lewrockwell--2020-08-10--If COVID Fatalities Were 90.2% Lower, How Would You Feel About Schools Reopening?

• According to the CDC , 101 children age 0 to 14 have died from influenza , while 31 children have died from COVID-19 .
• No evidence exists to support the theory that children pose a threat to educational professionals in a school or classroom setting , but there is a great deal of evidence to support the safety of in-person education .
• According to the CDC , 131,332 Americans have died from pneumonia and 121,374 from COVID-19 as of July 11th , 2020 .
• Had the CDC used its industry standard , Medical Examiners ’ and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003 , as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years , the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2 % lower than it currently is .
A Family Guide to Covi ... Haseltine , William A .
Best Price : $ 36.00 Buy New $ 20.00 The CDC has instructed hospitals , medical examiners , coroners and physicians to collect and report COVID-19 data by significantly different standards than all other infectious diseases and causes of death .
These new and unnecessary guidelines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and without open discussion among qualified professionals that are free from conflicts of interest .
These new and unnecessary guidelines were additionally instituted despite the existence of effective rules for data collection and reporting , successfully used by all hospitals , medical examiners , coroners , and physicians for more than 17 years .
As a result , elected officials have enacted many questionable policies that have injured our country ’ s economy , our country ’ s educational system , our country ’ s mental and emotional health , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitutionally-protected rights to participate in our own governance .
This paper will present significant evidence to support the position that if the CDC simply employed their 2003 industry standard for data collection and reporting , which has been successfully used nationwide for 17 years ; the total fatalities attributed to COVID-19 would be reduced by an estimated 90.2 % , and questions would be non-existent regarding schools reopening and whether or not Americans should be allowed to work .
… It is very possible that state health departments have been instructed by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and hospitalizations Is It Safe for Students & Teachers to Return to School ?
While the current question gripping the nation is , ‘ Should schools reopen in the fall ?
’ The crucial data available through the CDC , but not being actively promoted by the CDC , asks a different question , ‘ Should schools have ever closed in the first place ?
’ According to the CDC ’ s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts By Sex , Age & State , we know the following data from Feb 1 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Three times as many children in the 0 to 14 age demographic have died from influenza ( 101 ) compared to COVID-19 ( 31 ) .
• In the 0 to 14 age demographic , there have been 11,158 reported fatalities from all causes .
• Thus , COVID-19 fatalities in the 0 to 14 age demographic make up a very small 0.0278 % of all fatalities .
There is more data when looking at the 15 to 24 age demographic .
• 41.2 % more teens and college age young adults , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , have died from pneumonia ( 267 ) compared to COVID-19 ( 157 ) .
• In the 15 to 24 age demographic , there have been 13,721 reported fatalities from all causes .
• Thus , COVID-19 fatalities in the 15 to 24 age demographic make up only 1.14 % of all fatalities .
We would not consider closing in-person educational institutions for typical seasonal flu or pneumonia fatalities , so why did we close them when COVID-19 numbers are even lower ?
Some have argued for concern and caution in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makes logical sense , so let ’ s look again at the current data available .
• More work force age adults , in the 25 to 54 age demographic , have died from pneumonia ( 9,268 ) compared to COVID-19 ( 9,034 ) .
• In the 25 to 54 age demographic , there have been 146,663 reported fatalities from all causes .
• Thus , COVID-19 fatalities in the 25 to 54 age demographic make up 6.16 % of all fatalities .
The risk of fatality for COVID-19 is on par @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contracting pneumonia , 6.32 % in this age demographic .
As encouraging as this data is , we have concerns regarding data collection and reporting that we will discuss below that potentially lowers current fatality counts by 90.2 % .
It is very possible that state health departments have been instructed by the CDC to over-count COVID fatalities , cases , and hospitalizations , and we will present that evidence shortly .
… there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than there is for developing pneumonia for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have demonstrated in our first 2 research articles , ‘ Are Children Really Recovering 99.9584 % of the Time From COVID-19 , ’ and ‘ COVID-19…Have You Heard ?
There Is Good News !
’ there is a very real concern for Americans over the age 50 and especially over 65 years of age .
Risk of fatality increases substantially for Americans over age 50 with at least 1 of the following comorbidities : Hypertension , Diabetes , Elevated Cholesterol , Kidney Disease , Dementia , Heart Disease .
For perspective , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of dying from pneumonia higher than the risk of dying from COVID-19 in the 55 to 64 age demographic ?
• Pre-retirement adults , in the 55 to 64 age demographic , had a slightly higher chance of dying from pneumonia ( 16,469 ) compared to COVID-19 ( 14,963 ) .
• In the 55 to 64 age demographic , there have been 178,884 reported fatalities from all causes .
• Since February 1st , fatalities in the 55 to 64 age demographic had a 12 % greater risk of dying from pneumonia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 55 to 64 age demographic make up 8.21 % of all fatalities and the risk of fatality due to COVID-19 is on par with the risk of fatality associated with contracting pneumonia , 9.21 % .
The reported fatalities from the CDC ’ s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex , Age & State webpage : • Include ‘ Probable ’ fatalities , unconfirmed by testing , for COVID but not for influenza or pneumonia ; • Does not have accompanying data to detail how many of the fatalities had significant underlying , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Does not have accompanying data to determine if any of the fatalities were treated in a hospital setting and if the subsequent fatality was a result of the treatment .
What this data does reveal , however , is that there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than from contracting influenza for children & teens .
It also reveals that there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than there is for developing pneumonia for teens & young adults .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presented with infection rates and medical conditions at these rates , so why are we considering doing it for an infection that poses even less of a risk ?
What this data reveals for adults working with children , teens , and young adults is that COVID-19 has a lower risk of fatality than pneumonia and the data suggests that other options should be created for both parents and educational professionals to allow them to choose which style of education they are currently comfortable with ( 1 ) traditional in-person education ; ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 3 ) virtual online education .
There are many questions that need to be addressed with the current situation .
Should each school district give parents and professionals options for in-person education , hybrid education , and/or online education this fall ?
Should parents and professionals be allowed to decide where their comfort level is , and act accordingly given the data presented ?
Or , should in-person students and professionals be forced to adhere to guidelines from the CDC that not only compromise the educational experience , but also place undue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a lower risk than pneumonia for all and influenza for the 0 to 14 age demographic ?
We leave these questions for each American to answer .
Remaking the American ... Tomes , Nancy Best Price : $ 12.55 Buy New $ 33.77 … ( the ) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden .
More Scientific Evidence that It ’ s Safe for Children to Go Back to School “ Children under 10 are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and if they get infected , they are less likely to get seriously ill. What is interesting is that even if children do get infected , they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults .
We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.
” 2 Sweden kept schools open with no demonstrative adverse impact upon children in school settings compared to Finland that elected to close in-person education .
“ Sweden ’ s decision to keep schools open during the pandemic resulted in no higher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in neighboring Finland , where schools did temporarily close , their public health agencies said in a joint report…In conclusion , ( the ) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden.
” 3 A German study found that children are unlikely vectors of COVID-19 .
“ Prof Reinhard Berner , the head of pediatric medicine at Dresden University Hospital and leader of the study , said the results suggested the virus does not spread easily in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposite , ” Prof Berner told a press conference .
“ Children act more as a brake on infection .
Not every infection that reaches them is passed on.
” The study tested 2,045 children and teachers at 13 schools — including some where there have been cases of the virus.
” 4 No evidence of children infecting teachers in Australia .
“ Our investigation found no evidence of children infecting teachers…In contrast to influenza , data from both virus and antibody testing to date suggest that children are not the primary drivers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the community.
” 5 School environments are low risk and in-person education resuming should begin .
“ Our report includes both the primary and secondary school setting , with no transmission in either setting .
The limited evidence of transmission in school settings supports the re-opening of schools as part of the easing of current restrictions .
There are no zero risk approaches , but the school environment appears to be low risk.
” 6 Infected children do not spread the virus to other children , teachers or administrators .
“ The main @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not spread the virus to other children or to teachers or other school staff…there was no secondary transmission of the virus to other children at the school , or from children to teachers.
” 7 After all , based upon the July 11th data from the CDC ’ s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex , Age & State webpage , if COVID-19 is an epidemic ( 122,374 Fatalities ) , then shouldn ’ t pneumonia ( 131,372 Fatalities ) also be an epidemic ?
Why Did the CDC Decide to Create @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reporting Rules Already Existed ?
A double standard exists for how COVID-19 data is collected and reported versus all other infectious diseases and causes of death .
Let ’ s examine three essential data categories ; Fatalities , Cases & Hospitalizations for all infectious diseases because there are significant flaws in what constitutes a COVID-19 case , hospitalization and fatality .
On March 24th , the CDC decided to ignore universal data collection and reporting guidelines for fatalities in favor of adopting new guidelines unique to COVID-19 .
The guidelines the CDC decided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2003 .
After all , based upon the July 11th data from the CDC ’ s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex , Age & State webpage , if COVID-19 is an epidemic ( 122,374 Fatalities ) , then shouldn ’ t pneumonia ( 131,372 Fatalities ) also be an epidemic ?
1 It is important to note that COVID-19 data is collected and reported by a much different standard than all other infectious diseases and causes of death data .
This unique standard for COVID-19 was used , despite the existence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2003 for data collection across all infective , comorbid , and injurious situations .
… the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not .
