Context is Everything

To date: In the United States, 138,000 have died from COVID out of 3,430,000 confirmed cases. (That’s a mortality rate of 4.02% in case you were wondering, the same amount as in the rest of the world; look for that number to go down once more testing is completed and it becomes obvious that more and more asymptomatic people are testing positive for the virus or positive for antibodies.)

Few people realize that in the U.S., for every death, regardless of the true cause, the death is recorded as a COVID death, for COVID positive patients.  So if you really die of heart disease, a stroke, cancer or injuries sustained in an automobile accident, and you’re COVID positive, they’ll say you died of COVID. Keep this in mind as you peruse the following information.

According to the CDC:
  • 1 in every 4 deaths every year is due to heart disease so we can reduce the number of reported COVID deaths by 25%.  
  • 1 out of every 20 deaths is due to stroke so we can reduce the number of reported COVID deaths by another 5%.
  • The anticipated number of deaths due to cancer is 151 for every 100,000 in 2020, so we can reduce the number of reported COVID deaths by yet another 1.5%.
  • There are 52.2 deaths per 100,000 due to unintentional injury like car accidents, so we can further reduce the number of reported COVID deaths by .05%.

Greater than 3% die of something else entirely like childbirth, or a respiratory disease or even natural causes. The true percentage is obviously significantly higher than 3%, but for the sake of argument, let’s round “other than COVID” causes of death to one third and say at LEAST 1/3 of recorded COVID deaths were actually due to other causes. 

Had these other causes not been a factor, the odds are overwhelming that these people would have recovered.  Think of it this way; were it not for that pesky little highway fatality, a COVID positive patient would most likely have recovered, as greater than 95% do. 

So if we reduce the number of COVID deaths by a third (42,000) to eliminate people who died of other causes, we’re looking at 92,000, with a mortality rate of 2.6%, which is so much higher than it really is because more and more people are testing positive and not dying.   To keep this in perspective, the mortality rate for the common flu is 2%.     

So the larger question is this:  Is it reasonable to shut down commerce and expect us to stay inside and wear masks outside to prevent COVID deaths?

Consider this:  In 2017, before COVID, (again, according to the CDC) 647,457 died of heart disease and 599,108 died of cancer.  Would it be reasonable to restrict the population from buying cigarettes and alcohol, because they are the major contributors of the two top deadliest diseases?  After all, if they weren’t on the shelves, these top killers would no longer be #1 or #2.

Road crashes are the leading cause of death in the U.S. for people aged 1-54.  Would it be reasonable to expect the population to give up transportation to protect them?  These are lives in their prime.  

So exactly how much is too much to expect of the general population to prevent the death of others who, in the case of COVID, are largely responsible for the factors that put them at risk in the first place?  (Not 100% of the time, but most of the time.) 

This is a serious question.  We are giving up our freedoms and our livelihood to prevent COVID deaths when the agencies directing us to do so are obviously playing with the numbers.  Those most at risk of dying from COVID have comorbidities like obesity, high blood pressure, and diabetes, things directly related to their lifestyle.  These are choices.  Society can’t fix that.      

The new life expectancy for Americans is 78.7 years (abysmal for a developed country, I know) and people in their 80s account for almost half of all COVID deaths.  These are people at the end of their lives who are actually living on borrowed time in comparison to their peers.  Is it reasonable to expect society to stay inside and socially distance in public, to protect others from meeting their maker at the end of their lives?  Or are we to assume they will not die of something else, if we eliminate their exposure to COVID?
Why doesn’t the media report the data like this?  It isn’t intellectually honest to throw a number out there, which is grossly inflated when you take these other factors into consideration, without explanation.  Why do they continue to insist the virus is the sole reason COVID positive people are dying and that, as good citizens and in the interest of protecting ourselves, it is somehow our responsibility to fix this?
I am in the targeted age group.  In lieu of an effective vaccine, I fully expect to get COVID at some point, if I haven’t already, and I fully expect to survive because I take care of my health.  If I get it when I am in my 80s, then it is but one of the many things I could die from.  I do not see my only avenue of avoiding severe illness or death from COVID as society’s responsibility, because unless you put me in solitary confinement and send me food on a conveyor belt like in the Jetsons, you can’t.
In other words, it may not be reasonable to insist the entire population take on a 6 trillion dollar debt and forfeit our freedoms to stand between those who suffer from a variety of factors over which we have no control, and COVID, thinking we can prevent their death.  We cannot live a healthy lifestyle for other people.  We cannot extend their lives beyond national averages.  We are simply not that powerful and not that wealthy.  The living have pressing priorities like being able to work and support our families so we can hope to live as long as half of those who die of COVID in their 80s!  I am not being callous.  I am being honest.
Apparently, it is unrealistic to expect those charged with coming up with reasonable solutions to healthcare concerns to tell the truth.  History will look back on 2020 as the year of the great deception.  

