1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

What? I guess you don’t understand what i said. You could read it again or, perhaps, ask your mom to explain it.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh my. You truly are a retard.

Case fatality rate definition: proportion of people diagnosed with a certain disease, who end up dying of it.

Again, this counts only people that are diagnosed. In this case, a positive covid test.

So again, you do not understand what you read.

And I should say again, if you’re the only one that claims covid has a 1% death rate, it is you that’s the retard.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

This statement is especially funny because you’re the one that claimed covid had a 1% death rate, despite “all those people in universities, hospitals, healthcare systems around the globe” that knew otherwise.

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

For sure some got caught

3
DoggyDawg 3 points ago +3 / -0

Some doctors in Canada were charging big money to register vaccinations. I have two friends that paid $10,000 each to doctors for fake vaccination registrations.

3
DoggyDawg 3 points ago +3 / -0

Inequality and poverty in the same line? They’re completely different. Poverty needs to be addressed. Inequality does not.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

You can’t take it when you’re called out on your retarded double standards and hypocrisy, eh? That’s cute.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

Published stats are based on the 28-day count, as per the links that you presented. You’re in denial. Seems like your whole reason for being (scaring everybody about covid) has collapsed. That’s cute.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

I know. But it’s ironic that I’m explaining the facts that he submitted but didn’t understand. He’s in denial now and that’s quite funny.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

Now it's your opinion that I have no relative training or experience. You're killing me with these opinions, man.

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wrong again. I absolutely acknowledged it. That's what's used in the more accurate count. The "28-day" count was the one that over-counted covid deaths relative to the more accurate one, which is what has been used for covid death stats up to just a few months ago.

From your own link:

Throughout 2020 and 2021, between 80% and 90% of deaths reported within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test also had COVID-19 mentioned on the death registration.

It's even worse than we thought. Covid deaths are over-stated by up to 20%.

I should also mention, your gotcha claim UKHSA (28 day) measure under-reported deaths for the first two months was not relative to the more accurate measure. It was because the actual covid test only started to be used in April, 2020.

You really should have asked your mom to explain this to you.

Covid death stats are over-reported by up to 20% based entirely on your own documentation that you presented to us

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

you forgot to include the most important part, on purpose… for the first two months. This was prior to mass testing. From then on, deaths were over-reported.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

Now it’s your opinion that my opinion is uninformed? You’re killing me, man!

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

You’re definitely gonna need someone to explain this to you. Ask your mom, perhaps.

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

It doesn't seem to have occurred to her that "85 to 90%" could be interpreted any other way than how she thought it should be.

You know you look better if you admit you’re wrong or simply stay silent, right? Only one of the 2 calculations could possibly be higher. We both know which one it is. Everyone knows which one it is. No need to play dumb. Hint, it’s the one that counts a broader range of deaths as covid deaths, the one that specifically says in your posted quote that it’s less precise, which also happens to be the one used for official death counts up to a few months ago.

Nevertheless, i was being generous. Could be overstated by more than 15%. If the actual count shows, say 85 deaths, and the count with the overstated number shows 100 deaths (85% correlation), that would be overstated by 17.6%.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +2 / -1

To be fair, though, Tuchodi didn’t fully grasp what he was posting, as usual, because his intention was to prove that covid death stats are not over-stated.

3
DoggyDawg 3 points ago +3 / -0

They’re really not socially accepted. Media and politicians accept them. Most people find the woke left weird.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

You’re saying that politicians make decisions based on advice from other people? Odd that you accuse people of having an actual opinion, like that’s a bad thing, and then retort with an opinion of your own.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

And? The 28-day measure overstates covid deaths, up to 15% more (85% to 90% correlation), just as everyone is telling you, just as it says in what you just quoted. In your fantasy, these two methods of counting are the same thing. In reality, they’re not.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

Two different ways of counting deaths will result in two different totals. Both numbers are accurate in Tuchodi’s fantasy.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

No shit it’s an opinion. Politicians don’t tell me their strategies.

0
DoggyDawg 0 points ago +1 / -1

It’s not an opinion. Everyone that died within 28 days of a covid infection was counted as a covid death. That’s official, not an opinion.

1
DoggyDawg 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exactly. Initial response was based in suspected 3.5% civid death rate. That was the correct response. The response didn’t react to new information that showed the death rate estimates were way off. The rest after the was political. It’s political suicide to be the first to let down your guard in case you get it wrong. Easier to stay the course, politically. Plus, there was a lot of stupidity in people like you that remained afraid.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›