This begs the question , if the CDC already has well established guidelines for reporting fatalities then why make up new guidelines for COVID-19 ?
COVID-19 data is collected and reported based upon the March 24th National Vital Statistics Systems ( NVSS ) Guidelines and the April 14th CDC adoption of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of State and Territorial Epidemiologists ( CSTE ) .
8,9 However , the data for all other causes of death is based upon the 2003 CDC ’ s Medical Examiners ’ & Coroners ’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and the CDC ’ s Physicians ’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death .
10,11 On March 24th , the NVSS , under the direction of the CDC and National Institute of Health ( NIH ) , instructed physicians , medical examiners , and coroners that COVID-19 would : • be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ more often than not ; ” • be recorded as the cause of death listed in Part I of the death certificate even in assumed cases ; • be recorded as the primary cause of death even if the decedent had other chronic comorbidities .
All comorbidities for COVID-19 would be listed now in Part II , rather than in Part I as they had been since 2003 for all other causes of death .
“ Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause ?
The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However , the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.
” “ Should “ COVID-19 ” be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test ?
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 .
Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case , medical records , laboratory testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed , these conditions can be reported in Part II .
( See attached Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths ) ” It ’ s worth noting that Part I of a death certificate is the immediate cause of death listed in sequential order from the official cause on line item ( a ) to the underlying causes that contributed to death in descending order of importance on line item ( d ) , while Part II is/are the significant conditions NOT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) in Part I .
As we will demonstrate shortly , comorbid conditions are always listed on Part I of death certificates as causes of death per the 2003 CDC Handbook , so that accurate reporting can be developed .
Comorbidities are seldom placed in Part II , as this is typically the place where coroners and medical examiners can list recent infections as underlying factors .
Prior to the March 24th and April 14th decisions , any comorbidities would have been listed in Part I rather than Part II and initiating factors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been listed on the last line in Part I or in Part II .
Why does this matter ?
This matters because the Part I causes of death are statistically recorded for public health reporting , while Part II does not hold nearly the same statistical significance in reporting .
This March 24th NVSS guideline essentially allows COVID-19 to be the cause of death when the actual cause of death should be the comorbidity according to the industry-standard 2003 CDC Handbook .
It can be a bit confusing , so we will present @ @ @ @ @ @ @ April 14th , the CDC in conjunctions with approval from the National Institute of Health ( NIH ) , adopted the CSTE position paper that authorized the following guidelines for data collection and reporting which are completely unique for COVID-19 and had never been done before which : • created a pathway for the minimum standards of evidence to be a single cough [ section A1 ] ; • created a pathway for completely bypassing laboratory testing in order to classify a COVID-19 case as positive [ section A5 ] ; • created @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence necessary for determining a COVID-19 case to be positive as being within 6 feet of a ‘ Probable ’ case for 10 minutes or traveling to an area with outbreaks [ section A3 ] ; • declined to create any methodology for ensuring the same COVID-19 positive person would not be counted multiple times as a new case upon being tested multiple times [ section B ] .
Title : Standardized surveillance case definition and national notification for 2019 novel coronavirus disease ( COVID-19 ) • Narrative : Description of criteria to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A1 .
Clinical Criteria At least two of the following symptoms : • fever ( measured or subjective ) , chills , rigors , myalgia , headache , sore throat , new olfactory and taste disorder ( s ) OR • At least one of the following symptoms : cough , shortness of breath , or difficulty breathing OR • Severe respiratory illness with at least one of the following : • Clinical or radiographic evidence of pneumonia , or • No alternative more likely diagnosis A2 .
Laboratory Criteria Laboratory evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FDA or designated authority : • Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a clinical specimen using a molecular amplification detection test • Detection of specific antibody in serum , plasma , or whole blood indicative of a new or recent infection* *serologic methods for diagnosis are currently being defined A3 .
Epidemiologic Linkage One or more of the following exposures in the 14 days before onset of symptoms : • Close contact** with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19 disease ; or • Travel to or residence in an area with sustained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Member of a risk cohort as defined by public health authorities during an outbreak .
**Close contact is defined as being within 6 feet for at least a period of 10 minutes to 30 minutes or more depending upon the exposure .
In healthcare settings , this may be defined as exposures of greater than a few minutes or more .
Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of exposure that constitutes prolonged exposure and thus a close contact .
A4 .
Vital Records Criteria A death certificate that lists COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ death or a significant condition contributing to death .
• Meets clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19 .
• Meets presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence .
• Meets vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID19 .
• Criteria to distinguish a new case of this disease or condition from reports or notifications which should not be enumerated as a new case for surveillance • N/A until more virologic data are available ” Additionally , the CSTE position @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitutes a COVID-19 recovery for all state and country health departments to follow .
While the , seemingly independent , CSTE position paper was authored by five accomplished professionals from the Idaho , Alabama , Michigan , Hawaii , and Iowa state health departments ; 5 of the 7 Subject Matter Experts who contributed to the position paper were directly employed by the CDC which raises ethical concerns about conflicts of interest .
It stands to reason that each of the professionals who contributed to the CSTE position paper were aware of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fatalities .
Additionally , no subject matter experts from universities , medical examiners , coroners or private industry appear to have been consulted on the production of this highly questionable document .
So , why does all of this matter ?
It matters for several reasons : • The minimum standards defy accepted professional standards for differential diagnosis in medical practice ; • Section A3 empowers contact tracers , who are unlikely to have any medical training , to illegally diagnose patients without even examining them , which is a violation of medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medicine without a license ; • The CSTE position paper opens the door for any fatality to be listed as COVID-19 without any reasonable standard of evidence , while mandating that comorbidities simultaneously be deemphasized and moved to Part II , so as not to appear as a cause of death ; • Simultaneous testing for all other infectious diseases , with similar respiratory symptom profiles like Coccidioidomycosis for Valley Fever , is not required .
We therefore have no clinical or statistical means of knowing if a co-infection was present along with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the differential diagnosis process .
Why was all of this necessary with a successful methodology for physicians , medical examiners , and coroners already in place since 2003 ?
The CDC ’ s 2003 Handbook suggests that COVID-19 should be listed either at the bottom of Part I or in Part II of a death certificate , rather than as the top line item in Part I , despite Dr. Fauci ’ s describing in multiple press interviews , that medical examiners and coroners would not be doing this , which disregards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the NVSS to do so .
The ability for medical examiners and coroners to register their best medical opinion was neutered by the March 24th NVSS guidelines .
Let ’ s review what would have happened had the CDC decided to use their 2003 Handbook rather than adopting new rules for COVID-19 reporting .
“ Because statistical data derived from death certificates can be no more accurate than the information provided on the certificate , it is very important that all persons concerned with the registration of deaths strive not only for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and promptness in reporting these events.
” .
“ The principal responsibility of the medical examiner or coroner in death registration is to complete the medical part of the death certificate.
” “ The cause-of-death section consists of two parts .
Part I is for reporting a chain of events leading directly to death , with the immediate cause of death ( the final disease , injury , or complication directly causing death ) online ( a ) and the underlying cause of death ( the disease or injury that initiated the chain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] that led directly and inevitably to death ) on the lowest used line .
Part II is for reporting all other significant diseases , conditions , or injuries that contributed to death but which did not result in the underlying cause of death given in Part I.
” Under these guidelines , the highest COVID-19 could be listed in the presence of an established comorbidity would be Part I , line item ( d ) or lower , or in Part II .

Key Findings For Data Through July 12th
According to the CDC, 101 children age 0 to 14 have died from influenza, while 31 children have died from COVID-19.
No evidence exists to support the theory that children pose a threat to educational professionals in a school or classroom setting, but there is a great deal of evidence to support the safety of in-person education.
According to the CDC, 131,332 Americans have died from pneumonia and 121,374 from COVID-19 as of July 11 th , 2020.
, 2020. Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower than it currently is.
Abstract
A Family Guide to Covi... Haseltine, William A. Best Price: $36.00 Buy New $20.00 (as of 04:01 UTC - Details) The CDC has instructed hospitals, medical examiners, coroners and physicians to collect and report COVID-19 data by significantly different standards than all other infectious diseases and causes of death.
These new and unnecessary guidelines were instituted by the CDC in private, and without open discussion among qualified professionals that are free from conflicts of interest.
These new and unnecessary guidelines were additionally instituted despite the existence of effective rules for data collection and reporting, successfully used by all hospitals, medical examiners, coroners, and physicians for more than 17 years.
As a result, elected officials have enacted many questionable policies that have injured our country’s economy, our country’s educational system, our country’s mental and emotional health, and the American citizen’s personal expression of Constitutionally-protected rights to participate in our own governance.
This paper will present significant evidence to support the position that if the CDC simply employed their 2003 industry standard for data collection and reporting, which has been successfully used nationwide for 17 years; the total fatalities attributed to COVID-19 would be reduced by an estimated 90.2%, and questions would be non-existent regarding schools reopening and whether or not Americans should be allowed to work.
… It is very possible that state health departments have been instructed by the CDC to over-count COVID fatalities, cases, and hospitalizations
Is It Safe for Students & Teachers to Return to School?
While the current question gripping the nation is, ‘Should schools reopen in the fall?’ The crucial data available through the CDC, but not being actively promoted by the CDC, asks a different question, ‘Should schools have ever closed in the first place?’