One final note:  In their key update for week 27 ending July 4 2020, the CDC reported the percentage of COVID deaths is currently below the epidemic threshold.  Did anyone report that?  Not to my knowledge.  Why? Because after the eleventh week of a declining percentage of deaths, the CDC is just sure the number is going to go up.   

Well, if they’re sure . . .  Maybe if they restricted BLM from flooding the streets, blocking traffic, tearing down statues, defacing property, looting, setting buildings on fire, killing one another and beating the crap out of innocent people for weeks on end, the number would continue to decline.  But this isn’t a reasonable solution in their minds, folks.  Keep the rest of us out of restaurants and off park benches, but for goodness sake, let BLM take over our streets.  Priorities!  Keep your masks on to protect these people!!!  Their lives matter.  Yours?  Not so much.   


  1. I’m afraid it isn’t quite as simple as saying since one out of every four deaths in a typical year are from heart disease you can decrease the amount of deaths attributed to covid by twenty-five percent.

    The question of how long would someone who died with covid would have lived if they hadn’t contracted it has been and will be the subject of studies. The conceptual term is “years of life lost”. I am not aware of any US statistics as of yet, but some early studies in Europe, focusing on the UK and Italy which were both hard hit had some sobering figures. Despite the weighting towards fatalities in the elderly, and accounting for most underlying health conditions, the average was still something on the order of a decade of life lost. The Economist had a visualization of some of the data:

    I think it is also important to note that heart disease, diabetes, obesity, car accidents and the like are not contagious. Infectious disease is an entirely different animal, sixty seconds in an elevator had an end result of a cluster of seventy-one infections from one patient zero:

    • cynthia curran says

      We are mentioning that the left also supported massive protests that helped to infect people,  now wants to now lockdown the economy again. That’s a double standard. No church services but 7 weeks of George Floyd protests. Also, Sweden, that did less of a lockdown now has almost no deaths. What about bad health caused by missing months of work. Just because a small number of corona virus survivors have complexations doesn’t mean we should lock down forever.

      • Tim R. Mortiss says

        This statement about Sweden is quite wrong. Sweden has over 5,000 deaths; the other Scandinavian countries each have less than 10% of that. While Norway, Finland, and Denmark are starting to open their borders, they all remain closed to Sweden. My Scandi friends, of which I have several, mostly regard the Swedish approach as appalling.

        • Half of COVID 19 deaths in Sweden have occurred in nursing homes. The elderly are routinely denied hospital treatment and they are denied oxygen They are treated (if that is the right word) with morphine and midazolam – which restricts their breathing. As Dr Yngve Gustafson ‘…told the Svenska Dagbladet newspaper, “It’s active euthanasia, to say the least”.’

          • Gail Sheppard says

            They do this “right here in River City” (from the Music Man), when they transfer you to Hospice. They withdraw water and give patients with breathing issues, like my dad, morphine.

            • Tim R. Mortiss says

              It’s an old procedure for the aged terminally ill; turn up the morphine drip to reduce pain and agitation from the suffocation of advanced pneumonia. Death is thereby advanced to some degree– but this isn’t euthanasia. “Pneumonia– the old man’s friend”, as my dad and granddad used to say.
              On the other hand,  I doubt little that what goes on in Sweden is another thing entirely.

