If anyone wants to know where OP actually lied - I copied both links here so you can follow them and look for yourself.
TL;DR: For 2020, in addition to missing the "future" (which OP accounted for) it's missing the "near past" (because the CDC gets death notices from local morgues a few weeks after death). OP "forgot" to account for that.
The CDC's data has the correct number of "deaths compared to previous years" that OP claims to calculate and it shows MASSIVE INCREASE IN DEATHS. But OP decided to hide these numbers from you and instead wrongly calculate them himself to spread misinformation.
Like all good lies - they intentionally fudge 2 different ways of counting and comparing them.
Note that there's a column called "percent of expected deaths" that does exactly what OP claims to do - compares the number of deaths to previous years. And you can see it's significantly over 100% almost every week - PEAKING AT 142% FOR SEVERAL WEEKS!
That's 40% EXTRA DEAD compared to previous years! It's HUGE!
Anyway - IF OP were honest, they'd use this data: data counted the same way in multiple years.
But OP is a liar - so they instead decided to use this page for comparison:
They got the total deaths in 2018, and did "math" to compare the numbers.
Why is it wrong? They are both deaths, so why can't we use both numbers?
Well, let's read the comment on the first page:
Percent of expected deaths is the number of deaths for all causes for this week in 2020 compared to the average number across the same week in 2017ā2019. Previous analyses of 2015ā2016 provisional data completeness have found that...
The important part:
... completeness is lower in the first few weeks following the date of death (<25%), and then increases over time such that data are generally at least 75% complete within 8 weeks of when the death occurred
Meaning real-time data is hard to get. The data takes a few weeks to get from local morgues etc. to the CDC. Meaning the data for the last few weeks is lower than the real data!!!
WE CAN SEE IT IN THE ACTUAL TABLE! Look at the last 4-5 weeks in the table, you'll see the "percent of expected deaths" is extremely low there - like 32% in the last week, 77% in the previous week etc.
Why? Because it's only partial data!
THIS IS OP'S LIE!!! He knows that the data is incomplete (real-time data always is) but pretends in his math that it is complete and compares it to complete data from 2018. Instead of using the week-by-week comparison that would show the 142% of expected death in multiple weeks.
There will be no data about 4 million deaths, since the death increase is "only" about 10-15%, so from 2.8 million to around 3.2 million (extra 300-400k)
And I don't want to wait until 2021 to get data, so instead how about I look at the number of deaths per week, and ignore the last few weeks since their data is incomplete. Sounds good?
I can do that now! How cool is that? Here's the data:
You can look yourself and see - there are HUGE excess death numbers between 2020 and previous years. Almost 200k extra dead in just the first 6 months. More now.
Really? Really?! I said deaths were up 40% for several weeks, NOT for the entire year.
Here's what I wrote:
And you can see it's significantly over 100% almost every week - PEAKING AT 142% FOR SEVERAL WEEKS!
That's 40% EXTRA DEAD compared to previous years! It's HUGE!
The 40% is the peak difference, meaning the biggest difference, not the average difference. You know - like the peak of a mountain isn't the hight of the entire mountain, just of one spot at the top.
Nope. John Hopkins (university) didn't publish that.
The Johns Hopkins News-Letter (which is the page you linked) ISN'T published by the university and doesn't represent the university's opinions in any way.
It's an independent newsletter run by a few students. That is all
And also, they retracted and removed this article, probably because it was wrong. But you already knew that - that's why you linked the archive of their page
But forget all that - the bigger question is WHY DO YOU NEED SOMEONE ELSE TO TELL YOU WHAT THE DATA IS?!
You can look at the data yourself instead of trusting others. Don't read about people who looked at the data - you have your own eyes, look at the data yourself.
What are you afraid of? That if you look at the data yourself you'll find that reality doesn't conform to your opinions?
Because if there was a truly deadly viral pandemic, there would be military people in containment suits in the streets picking up the dead, nobody would be allowed to leave for any reason at all. And if they did have a reason to they would be in full containment suits. There would be food deliveries to all homes so people were not starving to death.
It would not be a situation where some stores are allowed to stay open as long as people wear a paper mask, thats nothing more than theater and mind control tactics, pretending there is a pandemic.
A real pandemic would not leave us with questions about its existence, it would be obvious to all
Because if there was a truly deadly viral pandemic, there would be military people in containment suits in the streets picking up the dead
You watch too many movies.
Also, that's for pandemics with very high mortality rate (say, 30% if you want so much death that you need to pick up corpses from the street)
COVID only has like 1% death rate, or even less than that.
1% of the US is still 3 million people. We're talking about 300k dead - so just 0.1% It's a tiny tiny number, 0.1%
It's still 300k fucking people. It's still a HUGE number of deaths. But no where near the nightmare scenario you're describing of military in the streets and picking up corpses.
It's more of a "wear your masks" kind of thing, not a "containment suite" kind of thing.
You think you're a critical thinker, but you're just confusing your lack of knowledge with insight.
view the rest of the comments ā
Men13 ago
If anyone wants to know where OP actually lied - I copied both links here so you can follow them and look for yourself.
TL;DR: For 2020, in addition to missing the "future" (which OP accounted for) it's missing the "near past" (because the CDC gets death notices from local morgues a few weeks after death). OP "forgot" to account for that.