According to the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts By Sex, Age & State, we know the following data from Feb 1, 2020 through July 11th, 2020.1
Three times as many children in the 0 to 14 age demographic have died from influenza (101) compared to COVID-19 (31).
In the 0 to 14 age demographic, there have been 11,158 reported fatalities from all causes.
Thus, COVID-19 fatalities in the 0 to 14 age demographic make up a very small 0.0278% of all fatalities. COVID-19: Lockdowns on... Betrus, Michael Buy New $16.99 (as of 03:38 UTC - Details )
There is more data when looking at the 15 to 24 age demographic.
41.2% more teens and college age young adults, in the 15 to 24 age demographic, have died from pneumonia (267) compared to COVID-19 (157).
In the 15 to 24 age demographic, there have been 13,721 reported fatalities from all causes.
Thus, COVID-19 fatalities in the 15 to 24 age demographic make up only 1.14% of all fatalities.
We would not consider closing in-person educational institutions for typical seasonal flu or pneumonia fatalities, so why did we close them when COVID-19 numbers are even lower?
Some have argued for concern and caution in the 25 to 54 age demographic, which makes logical sense, so let’s look again at the current data available.
More work force age adults, in the 25 to 54 age demographic, have died from pneumonia (9,268) compared to COVID-19 (9,034).
In the 25 to 54 age demographic, there have been 146,663 reported fatalities from all causes.
Thus, COVID-19 fatalities in the 25 to 54 age demographic make up 6.16% of all fatalities. The risk of fatality for COVID-19 is on par with the risk of fatality associated with contracting pneumonia, 6.32% in this age demographic.
As encouraging as this data is, we have concerns regarding data collection and reporting that we will discuss below that potentially lowers current fatality counts by 90.2%. It is very possible that state health departments have been instructed by the CDC to over-count COVID fatalities, cases, and hospitalizations, and we will present that evidence shortly.
… there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than there is for developing pneumonia for teens & young adults.
As we have demonstrated in our first 2 research articles, ‘Are Children Really Recovering 99.9584% of the Time From COVID-19,’ and ‘COVID-19…Have You Heard? There Is Good News!’ there is a very real concern for Americans over the age 50 and especially over 65 years of age. Risk of fatality increases substantially for Americans over age 50 with at least 1 of the following comorbidities: Hypertension, Diabetes, Elevated Cholesterol, Kidney Disease, Dementia, Heart Disease. For perspective, according to the CDC, is the risk of dying from pneumonia higher than the risk of dying from COVID-19 in the 55 to 64 age demographic?
Pre-retirement adults, in the 55 to 64 age demographic, had a slightly higher chance of dying from pneumonia (16,469) compared to COVID-19 (14,963). Unreported Truths abou... Berenson, Alex Buy New $5.99 (as of 03:17 UTC - Details )
In the 55 to 64 age demographic, there have been 178,884 reported fatalities from all causes.
Since February 1st, fatalities in the 55 to 64 age demographic had a 12% greater risk of dying from pneumonia than COVID-19. COVID-19 fatalities in the 55 to 64 age demographic make up 8.21% of all fatalities and the risk of fatality due to COVID-19 is on par with the risk of fatality associated with contracting pneumonia, 9.21%.
The reported fatalities from the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age & State webpage:
Include ‘Probable’ fatalities, unconfirmed by testing, for COVID but not for influenza or pneumonia;
Does not have accompanying data to detail how many of the fatalities had significant underlying, pre-existing, or comorbid medical conditions;
Does not have accompanying data to determine if any of the fatalities were treated in a hospital setting and if the subsequent fatality was a result of the treatment.
What this data does reveal, however, is that there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than from contracting influenza for children & teens. It also reveals that there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than there is for developing pneumonia for teens & young adults.
We would not consider prohibiting in-person education when presented with infection rates and medical conditions at these rates, so why are we considering doing it for an infection that poses even less of a risk?
What this data reveals for adults working with children, teens, and young adults is that COVID-19 has a lower risk of fatality than pneumonia and the data suggests that other options should be created for both parents and educational professionals to allow them to choose which style of education they are currently comfortable with (1) traditional in-person education; (2) hybrid online/in-person education; or (3) virtual online education.
There are many questions that need to be addressed with the current situation.
Should each school district give parents and professionals options for in-person education, hybrid education, and/or online education this fall?
Should parents and professionals be allowed to decide where their comfort level is, and act accordingly given the data presented?
Or, should in-person students and professionals be forced to adhere to guidelines from the CDC that not only compromise the educational experience, but also place undue, unrealistic burdens upon them for something with a lower risk than pneumonia for all and influenza for the 0 to 14 age demographic?
We leave these questions for each American to answer. Remaking the American ... Tomes, Nancy Best Price: $12.55 Buy New $33.77 (as of 03:17 UTC - Details)
… (the) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden.
More Scientific Evidence that It’s Safe for Children to Go Back to School
A genetic project in Iceland revealed interesting findings about children infecting adults.
“Children under 10 are less likely to get infected than adults and if they get infected, they are less likely to get seriously ill. What is interesting is that even if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.”2
Sweden kept schools open with no demonstrative adverse impact upon children in school settings compared to Finland that elected to close in-person education.
“Sweden’s decision to keep schools open during the pandemic resulted in no higher rate of infection among its schoolchildren than in neighboring Finland, where schools did temporarily close, their public health agencies said in a joint report…In conclusion, (the) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden.” 3
A German study found that children are unlikely vectors of COVID-19.
“Prof Reinhard Berner, the head of pediatric medicine at Dresden University Hospital and leader of the study, said the results suggested the virus does not spread easily in schools. “It is rather the opposite,” Prof Berner told a press conference. “Children act more as a brake on infection. Not every infection that reaches them is passed on.” The study tested 2,045 children and teachers at 13 schools — including some where there have been cases of the virus.” 4
No evidence of children infecting teachers in Australia.
“Our investigation found no evidence of children infecting teachers…In contrast to influenza, data from both virus and antibody testing to date suggest that children are not the primary drivers of COVID-19 spread in schools or in the community.” 5
School environments are low risk and in-person education resuming should begin.
“Our report includes both the primary and secondary school setting, with no transmission in either setting. The limited evidence of transmission in school settings supports the re-opening of schools as part of the easing of current restrictions. There are no zero risk approaches, but the school environment appears to be low risk.” 6
Infected children do not spread the virus to other children, teachers or administrators.
“The main new finding is that the infected children did not spread the virus to other children or to teachers or other school staff…there was no secondary transmission of the virus to other children at the school, or from children to teachers.” 7
After all, based upon the July 11th data from the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age & State webpage, if COVID-19 is an epidemic (122,374 Fatalities), then shouldn’t pneumonia (131,372 Fatalities) also be an epidemic?
Why Did the CDC Decide to Create Unique Reporting Rules for COVID-19 When Successful Reporting Rules Already Existed?
A double standard exists for how COVID-19 data is collected and reported versus all other infectious diseases and causes of death. Let’s examine three essential data categories; Fatalities, Cases & Hospitalizations for all infectious diseases because there are significant flaws in what constitutes a COVID-19 case, hospitalization and fatality.
On March 24th, the CDC decided to ignore universal data collection and reporting guidelines for fatalities in favor of adopting new guidelines unique to COVID-19. The guidelines the CDC decided against using have been used successfully since 2003.
After all, based upon the July 11th data from the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age & State webpage, if COVID-19 is an epidemic (122,374 Fatalities), then shouldn’t pneumonia (131,372 Fatalities) also be an epidemic?1
Fatality Data
It is important to note that COVID-19 data is collected and reported by a much different standard than all other infectious diseases and causes of death data. This unique standard for COVID-19 was used, despite the existence of guidelines that have been successfully used since 2003 for data collection across all infective, comorbid, and injurious situations.
… the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.
This begs the question, if the CDC already has well established guidelines for reporting fatalities then why make up new guidelines for COVID-19?
COVID-19 data is collected and reported based upon the March 24th National Vital Statistics Systems (NVSS) Guidelines and the April 14th CDC adoption of a position paper authored by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE). 8,9
However, the data for all other causes of death is based upon the 2003 CDC’s Medical Examiners’ & Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and the CDC’s Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death. 10,11
On March 24th, the NVSS, under the direction of the CDC and National Institute of Health (NIH), instructed physicians, medical examiners, and coroners that COVID-19 would:
be recorded as the underlying cause of death “more often than not;”
be recorded as the cause of death listed in Part I of the death certificate even in assumed cases;
be recorded as the primary cause of death even if the decedent had other chronic comorbidities. All comorbidities for COVID-19 would be listed now in Part II, rather than in Part I as they had been since 2003 for all other causes of death.
March 24th, 2020 – NVSS COVID-19 Alert No. 2
“Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause? 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 COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”
“Should “COVID-19” be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test? 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. Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II. (See attached Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths)”
It’s worth noting that Part I of a death certificate is the immediate cause of death listed in sequential order from the official cause on line item (a) to the underlying causes that contributed to death in descending order of importance on line item (d), while Part II is/are the significant conditions NOT relating to the underlying cause(s) in Part I.
As we will demonstrate shortly, comorbid conditions are always listed on Part I of death certificates as causes of death per the 2003 CDC Handbook, so that accurate reporting can be developed. Comorbidities are seldom placed in Part II, as this is typically the place where coroners and medical examiners can list recent infections as underlying factors.