              • Gail Sheppard says

                My dad had a pneumonia like condition and was in the hospital. The next step was getting him into rehab. In order to go into rehab, two doctor’s had to sign off on it. In order for them to sign off on it, he had to demonstrate he could begin therapy in a chair. To demonstrate he could begin therapy in a chair, he had to be able to get himself from the bed to the chair on his own. He was too weak. They would not keep him in the hospital or sign off on his transfer to any facility except hospice. I guess they assume every 90-year-old person is “terminal.”

        • Belarus has a similar population to Sweden and had the same measures, with a similar number of infected, but only around 500 deaths in total. A better example.

          • Gail Sheppard says

            As I wrote back in mid-March, social distancing should have been voluntary and rewarded to encourage compliance.

            Those most at risk should have been incentivised to stay home and released in waves, as healthcare resources became available.

            The young, without high blood pressure and diabetes, should have been encouraged to engage in normal activities so the virus could spread quickly through the population to develop herd immunity, before releasing those at risk so they would be less likely to run into carriers and more likely to have the healthcare resources they would have needed to recover.

            The lab tests, the tracking, and compliance could have all been voluntary and rewarded so there would have been no need to shut everything down.

    • Gail Sheppard says

      Your first link looks at the likelihood that someone who died of COVID would shortly die of something else anyway. It is from Italy so it is different than our experience here. Even if it was the same, it really doesn’t really address those over 80 which are the hardest hit in the U.S. If the average life expectancy is less than 80, what benchmark would you use to make the case that these 80 year-olds have a lot more time left?

      Your second link is about some woman who purportedly infected 71 people in 60 seconds in an elevator. Do you want to know what the actual study says?

      “On March 19, 2020, case-patient A0 returned to Heilongjiang Province from the United States; she was asked to quarantine at home. She lived alone during her stay in Heilongjiang Province. She had negative SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid and serum antibody tests on March 31 and April 3.

      Patient B1.1 was the downstairs neighbor of case-patient A0. They used the same elevator in the building but not at the same time and did not have close contact otherwise. On March 26, B1.1’s mother, B2.2, and her mother’s boyfriend, B2.3, visited and stayed in B1.1’s home all night. On March 29, B2.2 and B2.3 attended a party with patient C1.1 and his sons, C1.2 and C1.3.

      On April 2, C1.1 suffered a stroke and was admitted to hospital 1. His sons, C1.2 and C1.3, cared for him in ward area 1 of the hospital. Patient C1.1 shared the same clinical team and items, such as a microwave, with other patients in the ward. On April 6, patient C1.1 was transferred to hospital 2 because of fever; C1.2 and C1.3 accompanied him.

      On April 7, patient B2.3 first noted symptoms of COVID-19. He tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on April 9, the first confirmed case in this cluster. His close contacts, B1.1, B2.1, B2.2, and C1.1, subsequently tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on April 9 or 10. Patient C1.1 was quarantined in hospital 2 when he tested positive on April 9. The epidemiologic investigation showed that none of these 5 persons had a history of travel or residence in affected areas with sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2 during the 14 days before diagnosis, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 came from contact with other persons.

      During C1.1’s admission at hospital 1, a total of 28 other persons, D1.1–BB1.1, were infected with SARS-CoV-2 in ward area 1. Because all patients in the ward could ambulate, 4 persons, CC1.1, DD1.1, EE1.1, and FF1.1, were infected in other wards and in the computed tomography room of hospital 1. Among hospital 1 staff, 5 nurses and 1 doctor were infected. In hospital 2, another 20 persons, GG1.1–VV1.1, were infected in the ward where C1.1 stayed (Figure).

      On April 9, investigators also learned that A0, B1.1’s neighbor, had returned on March 19 from the United States, where COVID-19 cases had been detected. Investigators performed SARS-CoV-2 serum antibody tests on A0 on April 10 and 11. SARS-CoV-2 serum IgM was negative but IgG was positive, indicating that A0 was previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 (5,6). Therefore, we believe A0 was an asymptomatic carrier (7,8) and that B1.1 was infected by contact with surfaces in the elevator in the building where they both lived (9). Other residents in A0’s building tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids and serum antibodies.