The CDC's data has the correct number of "deaths compared to previous years" that OP claims to calculate and it shows MASSIVE INCREASE IN DEATHS. But OP decided to hide these numbers from you and instead wrongly calculate them himself to spread misinformation.
Like all good lies - they intentionally fudge 2 different ways of counting and comparing them.
First page - mortality per week:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
Note that there's a column called "percent of expected deaths" that does exactly what OP claims to do - compares the number of deaths to previous years. And you can see it's significantly over 100% almost every week - PEAKING AT 142% FOR SEVERAL WEEKS!
That's 40% EXTRA DEAD compared to previous years! It's HUGE!
Anyway - IF OP were honest, they'd use this data: data counted the same way in multiple years.
But OP is a liar - so they instead decided to use this page for comparison:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
They got the total deaths in 2018, and did "math" to compare the numbers.
Why is it wrong? They are both deaths, so why can't we use both numbers?
Well, let's read the comment on the first page:
The important part:
Meaning real-time data is hard to get. The data takes a few weeks to get from local morgues etc. to the CDC. Meaning the data for the last few weeks is lower than the real data!!!
WE CAN SEE IT IN THE ACTUAL TABLE! Look at the last 4-5 weeks in the table, you'll see the "percent of expected deaths" is extremely low there - like 32% in the last week, 77% in the previous week etc.
Why? Because it's only partial data!
THIS IS OP'S LIE!!! He knows that the data is incomplete (real-time data always is) but pretends in his math that it is complete and compares it to complete data from 2018. Instead of using the week-by-week comparison that would show the 142% of expected death in multiple weeks.
OP IS A LIAR!
crazy_eyes ago
so let us know when you have the data showing 4 million deaths in the US in 2020
Men13 ago
There will be no data about 4 million deaths, since the death increase is "only" about 10-15%, so from 2.8 million to around 3.2 million (extra 300-400k)
And I don't want to wait until 2021 to get data, so instead how about I look at the number of deaths per week, and ignore the last few weeks since their data is incomplete. Sounds good?
I can do that now! How cool is that? Here's the data:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
Or a different page that looks per-month and has 2020 data for the first 6 months, and 2019 data you can compare to? I have that as well!
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/provisional-tables.htm
You can look yourself and see - there are HUGE excess death numbers between 2020 and previous years. Almost 200k extra dead in just the first 6 months. More now.
I linked the data, you can check for yourself.
Good enough for you?
crazy_eyes ago
You said the deaths were up 40% that would make for 4 million deaths if you take an average year and add 40% additional deaths
Men13 ago
...
Really? Really?! I said deaths were up 40% for several weeks, NOT for the entire year.
Here's what I wrote:
The 40% is the peak difference, meaning the biggest difference, not the average difference. You know - like the peak of a mountain isn't the hight of the entire mountain, just of one spot at the top.
crazy_eyes ago
Johns Hopkins disagrees with your data
https://web.archive.org/web/20201122214034/https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19
Men13 ago
Nope. John Hopkins (university) didn't publish that.
The Johns Hopkins News-Letter (which is the page you linked) ISN'T published by the university and doesn't represent the university's opinions in any way.
It's an independent newsletter run by a few students. That is all
And also, they retracted and removed this article, probably because it was wrong. But you already knew that - that's why you linked the archive of their page
But forget all that - the bigger question is WHY DO YOU NEED SOMEONE ELSE TO TELL YOU WHAT THE DATA IS?!
You can look at the data yourself instead of trusting others. Don't read about people who looked at the data - you have your own eyes, look at the data yourself.
What are you afraid of? That if you look at the data yourself you'll find that reality doesn't conform to your opinions?
crazy_eyes ago
I don't need anybody to tell me a damned thing
I know there is no pandemic
You want to know how I know
Because if there was a truly deadly viral pandemic, there would be military people in containment suits in the streets picking up the dead, nobody would be allowed to leave for any reason at all. And if they did have a reason to they would be in full containment suits. There would be food deliveries to all homes so people were not starving to death.
It would not be a situation where some stores are allowed to stay open as long as people wear a paper mask, thats nothing more than theater and mind control tactics, pretending there is a pandemic.
A real pandemic would not leave us with questions about its existence, it would be obvious to all
Men13 ago
You watch too many movies.
Also, that's for pandemics with very high mortality rate (say, 30% if you want so much death that you need to pick up corpses from the street)
COVID only has like 1% death rate, or even less than that.
1% of the US is still 3 million people. We're talking about 300k dead - so just 0.1% It's a tiny tiny number, 0.1%
It's still 300k fucking people. It's still a HUGE number of deaths. But no where near the nightmare scenario you're describing of military in the streets and picking up corpses.
It's more of a "wear your masks" kind of thing, not a "containment suite" kind of thing.
You think you're a critical thinker, but you're just confusing your lack of knowledge with insight.
rayfarmer ago
If covid only has a death rate of 1%, what is the death rate of influenza, flu and standard Coronas?
Men13 ago
The death rate? About the same. Slightly lower, but not by a lot. It's hard to measure because not everyone that gets the flu tells their doctor.
The infection rate? MUCH MUCH LOWER for influenza, flu etc.
Meaning many many more people are infected with COVID, and if more people are infected, then 1% mortality means more people die.
Making it a much deadlier pandemic.
Does that make sense?
rayfarmer ago
Yes, that makes sense. Iām not retarded.
What the the various infection rates?