Prior to the March 24th and April 14th decisions, any comorbidities would have been listed in Part I rather than Part II and initiating factors, like recent infections, would have been listed on the last line in Part I or in Part II.
Why does this matter?
This matters because the Part I causes of death are statistically recorded for public health reporting, while Part II does not hold nearly the same statistical significance in reporting. This March 24th NVSS guideline essentially allows COVID-19 to be the cause of death when the actual cause of death should be the comorbidity according to the industry-standard 2003 CDC Handbook. It can be a bit confusing, so we will present an example shortly for clarity.
On April 14th, the CDC in conjunctions with approval from the National Institute of Health (NIH), adopted the CSTE position paper that authorized the following guidelines for data collection and reporting which are completely unique for COVID-19 and had never been done before which:
allowed for ‘Probable’ cases, hospitalizations, and fatalities [ section A5 ];
]; created a pathway for the minimum standards of evidence to be a single cough [ section A1 ];
]; created a pathway for completely bypassing laboratory testing in order to classify a COVID-19 case as positive [ section A5 ];
]; created a pathway for the minimum standard of evidence necessary for determining a COVID-19 case to be positive as being within 6 feet of a ‘Probable’ case for 10 minutes or traveling to an area with outbreaks [ section A3 ];
]; declined to create any methodology for ensuring the same COVID-19 positive person would not be counted multiple times as a new case upon being tested multiple times [section B].
April 14th, 2020 – CDC Adopts CSTE Interim-20-ID-01
Title: Standardized surveillance case definition and national notification for 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19)
“VII. Case Definition for Case Classification
Narrative: Description of criteria to determine how a case should be classified.
A1. Clinical Criteria At least two of the following symptoms:
fever (measured or subjective), chills, rigors, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s) OR
At least one of the following symptoms: cough, shortness of breath, or difficulty breathing OR
OR Severe respiratory illness with at least one of the following: Clinical or radiographic evidence of pneumonia, or Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). AND No alternative more likely diagnosis
A2. Laboratory Criteria Laboratory evidence using a method approved or authorized by the FDA or designated authority:
Confirmatory laboratory evidence:
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a clinical specimen using a molecular amplification detection test
Presumptive laboratory evidence:
Detection of specific antigen in a clinical specimen
Detection of specific antibody in serum, plasma, or whole blood indicative of a new or recent infection*
*serologic methods for diagnosis are currently being defined
A3. Epidemiologic Linkage One or more of the following exposures in the 14 days before onset of symptoms:
Close contact** with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19 disease; or
or Close contact** with a person with: clinically compatible illness AND linkage to a confirmed case of COVID-19 disease.
Travel to or residence in an area with sustained, ongoing community transmission of SARS-CoV2.
Member of a risk cohort as defined by public health authorities during an outbreak.
**Close contact is defined as being within 6 feet for at least a period of 10 minutes to 30 minutes or more depending upon the exposure. In healthcare settings, this may be defined as exposures of greater than a few minutes or more. Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of exposure that constitutes prolonged exposure and thus a close contact.
A4. Vital Records Criteria A death certificate that lists COVID-19 disease or SARS-CoV-2 as a cause of death or a significant condition contributing to death.
A5. Case Classifications
Confirmed:
Meets confirmatory laboratory evidence.
Probable:
Meets clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19.
Meets presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence.
Meets vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID19.
Criteria to distinguish a new case of this disease or condition from reports or notifications which should not be enumerated as a new case for surveillance
N/A until more virologic data are available”
Additionally, the CSTE position paper gave no definition as to what constitutes a COVID-19 recovery for all state and country health departments to follow.
While the, seemingly independent, CSTE position paper was authored by five accomplished professionals from the Idaho, Alabama, Michigan, Hawaii, and Iowa state health departments; 5 of the 7 Subject Matter Experts who contributed to the position paper were directly employed by the CDC which raises ethical concerns about conflicts of interest.
It stands to reason that each of the professionals who contributed to the CSTE position paper were aware of the existence of the 2003 guidelines for reporting fatalities. Additionally, no subject matter experts from universities, medical examiners, coroners or private industry appear to have been consulted on the production of this highly questionable document.
So, why does all of this matter?
It matters for several reasons:
The minimum standards defy accepted professional standards for differential diagnosis in medical practice;
Section A3 empowers contact tracers, who are unlikely to have any medical training, to illegally diagnose patients without even examining them, which is a violation of medical law in every state and constitutes practicing medicine without a license;
The CSTE position paper opens the door for any fatality to be listed as COVID-19 without any reasonable standard of evidence, while mandating that comorbidities simultaneously be deemphasized and moved to Part II, so as not to appear as a cause of death;
Simultaneous testing for all other infectious diseases, with similar respiratory symptom profiles like Coccidioidomycosis for Valley Fever, is not required. We therefore have no clinical or statistical means of knowing if a co-infection was present along with a positive finding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the differential diagnosis process.
Why was all of this necessary with a successful methodology for physicians, medical examiners, and coroners already in place since 2003?
The CDC’s 2003 Handbook suggests that COVID-19 should be listed either at the bottom of Part I or in Part II of a death certificate, rather than as the top line item in Part I, despite Dr. Fauci’s describing in multiple press interviews, that medical examiners and coroners would not be doing this, which disregards any knowledge of the March 24th orders by the NVSS to do so.
The ability for medical examiners and coroners to register their best medical opinion was neutered by the March 24th NVSS guidelines.
Let’s review what would have happened had the CDC decided to use their 2003 Handbook rather than adopting new rules for COVID-19 reporting.
2003 – CDC Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration
“Because statistical data derived from death certificates can be no more accurate than the information provided on the certificate, it is very important that all persons concerned with the registration of deaths strive not only for complete registration, but also for accuracy and promptness in reporting these events.”.
“The principal responsibility of the medical examiner or coroner in death registration is to complete the medical part of the death certificate.”
“The cause-of-death section consists of two parts. Part I is for reporting a chain of events leading directly to death, with the immediate cause of death (the final disease, injury, or complication directly causing death) online (a) and the underlying cause of death (the disease or injury that initiated the chain of events [SARS-CoV-2 in this case] that led directly and inevitably to death) on the lowest used line. Part II is for reporting all other significant diseases, conditions, or injuries that contributed to death but which did not result in the underlying cause of death given in Part I.”
Under these guidelines, the highest COVID-19 could be listed in the presence of an established comorbidity would be Part I, line item (d) or lower, or in Part II.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-08-10--About Those Dead Black Males

About Those Dead Black Males

“ Students upset by the focus on ‘ dead white males ’ demanded that the freshman course be replaced with one more inclusive toward women , minorities , and non-Western cultures.
” Thus read a Boston Globe report about a controversy at Stanford in which students rebelled against their university ’ s Western Culture requirement .
It did not take long for Jesse Jackson to get in on the act .
It was during the Stanford controversy that he first sounded his famous chant “ Hey hey , ho ho , Western Culture ’ s got to go !
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , too , thought that it was wrong for universities to give so much attention to dead white males .
Needless to say , in the end Stanford yielded to the protestors ’ demands .
This was more than two decades ago , and things have have only gotten worse since .
Perhaps you have also noticed that dead white males have not been getting good PR in recent years .
Ceaselessly portrayed as dominating , selfish and oppressive , they have been painted as the villains of world history .
Their crowning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system – Western civilization – which they used , it is alleged , as the self-serving means for their own advancement , benefit and pleasure .
This they accomplished by oppressing everyone else in their society such as women , homosexuals , racial minorities , transsexuals and whatever other identity groups or genders are yet to be discovered .
Patriarchal , domineering and insensitive , dead white males exploited not only every other demographic within their own societies but also people of other cultures .
So goes the official politically correct narrative of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the symbols of western culture which we witnessed in recent months is the logical culmination of this line of thought .
Why I Am Not A Muslim Warraq , Ibn Best Price : $ 31.00 Buy New $ 18.50 We have recently argued that this characterization may not be quite correct .
In the process we have suggested that the opposite is actually the case and that the civilization which the dead white men brought into existence has been a great liberator of people everywhere .
This is particularly true of women , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whatever other identity groups yet to be discovered genders .
But be that as it may , we would now like to honor the spirit of racial equality and fairness and look at the deeds of dead males of other races .
Let us begin today with dead black malesÔ and see what kind of works they have wrought .
We are sure that few would disagree that after the long years of neglect they should be given their chance to shine .
Let us , then , inquire into the kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What type of culture and socio-economic system they left behind as inheritance for future generations ?
What manner of contributions have they made to the general well-being and advancement of mankind ?
How do their scientific , technological , literary , philosophical , artistic achievements compare with those of their dead white counterparts ?
If truth be told , the achievements of dead black males are less than you may think .
When early European explorers first arrived in Africa , they observed that the indigenous civilization seems to be roughly at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The indigenous populations – ruled over by the iron hand of black males – lived under most difficult and primitive conditions .
They apparently did not know how to make use of the wheel and had no written language .
As far as science , technology , philosophy , literature and jurisprudence are concerned , nothing of note has been accomplished or even apparently attempted .
The religion was animistic , magic and woodoo in nature devoid of any underlying systems of scriptures or developed theology .
In terms of architecture , dead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public buildings or monuments .
Most of their building efforts seem to have been confined to the construction of mud huts and simple wooden structures .
But let us not dwell on the fact that those dead black males made no practical contribution to the general welfare and betterment of the human race and left behind virtually nothing of significance in any area of human endeavor .