      On April 15, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention sequenced the entire genomes of 21 samples from the cluster. Viral genomes were identical in 18 cases and 3 other cases had a difference of 1–2 nucleotides, indicating that SARS-CoV-2 came from the same point of origin. The viral genome sequences from the cluster were distinct from the viral genomes previously circulating in China, indicating the virus originated abroad (10) and suggesting case A0 was the origin of infection for this cluster.

      All persons in this cluster, including those who lived in the same community and had close contact with SARS-CoV-2–positive patients or visited the 2 hospitals during April 2–15, were tested for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids and serum antibodies. As of April 22, 2020, A0 remained asymptomatic, and a total of 71 SARS-CoV-2–positive cases had been identified in the cluster.”

      Not as straightforward as your article suggests, right? Unfortunately, you cannot take what you read at face value. I wish you could assume what you read is true. We used to be able to. There was a day when we had 3 news stations and they would all report the same story the same way. Not anymore.

      • From the Economist article, it did address those over 80, it only excluded those under 50.

        As to the second, I’m afraid I could use some clarification on what you think the article got wrong in describing the study? The article summarized that there was a cluster of seventy-one cases that were traced back to a root patient zero. And that patient zero despite taking precautions was so infectious that apparently they contaminated an elevator enough during a very brief ride to start a larger infection chain. By straightforward are you suggesting either myself or the article were claiming that there were seventy-one people in an elevator that got infected all at once in sixty seconds? I can’t see how you could possibly draw that conclusion.

        That was my point in regards to infectious disease not being in the same category as car accidents or heart disease or diabetes in terms of requiring preventative measures. If I rear end somebody at a stop sign on my way home from work, the person I rear end doesn’t go home and then a week later they and their spouse and their teenage child rear end six more people.

        • Gail Sheppard says

          Yes, it was a model of deaths based on data from Italy, Scotland and Wales, where they were making the point that victims in their 60s and 70s could live for more than ten years. Nothing about victims in their 80s.

          With regard to your other point, you said, ” . . . sixty seconds in an elevator had an end result of a cluster of seventy-one infections from one patient zero” and the title of the article you provided reads: Woman infects 71 people in 60 seconds

          I’m not sure anyone made the point that an infectious disease (in this case a virus) was in the same category as a car accident which is the point *I* was trying to make. The powers-that-be linked them together. If someone who was COVID positive dies of injuries from a car accident, they count it as a COVID death in the U.S.

          • I fear you may not have read closely enough. The YLL average was for an overall 50-99 cohort, that decade-ish estimate was inclusive of people 80+ ‘bringing down’ the average. As it noted “Fully 20% of the dead were reasonably healthy people in their 50s and 60s, who were expected to live for another 25 years on average.” Now, there are limitations to the estimations, which were discussed, but the data is there to suggest that one can’t simply handwave away covid deaths as people who were about to drop dead anyway.

            As to the second, what you seem to actually take issue with was the headline, which was itself not technically incorrect, but granted a bit sensationalist given the body of the article text itself. I suspect one can find attention grabbing headlines on tablets from ancient Sumer.

            Of the 138,000 covid attributed deaths in the US, I’m curious how many you think are from fatal car accidents where the cause of death was inappropriately marked as covid, 2? 3? If this is such a widespread phenomenon do you not have supporting evidence?

            • Gail Sheppard says

              I wasn’t trying to chide you. I thought you may not have known that the story was not quite accurate with respect to saying a single person gave 71 people COVID in an elevator within 60 seconds. Some people (not talking about you, because you seem to know the difference) might see this and actually believe one person could make 71 people sick within 60 seconds!

              With regard to the other conversation, I understand what you’re saying. In our case, however, almost half of COVID deaths happen to those 80 and over who would not be expected to live another 25 years or perhaps any time at all, since they have already outlived their peers in terms of the average of death. That was my only point.

