pneumonia deaths in February and early March were obviously inflated compared to prior years.
@no1marauder saidNo, you are lying.
That lie has been refuted on this board numerous times; I'm not going to waste my time doing so again.
COVID deaths were probably significantly undercounted as I have already shown you; the number of reported pneumonia deaths in February and early March were obviously inflated compared to prior years.
My brother is diabetic and he had Covid and recovered. They gave him the vaccine less than 1 month after he got out of the hospital. He had a seizer after his first shot. Why didn't they give that vaccine to people who needed it instead?
I blame the CDC for that. They lied and now they say it was a mistake. How does a mistake like that happen?
@metal-brain saidYou blame the CDC for your brother getting a shot? I assume no one put a gun to his head.
No, you are lying.
My brother is diabetic and he had Covid and recovered. They gave him the vaccine less than 1 month after he got out of the hospital. He had a seizer after his first shot. Why didn't they give that vaccine to people who needed it instead?
I blame the CDC for that. They lied and now they say it was a mistake. How does a mistake like that happen?
CDC advice was to wait 90 days after a positive test to get the vaccine. https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/experts-recommend-waiting-90-days-before-getting-covid-19-vaccine-after-recovery/
1 edit
@no1marauder saidMy brother isn't as informed as I am and he listened to advice from medical professionals and guess where they got that information? The CDC!
You blame the CDC for your brother getting a shot? I assume no one put a gun to his head.
CDC advice was to wait 90 days after a positive test to get the vaccine. https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/experts-recommend-waiting-90-days-before-getting-covid-19-vaccine-after-recovery/
The CDC lied.
You didn't even read the article. Read it and notice this quote:
"CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices had just issued a high profile report authored by 15 scientists. It wrongly claimed Pfizer’s study proved the vaccine is highly effective or showed “Consistent high efficacy” for people who’d already had coronavirus—“SARS-CoV-2.”
That is not true. Pfizer said people would have to get another vaccine every 6 to 12 months, but people that get infected need to get one sooner than that? Dude, wake up!
CDC director Robert Redfield appeared before Congress this week, and quite frankly, he made a fool out of himself.
Not only did he reverse his previous recommendations on face masks when he previously stated healthy people should not wear them, he is now saying that the “science” behind wearing face masks to reduce exposure to the COVID virus makes them more effective than a COVID vaccine.
https://vaccineimpact.com/2020/cdc-director-redfield-lies-to-congress-about-masks-loses-all-credibility/
@no1marauder saidI turn my light work over to MB. And I see he already put you in your place.
Jesus, you're really eating up MB sources. It's almost sad to see how gullible you and the other right wingers are.
The article is BS and over a year out of date. It ridicules the idea that any more than 60,000 in the US will die of COVID-19 and shows only that the CDC used the same method of counting such deaths as it did in the past for any other cause.
Have another nice day
@earl-of-trumps saidCDC director Robert Redfield is big liar.
I turn my light work over to MB. And I see he already put you in your place.
Have another nice day
I am still waiting for the science study Redfield is referring to. Nobody has been able to produce one.
I doubt it exists.
@metal-brain saidLiar
No, you are lying.
My brother is diabetic and he had Covid and recovered. They gave him the vaccine less than 1 month after he got out of the hospital. He had a seizer after his first shot. Why didn't they give that vaccine to people who needed it instead?
I blame the CDC for that. They lied and now they say it was a mistake. How does a mistake like that happen?
@kevcvs57 saidWhen Redfield said face masks would do more harm than good was he lying?
Liar
When he said face masks are effective and better than taking a vaccine was he lying?
They cannot both be true, so he clearly lied. It is not clear which of those two things is a lie, but it is clear that you lied by falsely calling me a liar.
LIAR!