It is likely they had no time for distractions such as science or philosophy , since they must have been fully preoccupied with building their fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trumpeting of virtues of non-white cultures , how could anyone doubt that those enlightened dead black guys ran societies in which women , racial minorities , homosexuals , transsexuals and everyone else must have been treated with utmost respect , dignity and equality ?
Why the West is Best : ... Warraq , Ibn Best Price : $ 5.30 Buy New $ 14.50 We do not have the time or space to examine their tender handling of all identity groups so we will just focus on one : women .
Nevertheless , seeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vulnerable demographic should give us some idea about how well they also treated the others .
Our focus on women will undoubtedly please Western feminists who unceasingly complain about the alleged male oppression , domination and discrimination within our civilization stream .
Surely those white males responsible for the creation of Western civilization will blush with shame in their graves once they hear how their black counterparts treated women in their circles .
When 19th century explorers arrived in South Africa , they were startled by the rather peculiar way in which females @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here is an account of a sympathetic explorer : Without putting too fine a point on this , the ( now dead ) black gentlemen were not very nice to their ladies .
Rather they displayed the form of male dominance that could only be described as gross .
Sadly , the notion that women were not more than chattel seems to have been deeply rooted in the black male psyche as evidenced by African history .
The evidence of historical misogyny and contempt for the female sex still lives today in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet performed in the parts of Africa that are unfortunate enough to suffer from a strong influence of the indigenous culture .
We have written about this brutal practice previously : Black males have obviously treated women inhumanly in the past and their heirs continue their ways to this day .
Contrast this with the attitude of the dead white males who were more than willing to grant distinction to women .
In our previous piece we mentioned the fact that even as the European explorers were horrified by the slave-like status of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were allowed to achieve the highest levels of intellectual and cultural pre-eminence .
CANCEL CULTURE : How to ... Reich , Alexander Buy New $ 12.99 It was the dead white males who were the first ones – and the only ones – among males of all races to come up with the ground-breaking notion that women are not inferior and that they deserve the same rights and dignity as men .
This thought has apparently never crossed the minds of the dead black males .
Furthermore , the dead white males were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality by creating a societal system that granted full rights to women .
The dead black men , on the other hand , never even thought of making such an attempt .
In fact , they have always resisted such efforts and their descendants do so to this day .
Consider this paradox : To the extent that any black woman today enjoys any rights – be they human , civil , legal or political – it is wholly due to the enlightened thinking and labor of the dead white men .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black women – or women of any color – can enjoy equal rights with men .
They are either fortunate enough to be living in a western democracy ( created by dead white males ) or they live in a more traditional society which has been reformed by the civilizing influence of Western males .
Therefore , black women today should be especially grateful to the dead white males .
If it was up to the dead black males , they would be still treated like chattel and slaves .
But it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of all colors – black , white , brown , yellow , red – who should feel deep appreciation .
This is because the dead white men were the only males in history who thought them worthy of holding equal status and rights and they worked hard to secure it for them .
How paradoxical , then , that western feminists keep complaining about dead white males .
And even though those angry feminists have apparently not noticed what those dead white males have done for them , others certainly have .
One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Pakistan-raised author and activist who has devoted his life to the reformation and secularization of Islamic culture .
This is what he wrote : “ The West is attacked as uniquely oppressive even though it has gained unprecedented rights and freedoms for women , for gays and lesbians , and for individuals in general.
” Beyond Woke Michael Rectenwald Buy New $ 19.99 Ibn Warraq is , of course , absolutely correct .
May we suggest that those western women who feel so oppressed in our society go and live in cultures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other color be it black , brown , yellow or red .
They would certainly not be accorded the rights , respect and consideration they receive in societies whose foundations have been laid by dead white males .
Their very ability to complain is made possible by laws , guarantees and protections instituted by those white men .
Black men in traditional cultures would certainly not tolerate such complaining although in their case it would actually be justified and true .
Dead black males especially would be quick to put a stop to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eye would be a lucky outcome for the complaining ladies .
If you think that the treatment of women by the dead black man was appalling wait until you learn how they treated racial and ethnic minorities and other vulnerable groups .
Hint : they did not treat them any better than they did their women .
Former Zambian President Robert Mugabe , for example , described homosexuality as “ un-African ” and “ a white disease.
” But this a subject for another essay .
One only wonders what those complaining Western @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to say about that .
But anyone who knows anything about history and life can not but observe with relief , “ Thank God for those dead white men .
Where would we be without them ?
” The Best of Vasko Kohlmayer

“Students upset by the focus on ‘dead white males’ demanded that the freshman course be replaced with one more inclusive toward women, minorities, and non-Western cultures.” Thus read a Boston Globe report about a controversy at Stanford in which students rebelled against their university’s Western Culture requirement. It did not take long for Jesse Jackson to get in on the act. It was during the Stanford controversy that he first sounded his famous chant “Hey hey, ho ho, Western Culture’s got to go!” Like the students he supported, Jackson, too, thought that it was wrong for universities to give so much attention to dead white males. Needless to say, in the end Stanford yielded to the protestors’ demands.
This was more than two decades ago, and things have have only gotten worse since. Perhaps you have also noticed that dead white males have not been getting good PR in recent years. Ceaselessly portrayed as dominating, selfish and oppressive, they have been painted as the villains of world history. Their crowning sin was the creation of a socio-economic system – Western civilization – which they used, it is alleged, as the self-serving means for their own advancement, benefit and pleasure. This they accomplished by oppressing everyone else in their society such as women, homosexuals, racial minorities, transsexuals and whatever other identity groups or genders are yet to be discovered. Patriarchal, domineering and insensitive, dead white males exploited not only every other demographic within their own societies but also people of other cultures. So goes the official politically correct narrative of our times. The widespread attacks on the symbols of western culture which we witnessed in recent months is the logical culmination of this line of thought. Why I Am Not A Muslim Warraq, Ibn Best Price: $31.00 Buy New $18.50 (as of 04:02 UTC - Details)
We have recently argued that this characterization may not be quite correct. In the process we have suggested that the opposite is actually the case and that the civilization which the dead white men brought into existence has been a great liberator of people everywhere. This is particularly true of women, racial minorities, homosexuals, transsexuals and whatever other identity groups yet to be discovered genders.
But be that as it may, we would now like to honor the spirit of racial equality and fairness and look at the deeds of dead males of other races. Let us begin today with dead black malesÔ and see what kind of works they have wrought. We are sure that few would disagree that after the long years of neglect they should be given their chance to shine.
Let us, then, inquire into the kind of civilization those guys have brought into being. What type of culture and socio-economic system they left behind as inheritance for future generations? What manner of contributions have they made to the general well-being and advancement of mankind? How do their scientific, technological, literary, philosophical, artistic achievements compare with those of their dead white counterparts?
If truth be told, the achievements of dead black males are less than you may think. When early European explorers first arrived in Africa, they observed that the indigenous civilization seems to be roughly at the stone age stage of development. The indigenous populations – ruled over by the iron hand of black males – lived under most difficult and primitive conditions. They apparently did not know how to make use of the wheel and had no written language. As far as science, technology, philosophy, literature and jurisprudence are concerned, nothing of note has been accomplished or even apparently attempted. The religion was animistic, magic and woodoo in nature devoid of any underlying systems of scriptures or developed theology. In terms of architecture, dead black males built no great cathedrals, public buildings or monuments. Most of their building efforts seem to have been confined to the construction of mud huts and simple wooden structures.
But let us not dwell on the fact that those dead black males made no practical contribution to the general welfare and betterment of the human race and left behind virtually nothing of significance in any area of human endeavor. It is likely they had no time for distractions such as science or philosophy, since they must have been fully preoccupied with building their fair and just societies. Given the multiculturalist trumpeting of virtues of non-white cultures, how could anyone doubt that those enlightened dead black guys ran societies in which women, racial minorities, homosexuals, transsexuals and everyone else must have been treated with utmost respect, dignity and equality? Why the West is Best: ... Warraq, Ibn Best Price: $5.30 Buy New $14.50 (as of 04:02 UTC - Details)
We do not have the time or space to examine their tender handling of all identity groups so we will just focus on one: women. Nevertheless, seeing the compassion with which they treated one vulnerable demographic should give us some idea about how well they also treated the others. Our focus on women will undoubtedly please Western feminists who unceasingly complain about the alleged male oppression, domination and discrimination within our civilization stream. Surely those white males responsible for the creation of Western civilization will blush with shame in their graves once they hear how their black counterparts treated women in their circles.
When 19th century explorers arrived in South Africa, they were startled by the rather peculiar way in which females were handled by the indigenous black culture. Here is an account of a sympathetic explorer:
“The females, and especially the young ones are kept principally among the old men, who barter away their daughters, sisters or nieces, in exchange for wives for themselves or their sons. Wives are considered the absolute property of the husband, and can be given away, or exchanged, or lent, according to his caprice … Female children are betrothed usually from early infancy … little real affection consequently exists between husbands and wives, a young man values a wife principally for her services as a slave.”