              To answer your question: I don’t think we can know how many fatal car accidents there were where COVID was determined to be the cause of death. We only know that they were told to code the final diagnosis and cause of death this way in all cases where the patient was COVID positive.

              I wrote a piece about it we heard from a few doctors who confirmed it was happening.

              Here is the evidence.


  2. At least we can all be safe in the knowledge that Big George Floyd died of COVID-19, right?

  3. From day one, I have consistently maintained that this is the flu, nothing more, nothing less.  It’s an odd variety, but that pretty much describes it.  When the Demsheviks noticed the Don’s slow initial response (despite restricting flights from China), they decided they had their golden egg.
    Germ warfare.
    But the germ being relatively mundane, they leaned heavy on the propaganda.  There is no other rational explanation for this circus than that the Demsheviks decided to use Covid as a terrorist weapon against the American people in order to force them to restore the Demsheviks to power and defenestrate the Don.
    Books will be written about this and it will literally kill the Democratic Party.  If Trump manages to win in November, he will have presided over the decimation of the Demsheviks.   The D by ones name will be like the star of david on jewish shoulders in Germany, subjecting them to utter contempt.
    How could it be otherwise?  This is the biggest string of hoaxes in human history all with the one goal of not allowing power to slip from the hands of the liberal establishment.
    It should make you sick to your stomach.  But that’s power and money.
    A Great Reckoning is coming.

  4. I do not have a dog in this fight nor the energy to follow it all.  Nor can I speak to rates of morbidity.
    I can say one thing for certain because I am intimately involved in it.  The number of COVID-19 tests for active infection (not the antibody tests) available to healthcare providers, health systems, and laboratories has increased dramatically in the last four weeks.  Quite literally millions (approximately 6 million, to be more precise) more tests have been produced and distributed to the healthcare market by one manufacturer alone during this period.  This is in addition to other manufacturers ramping up production as quickly as they can.
    There is no doubt whatsoever that millions more people have been tested in the past four weeks simply because testing became available. 
    I can also say with certainty that those states with previously low reported infections in which the numbers of infection are reported to be rising rapidly are some of the very states that were not considered “hot zones” by FEMA and thus had the least amount of access to the tests that were being produced. With access to the tests, the providers in these states are now testing a great deal more than they were able to previously.
    There is no way to measure the impact of additional testing in terms of the real change in the number of infections, but there is little doubt that more testing will result in more reported cases.  Infections may be on the rise (I don’t know), but I do know that the number of tests now available for use is likely skewing the data to some degree.

    The number of available tests will continue to increase rapidly over the next 2-3 months so I would expect the number of reported cases to continue to increase as well.

    Given the above, the number of deaths (if reported accurately) would be the number to watch in terms of the true status of the pandemic. It is reasonable to assume (and hope) that the morbidity rate for COVID-19 infected patients will likely fall as well, as it is far more difficult to ‘fudge.’

  5. George Michalopulos says
  6. Sam Young says

    To keep things in perspective I sometimes say to myself:
    “Elias, you probably won’t be crucified on a Cross.”
    Then things calm down – most of the time.

  7. George Michalopulos says

    And here’s more proof –yet again–that deaths from other sources are ascribed to COVID-19. In this case, a motorcycle fatality:

    • What I found interesting about this story was a refutation of the idea that all covid positive deaths are recorded as covid deaths:

      “Earlier this week, the Florida Department of Health sent FOX 35 News a statement that attempted to clarify that a “COVID death” is determined if, “COVID19 is listed as the immediate or underlying cause of death, or listed as one of the significant conditions contributing to death. Or, if there is a confirmed COVID-19 infection from a lab test – and the cause of death doesn’t meet exclusion criteria – like trauma, suicide, homicide, overdose, motor-vehicle accident, etc.”

      That is to say, this matter was simple error rather than policy. Before looking at conspiracies I would generally start by asking what is the normal error rate of mistakes in causes of death reporting in the state of Florida?

      • Antiochene Son says

        That may be the case in Florida, but in other states even “suspected” cases are reported with the totals. 