Without putting too fine a point on this, the (now dead) black gentlemen were not very nice to their ladies. Rather they displayed the form of male dominance that could only be described as gross. Sadly, the notion that women were not more than chattel seems to have been deeply rooted in the black male psyche as evidenced by African history. The evidence of historical misogyny and contempt for the female sex still lives today in the practice of female circumcision which is yet performed in the parts of Africa that are unfortunate enough to suffer from a strong influence of the indigenous culture. We have written about this brutal practice previously:
“There are no known health benefits to this practice which in many cases results in severe complications and side effects. The primary purpose behind this procedure is apparently to deprive women of the possibility of experiencing sexual pleasure. Thus, these unfortunate African women are reduced to being sexual objects for the pleasure of men and receptacles for their sperm as child bearers.”
Black males have obviously treated women inhumanly in the past and their heirs continue their ways to this day. Contrast this with the attitude of the dead white males who were more than willing to grant distinction to women. In our previous piece we mentioned the fact that even as the European explorers were horrified by the slave-like status of women in Africa, women in Europe were allowed to achieve the highest levels of intellectual and cultural pre-eminence. CANCEL CULTURE: How to... Reich, Alexander Buy New $12.99 (as of 04:40 UTC - Details)
It was the dead white males who were the first ones – and the only ones – among males of all races to come up with the ground-breaking notion that women are not inferior and that they deserve the same rights and dignity as men. This thought has apparently never crossed the minds of the dead black males. Furthermore, the dead white males were able to translate their noble ideas into reality by creating a societal system that granted full rights to women. The dead black men, on the other hand, never even thought of making such an attempt. In fact, they have always resisted such efforts and their descendants do so to this day.
Consider this paradox: To the extent that any black woman today enjoys any rights – be they human, civil, legal or political – it is wholly due to the enlightened thinking and labor of the dead white men. There are only two ways today in which black women – or women of any color – can enjoy equal rights with men. They are either fortunate enough to be living in a western democracy (created by dead white males) or they live in a more traditional society which has been reformed by the civilizing influence of Western males. Therefore, black women today should be especially grateful to the dead white males. If it was up to the dead black males, they would be still treated like chattel and slaves. But it is not only black women, but women of all colors – black, white, brown, yellow, red – who should feel deep appreciation. This is because the dead white men were the only males in history who thought them worthy of holding equal status and rights and they worked hard to secure it for them.
How paradoxical, then, that western feminists keep complaining about dead white males. And even though those angry feminists have apparently not noticed what those dead white males have done for them, others certainly have. One such perceptive observer is Ibn Warraq, the Pakistan-raised author and activist who has devoted his life to the reformation and secularization of Islamic culture. This is what he wrote: “The West is attacked as uniquely oppressive even though it has gained unprecedented rights and freedoms for women, for gays and lesbians, and for individuals in general.” Beyond Woke Michael Rectenwald Buy New $19.99 (as of 11:37 UTC - Details)
Ibn Warraq is, of course, absolutely correct. May we suggest that those western women who feel so oppressed in our society go and live in cultures erected and ran by men of any other color be it black, brown, yellow or red. They would certainly not be accorded the rights, respect and consideration they receive in societies whose foundations have been laid by dead white males. Their very ability to complain is made possible by laws, guarantees and protections instituted by those white men. Black men in traditional cultures would certainly not tolerate such complaining although in their case it would actually be justified and true. Dead black males especially would be quick to put a stop to criticisms of this kind. A black eye would be a lucky outcome for the complaining ladies.
If you think that the treatment of women by the dead black man was appalling wait until you learn how they treated racial and ethnic minorities and other vulnerable groups. Hint: they did not treat them any better than they did their women. Former Zambian President Robert Mugabe, for example, described homosexuality as “un-African” and “a white disease.” But this a subject for another essay. One only wonders what those complaining Western feminists and assorted social justice warriors would have to say about that. But anyone who knows anything about history and life cannot but observe with relief, “Thank God for those dead white men. Where would we be without them?”
The Best of Vasko Kohlmayer


The Narrative Pandemic

OK , I don ’ t like conspiracy theories and if people were always open and above-board in what they ’ re doing and told the truth , we would have enterprise facts instead of conspiracy theories .
As far as COVID-19 , well , I want to give the establishment a plausible excuse , so maybe they did what they did because they just wanted to save us from ourselves .
But – – – In a previous article , “ Truth , Conspiracy , or SNAFU —YOU Decide “ , we established that , violating this science – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made worldwide to report virus-related deaths as soon as it is established that the virus was present at the time of death — regardless of other factors .
This violates a basic principle of infectiology : only when it is certain that an agent has played a significant role in the disease or death may [ that ] diagnosis be made .
” –thoroughly credentialed infectiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi in his letter to German Prime Minister , Angela Merkel How to Destroy America ... Shapiro , Ben Best Price : $ 18.96 Buy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CDC/WHO amalgam seriously exaggerated the number of deaths blamed on COVID-19 by the simple expedient of jiggering their own long-established reporting guidelines .
Violating the above science , “ it ” told the entire world-wide medical establishment to illegitimatly list anyone dying as a COVID-19 death soley because assumed , presumed , probable , suspected or tested COVID-19 was present , resulting in these confessions – – – The city [ New York ] has added more than 3,700 additional people who were presumed to have died of the coronavirus but had never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its guidance to local governments , has recommended that cases of “ assumed ” coronavirus infection be noted on death certificates since before New York City recorded its first death on March 14 .
–N.Y.C .
Death Toll Soars Past 10,000 in Revised Virus Count – The New York Times [ emphasis added ] Dr. Scott Jensen , a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reveals HHS Document Coached Him on How to Overcount COVID-19 Cases … and from Trump-team star and “ scarf lady ” Dr. Deborah Birx – – – “ We ’ ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality.
” … ” If someone dies with COVID-19 , we are counting that as a COVID-19 death , ” Birx said .
–Dr .
Birx Confirms Anyone Who Dies WITH Coronavirus , Regardless of Any Underlying Health Condition , is Being Counted as a COVID-19 Death “ The way in which we code deaths in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.
” –Professor Walter Ricciardi , scientific adviser to Italy ’ s minister of health , telegraph.co.uk And we have these estimates of how exaggerated the official jiggered COVID-19 death numbers are as a result – – – “ More than 60 % of fatalities of people suspected of having contracted Covid-19 [ in Russia ] are not classified as coronavirus deaths because they occurred ‘ from clearly other causes ‘ “ … “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” –Bloomberg Those “ clearly other causes ” are things like stroke , heart attack , etc .
and are usually called “ pre-morbidities ” or “ co-morbidities.
“ The Plus : Self-Help fo ... Gutfeld , Greg Best Price : $ 17.87 Buy New $ 14.40 “ On re-evaluation by the [ Italian ] National Institute of Health , only 12 per cent of [ coronavirus ] death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus ” [ Professor Walter Ricciardi , scientific adviser to Italy ’ s minister of health ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used its industry standard , Medical Examiners ’ and Coroners ’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003 , as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years , the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2 % lower than it currently is.
” [ source ] and a tip-o-the-hat to Jon Rappaport In other words , CDC , for the first and only time in 17 years , broke with the ages-old scientific Koch infectiology tradition and , violating its own rules , told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ list anyone dying with — not from — assumed , presumed , probable , etc .
COVID-19 as a COVID-19 death .
The result is an approximately 10x ( 10 times ) exaggeration of the actual COVID-19 deaths .
Doctors Birx and Fauci — particularly Dr.Fauci having been in the infectious disease business for most of his career — simply can not claim to be ignorant of this blatantly dishonest and over-the-top exaggeration .
Why are they knowingly presiding over this grotesque scientific aberration instead of exposing it ?
So it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus pandemic we have to worry about , it ’ s the Narrative Pandemic .
Still , while the statistical truism that “ correlation does not imply causation ” obviously applies , if COVID-19 isn ’ t responsible , why does it keep mysteriously showing up correlated with all these co-morbidities , cases and deaths ?
The biggest and most obvious part of the answer is that the C.D.C.-W.H.O .
guidelines specifically instructed the world-wide medical establishment to illegitimately create that correlation with incorrect and misleading record keeping and reporting .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for doing it .
In fact , as John Rappoport hypothesizes , there ’ s an outside possibility that the dangers of COVID-19 may be mostly a statistical artifact produced by the fake statistics connecting it to the real killers , the co-morbidities .
Why would the world-wide elitist establishment do that ?
Well , to give them at least a limited-hang-out excuse , they might claim they were afraid “ we ” wouldn ’ t take their warnings seriously if they didn ’ t wildly exaggerate things .
Live Free Or Die @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Price : $ 21.27 Buy New $ 17.00 On the other hand , there ’ s the suggestion that this was their answer — for those willing to kill hundreds of millions , mostly by starvation — to perceived over-population and CO˛ emissions .
And of course , there ’ s always SNAFU – – – For perspective , what would happen if the world-wide health establishment had exactly followed those same illegitimate C.D.C./W.H.O .
reporting guidelines for COVID-19 deaths but were told to apply them to anyone dying WITH the common cold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell us we ’ re having a COVID-19 pandemic , the fake numbers would tell us we ’ re having a Common Cold pandemic instead .
And the narrative would look something like this – – – Trump-team star Birx would say , … ” If someone dies with the common cold , we are counting that as a common cold death.
” Prof. Ricciardi would say , “ …all the people who die in hospitals with the common cold are deemed to be dying of the common cold .
And Dr. Jensen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — would recognize that something is seriously wrong pointing out “ a common cold ” diagnosis instead of a COVID-19 diagnosis in that 7-page document .
Suddenly the number of folks with “ Common Cold ” on their death certificates begins to balloon and is reported — except approximately 90 % of them are dying from “ clearly other causes , ” those “ pre-morbidities ” or “ co-morbidities , ” remember .
Folks would say , “ Look at all the people dying WITH the common cold .
That must be what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ What do you mean the common cold isn ’ t that serious , people are dying !
” And they ’ d say , “ What do you mean it isn ’ t the cold that ’ s killing them — just look at the statistics !
!
They all have colds !
!
” And just as with COVID-19 , there would be all sorts of serious diseases and their serious symptoms correlated with the common cold meme by the dishonest record keeping : Pneumonia , heart attack , stroke , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aren ’ t from the cold or COVID-19 , present or not .
They ’ re the co-morbidities that are doing the killing .
Except maybe folks wouldn ’ t believe you because most folks have actually had common colds .
So maybe you add “ novel ” to “ common cold virus ” and hype the heck out of that meme .
Fear of the Invisible Roberts , Janine Best Price : $ 41.22 Buy New $ 18.31 You could substitute any common malady for “ common cold , ” and , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you ’ d get a “ pandemic ” as the result .
Yes , it ’ s THAT simple .
AND that stupid .
So the New York Times article would read , “ The C.D.C.
, in its guidance to local governments , has recommended ‘ that cases of ‘ assumed ’ common cold infection be noted on death certificates since before New York City recorded its first death on March 14 , ” and we ’ d be off to the Common Cold Pandemic races instead of the COVID-19 Pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distancing , lock-downs and economy destruction !
There is one other intriguing possibility in the form of two “ co-morbidities ” that are rarely recognized and almost never mentioned because it ’ s more convenient — and “ politick ” — to blame them on COVID-19 .
The first is “ politician.
” No , I ’ m not kidding .
Keep in mind that approximately half of all world-wide deaths blamed on COVID-19 happened in extended care facilities .
What ’ s that have to do with “ politician ” as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cuomo insisted on putting known COVID-19 patients in personal care-homes amongst the vulnerable elderly .
Like this : [ New York ] Gov .
Andrew M. Cuomo continued to defend his decision to place recovering COVID-19 patients into nursing homes , even though it brought him some “ political heat , ” he admitted on Sunday .
Cuomo defends decision to put COVID-19 patients in nursing homes | Newsday New Jersey governor Phil Murphy emulated Cuomo and Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf did the same , leading to this question at one of Wolf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 70 % of COVID-19 fatalities in Pennsylvania are from nursing homes and personal care homes .
What are your plans to deal with this ?
” –question to Rachel Levine , PA Sec .
of Health , Chanel 4 news , Tuesday , May 12 , 2020 2:24 PM , .
The same really stupid policy — unless it was intended to get rid of a lot of older folks who were draining government coffers — was encouraged by a Ł1,000 bounty in the UK and has been laid at BoJo ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) feet – – - False Alarm : The Truth ... Siegel , Marc Best Price : $ 12.95 Buy New $ 12.70 UK Council gave care homes Ł1000 as ‘ cash incentive ’ to take in Covid patients .
Hence “ Politician ” as a co-morbidity .
Does this help explain the care-home death toll in the rest of the world too ?
The second rarely mentioned co-morbidity is “ hospital.
” You enter a hospital with one malady but die from an in-hospital screw-up of some sort or a disease you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s called iatrogenic death .
If it doesn ’ t kill you , it ’ s an iatrogenic illness .
Even before this COVID-19 fiasco , “ hospital ” was the third leading cause of death in the U.S .
In an article the FTC coerced him into taking down — Dr. David Brownstein , MD explained that “ Hospitals receive …up to $ 13,000 from the Government for an admission diagnosis of COVID , ” and “ if the patient is ventilated , they receive up to $ 39,000.
” “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running around telling every physician and resident physician to diagnosis COVID at the first cough or sneeze , ” Dr. Brownstein suggests .
So , besides possibly treating folks for COVID-19 instead of for the co-morbidities they were there for , in addition — maybe to get the bounty — did they also hospitalize some who , fearing for their lives because of the narrative , wouldn ’ t have otherwise been hospitalized ?
If so , this would needlessly expose them to “ hospital.
” Were there additional COVID-19-fiasco-related hospital screw-ups and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ventilated at the beginning of the pandemic , you had an 80 or 90 percent chance of dying , now you have an 80 % chance of recovering.
” –Dr .
William Haseltine , President , Access Health International , Author “ A Family Guide to Covid , ” Bloomberg , Tuesday , June 16 , 2020 2:50 PM Accepting Dr. Haseltine ’ s numbers and doing the math , at the beginning of the “ pandemic , ” at least eight of ten ventilated patients died when , by best practices later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That means that six of ten early-on ventilated patients didn ’ t die of COVID-19 — or whatever — they died because they were ventilated and/or incorrectly ventilated , classic cases of iatrogenic death .
How many death certificates do you suppose actually reported it that way ?
And how many folks were put on ventilators , partially at least to collect that $ 39,000 ?
Does that implicate “ politician ” as a co-morbibity again ?
Further , instead of ventilation , “ best practices ” in large numbers of patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ , much safer with better outcomes than ventilating but without the $ 39,000 and so far practiced in only a few hospitals .
Factoring that oversight into the death figures would obviously increase the iatrogenic — and overall — “ hospital ” ( as opposed to COVID-19 ) co-morbidity death toll .
Maybe someone will eventually do the research and math to get a solid figure .
Were there still other political and medical system screw-ups that ended up with COVID-19 on the death certificate instead ?
Three whistle-blowing nurses verify over-ventilation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modern hospital issues to light here : Misconduct in NY hospitals–three nurses speak out !
Most troubling is the apparent consensus among those nurses that when you go into a hospital , “ pandemic ” or not , you should take an “ advocate ” with you .
So care-home deaths due to politicians housing COVID-19 patients in them , unnecessary bounty-driven hospitalizations that ended in death , ventialting patients rather than proning them and ventilating patients outside of later-discovered best practices added to all those other co-morbidities reflexively blamed on the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of deaths more honestly blamed on COVID-19 and not explained by the other more main-stream co-morbidities .
How much of that 10 % do they explain ?
So , hard as it is for some to believe , the take-away is that about 90 % of the official deaths blamed on COVID-19 — probably more — are fake news , and so is the so-called “ pandemic.
” It is in fact , a pandemic created by fake numbers and narrative , not by a virus — so we might want to call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and keep a wary eye out for any nefarious follow-ups .
HERE For updates , additions , comments , and corrections .
AND , “ Like , ” “ Tweet , ” and otherwise , pass this along !
The Best of L. Reichard White

OK, I don’t like conspiracy theories and if people were always open and above-board in what they’re doing and told the truth, we would have enterprise facts instead of conspiracy theories.
As far as COVID-19, well, I want to give the establishment a plausible excuse, so maybe they did what they did because they just wanted to save us from ourselves. But – – –
In a previous article, “Truth, Conspiracy, or SNAFU —YOU Decide“, we established that, violating this science – – –
“…the mistake is being made worldwide to report virus-related deaths as soon as it is established that the virus was present at the time of death — regardless of other factors. This violates a basic principle of infectiology: only when it is certain that an agent has played a significant role in the disease or death may [that] diagnosis be made. ” –thoroughly credentialed infectiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi in his letter to German Prime Minister, Angela Merkel
How to Destroy America... Shapiro, Ben Best Price: $18.96 Buy New $17.39 (as of 04:03 UTC - Details) - – – the CDC/WHO amalgam seriously exaggerated the number of deaths blamed on COVID-19 by the simple expedient of jiggering their own long-established reporting guidelines. Violating the above science, “it” told the entire world-wide medical establishment to illegitimatly list anyone dying as a COVID-19 death soley because assumed, presumed, probable, suspected or tested COVID-19 was present, resulting in these confessions – – –
The city [New York] has added more than 3,700 additional people who were presumed to have died of the coronavirus but had never tested positive. …The C.D.C., in its guidance to local governments, has recommended that cases of “assumed” coronavirus infection be noted on death certificates since before New York City recorded its first death on March 14. –N.Y.C. Death Toll Soars Past 10,000 in Revised Virus Count – The New York Times [emphasis added]
Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. –MN Senator and Dr. Reveals HHS Document Coached Him on How to Overcount COVID-19 Cases
… and from Trump-team star and “scarf lady” Dr. Deborah Birx – – –
“We’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality.”…”If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death,” Birx said. –Dr. Birx Confirms Anyone Who Dies WITH Coronavirus, Regardless of Any Underlying Health Condition, is Being Counted as a COVID-19 Death
… and from Italy – – –
“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.” –Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health, telegraph.co.uk
And we have these estimates of how exaggerated the official jiggered COVID-19 death numbers are as a result – – –
“More than 60% of fatalities of people suspected of having contracted Covid-19 [in Russia] are not classified as coronavirus deaths because they occurred ‘from clearly other causes‘“… “autopsies are performed in all suspected cases.” –Bloomberg
Those “clearly other causes” are things like stroke, heart attack, etc. and are usually called “pre-morbidities” or “co-morbidities.“ The Plus: Self-Help fo... Gutfeld, Greg Best Price: $17.87 Buy New $14.40 (as of 04:03 UTC - Details)
“On re-evaluation by the [Italian] National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of [coronavirus] death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus” [Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health] says. –telegraph.co.uk
“Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower than it currently is.” [source] and a tip-o-the-hat to Jon Rappaport
In other words, CDC, for the first and only time in 17 years, broke with the ages-old scientific Koch infectiology tradition and, violating its own rules, told the entire world-wide medical establishment to illegitimatly list anyone dying with — not from — assumed, presumed, probable, etc. COVID-19 as a COVID-19 death. The result is an approximately 10x (10 times) exaggeration of the actual COVID-19 deaths.
Doctors Birx and Fauci — particularly Dr.Fauci having been in the infectious disease business for most of his career — simply cannot claim to be ignorant of this blatantly dishonest and over-the-top exaggeration. Why are they knowingly presiding over this grotesque scientific aberration instead of exposing it?
So it’s completely clear, it’s not the virus pandemic we have to worry about, it’s the Narrative Pandemic.
Still, while the statistical truism that “correlation does not imply causation” obviously applies, if COVID-19 isn’t responsible, why does it keep mysteriously showing up correlated with all these co-morbidities, cases and deaths?
The biggest and most obvious part of the answer is that the C.D.C.-W.H.O. guidelines specifically instructed the world-wide medical establishment to illegitimately create that correlation with incorrect and misleading record keeping and reporting. And in some cases, gave cash incentives for doing it.
In fact, as John Rappoport hypothesizes, there’s an outside possibility that the dangers of COVID-19 may be mostly a statistical artifact produced by the fake statistics connecting it to the real killers, the co-morbidities.
Why would the world-wide elitist establishment do that?
Well, to give them at least a limited-hang-out excuse, they might claim they were afraid “we” wouldn’t take their warnings seriously if they didn’t wildly exaggerate things. Live Free Or Die: Amer... Hannity, Sean Best Price: $21.27 Buy New $17.00 (as of 05:05 UTC - Details)
On the other hand, there’s the suggestion that this was their answer — for those willing to kill hundreds of millions, mostly by starvation — to perceived over-population and CO˛ emissions.
And of course, there’s always SNAFU – – –
For perspective, what would happen if the world-wide health establishment had exactly followed those same illegitimate C.D.C./W.H.O. reporting guidelines for COVID-19 deaths but were told to apply them to anyone dying WITH the common cold instead?
Just as the fake numbers tell us we’re having a COVID-19 pandemic, the fake numbers would tell us we’re having a Common Cold pandemic instead.
And the narrative would look something like this – – –
Trump-team star Birx would say, …”If someone dies with the common cold, we are counting that as a common cold death.”
Prof. Ricciardi would say, “…all the people who die in hospitals with the common cold are deemed to be dying of the common cold.
And Dr. Jensen — and a bunch of other doctors — would recognize that something is seriously wrong pointing out “a common cold” diagnosis instead of a COVID-19 diagnosis in that 7-page document.
Suddenly the number of folks with “Common Cold” on their death certificates begins to balloon and is reported — except approximately 90% of them are dying from “clearly other causes,” those “pre-morbidities” or “co-morbidities,” remember.
Folks would say, “Look at all the people dying WITH the common cold. That must be what’s killing them.” And, “What do you mean the common cold isn’t that serious, people are dying!” And they’d say, “What do you mean it isn’t the cold that’s killing them — just look at the statistics!! They all have colds!!”
And just as with COVID-19, there would be all sorts of serious diseases and their serious symptoms correlated with the common cold meme by the dishonest record keeping: Pneumonia, heart attack, stroke, kidney failure, etc., but those aren’t from the cold or COVID-19, present or not. They’re the co-morbidities that are doing the killing.
Except maybe folks wouldn’t believe you because most folks have actually had common colds. So maybe you add “novel” to “common cold virus” and hype the heck out of that meme. Fear of the Invisible Roberts, Janine Best Price: $41.22 Buy New $18.31 (as of 02:55 UTC - Details)
You could substitute any common malady for “common cold,” and, using the same dishonest CDC/WHO reporting ploy, you’d get a “pandemic” as the result.
Yes, it’s THAT simple. AND that stupid.
So the New York Times article would read, “The C.D.C., in its guidance to local governments, has recommended ‘that cases of ‘assumed’ common cold infection be noted on death certificates since before New York City recorded its first death on March 14,” and we’d be off to the Common Cold Pandemic races instead of the COVID-19 Pandemic races — complete with masks, social distancing, lock-downs and economy destruction!
Yeeeeee-hawwwww!
There is one other intriguing possibility in the form of two “co-morbidities” that are rarely recognized and almost never mentioned because it’s more convenient — and “politick” — to blame them on COVID-19.
The first is “politician.” No, I’m not kidding.
Keep in mind that approximately half of all world-wide deaths blamed on COVID-19 happened in extended care facilities.
What’s that have to do with “politician” as a co-morbidity?
See, New York governor Cuomo insisted on putting known COVID-19 patients in personal care-homes amongst the vulnerable elderly. Like this:
[New York] Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo continued to defend his decision to place recovering COVID-19 patients into nursing homes, even though it brought him some “political heat,” he admitted on Sunday. Cuomo defends decision to put COVID-19 patients in nursing homes | Newsday
New Jersey governor Phil Murphy emulated Cuomo and Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf did the same, leading to this question at one of Wolf’s media events:
~”70% of COVID-19 fatalities in Pennsylvania are from nursing homes and personal care homes. What are your plans to deal with this?” –question to Rachel Levine, PA Sec. of Health, Chanel 4 news, Tuesday, May 12, 2020 2:24 PM,.
The same really stupid policy — unless it was intended to get rid of a lot of older folks who were draining government coffers — was encouraged by a Ł1,000 bounty in the UK and has been laid at BoJo’s (Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s) feet – – - False Alarm: The Truth... Siegel, Marc Best Price: $12.95 Buy New $12.70 (as of 11:29 UTC - Details)
UK Council gave care homes Ł1000 as ‘cash incentive’ to take in Covid patients.
Hence “Politician” as a co-morbidity. Does this help explain the care-home death toll in the rest of the world too?
The second rarely mentioned co-morbidity is “hospital.”
You enter a hospital with one malady but die from an in-hospital screw-up of some sort or a disease you get while there instead. That’s called iatrogenic death. If it doesn’t kill you, it’s an iatrogenic illness.
Even before this COVID-19 fiasco, “hospital” was the third leading cause of death in the U.S.
In an article the FTC coerced him into taking down — Dr. David Brownstein, MD explained that “Hospitals receive …up to $13,000 from the Government for an admission diagnosis of COVID,” and “if the patient is ventilated, they receive up to $39,000.”
“I can guarantee you that hospital administrators are running around telling every physician and resident physician to diagnosis COVID at the first cough or sneeze,” Dr. Brownstein suggests.
So, besides possibly treating folks for COVID-19 instead of for the co-morbidities they were there for, in addition — maybe to get the bounty — did they also hospitalize some who, fearing for their lives because of the narrative, wouldn’t have otherwise been hospitalized? If so, this would needlessly expose them to “hospital.”
Were there additional COVID-19-fiasco-related hospital screw-ups and deaths?
Here’s a clue – – –
~”If you were ventilated at the beginning of the pandemic, you had an 80 or 90 percent chance of dying, now you have an 80% chance of recovering.” –Dr. William Haseltine, President, Access Health International, Author “A Family Guide to Covid,” Bloomberg, Tuesday, June 16, 2020 2:50 PM
Accepting Dr. Haseltine’s numbers and doing the math, at the beginning of the “pandemic,” at least eight of ten ventilated patients died when, by best practices later on, only two of ten died. That means that six of ten early-on ventilated patients didn’t die of COVID-19 — or whatever — they died because they were ventilated and/or incorrectly ventilated, classic cases of iatrogenic death.
How many death certificates do you suppose actually reported it that way?
And how many folks were put on ventilators, partially at least to collect that $39,000? Does that implicate “politician” as a co-morbibity again?
Further, instead of ventilation, “best practices” in large numbers of patients was actually a practice called “proning“, much safer with better outcomes than ventilating but without the $39,000 and so far practiced in only a few hospitals.
Factoring that oversight into the death figures would obviously increase the iatrogenic — and overall — “hospital” (as opposed to COVID-19) co-morbidity death toll. Maybe someone will eventually do the research and math to get a solid figure.
Were there still other political and medical system screw-ups that ended up with COVID-19 on the death certificate instead?
Three whistle-blowing nurses verify over-ventilation — and bring a few other troubling modern hospital issues to light here: Misconduct in NY hospitals–three nurses speak out!
Most troubling is the apparent consensus among those nurses that when you go into a hospital, “pandemic” or not, you should take an “advocate” with you.
So care-home deaths due to politicians housing COVID-19 patients in them, unnecessary bounty-driven hospitalizations that ended in death, ventialting patients rather than proning them and ventilating patients outside of later-discovered best practices added to all those other co-morbidities reflexively blamed on the virus would all reduce the approximately 10% of deaths more honestly blamed on COVID-19 and not explained by the other more main-stream co-morbidities. How much of that 10% do they explain?
So, hard as it is for some to believe, the take-away is that about 90% of the official deaths blamed on COVID-19 — probably more — are fake news, and so is the so-called “pandemic.”
It is in fact, a pandemic created by fake numbers and narrative, not by a virus — so we might want to call it a “Narrative-created Pandemic” — and keep a wary eye out for any nefarious follow-ups.
HERE For updates, additions, comments, and corrections.
AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!
The Best of L. Reichard White