    • Michael Bauman says

      Brendan, contact tracing and forced quarantine are both part of fundamental public health practice.  Government has always had that authority.  It is right they should have it.
      The real question is: Are they using it in a legitimate and appropriate manner?  
      The electronics we have make goverental social manipulation much easier. 

      • There is precedence for forced quarantine OF THE SICK–not the healthy.

      • Daniel F says

        “It is a right they should have.”
        Michael, please let me know where in the Constitution you get that idea.

        • Michael Bauman says

          Daniel, I am researching specific citations, but a quick answer is that it is a traditional authority of at least local government as part of their function of maintaining community order.  Long used in managing STDs including AIDS and other communicable diseases. 
          The issues involve the proper due diligence on the risk to individuals and the community as a whole.  Obviously the possibility that such authority can be abused is high especially these days so robust oversite is necessary. But that weakens in times of real crises.  
          Federal involvement is another kettle of Goya beans.  There are a lot of caveats and significant over site required but if one favors federal involvement in Portland, it is only consistent to grant the same authority to control infectious disease.  

  8. In the case of Typhoid Mary Mallon, forced quarantine was no doubt justified. But as COVID 19 seems about as fatal as a bad flu, it is overkill. And in the case of the lady concerned here, it is a gross injustice.

    • Michael Bauman says

      Brendon, I agree. Here is a recent e-mail from my friends at the 10th Amendment Center (TAC). An organization of lawyers who concentrate on the 10th Amendment:
      “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
      (Emphasis mine)
      “Fear is the foundation of most governments.”

      That was John Adams (back when he was one of the good guys) writing in 1776. My only complaint about that statement is he should’ve eliminated the word “most.”
      All through history things have been the same. Emergencies create the perfect excuse for government power to expand.

      The COVID-19 pandemic is no exception. The spread of coronavirus and the fear generated has opened the door to all kinds of government actions that would be intolerable in normal times.

      Once established, these government powers never go away. In fact, the 9/11 emergency allowed the federal government to create the foundation for the surveillance state that exists today with the passage of the Patriot Act and other post-9/11 “authorities.”
      Since then, the federal government has been constructing an integrated national surveillance state with the cooperation of state and local agencies. The COVID-19 “emergency” provides an excuse to put that system to “good use.” it also sets the stage for further expansion and abuse of the system in the future.
      This week, Congress is considering yet another renewal and even an expansion to Section 215 of the wildly unconstitutional “Patriot” act.

      Never one to miss an opportunity to violate the Constitution, Sen. Mitch McConnell is pushing an amendment to the act this week to give the FBI the authority under the Act to secretly collect the browsing records and search history of Americans without a warrant.
      McConnell’s amendment accomplishes this by adding the words “internet website browsing records, internet search history records” to the list of records described in FISA law that covers FBI searches that require businesses to provide customer records. In other words, this amendment would permit the FBI to turn to your internet provider and demand they fork over your browser history.

      They’re trying to make more of their illegal surveillance “legal.” And possibly permanent.

      We also have proposals like the UNITE Act and the TRACE Act which won’t take a lot of imagination to see what they’ll turn into. A national contact tracing initiative isn’t something you’ll find in the Constitution either.

      Picking a geographic area and issuing a “warrant” for everyone who happened to be in a geographical area is pretty similar to the general warrants the British used – and which drove the colonists to secede from the empire.

      I covered this all in more detail in today’s Path to Liberty. If you prefer reading articles rather than a video or a podcast, you can also read through the notes of the show and I’ve included a bunch of reference links so you can research further.

      Here’s the link:

      Thank you so much for reading, watching, listening and sharing!

      Concordia res parvae crescunt,
      (small things grow great by concord)

      –Michael Boldin, TAC

      It is the only political organization I sent money to. Still it is critical to realize it is not the authority itself that is the problem, but the way and manner in which it is used. The colonists, however, got tried of making that distinction and decided (roughly 20% to 30% of them at most) to revolt. A critical mass had been reached.

    • Dear Brendan,

      I agree with you about mortality. My concern is the morbidity of COVID 19 and the ensuing enormous strain on hospital resources and personnel which is very UNLIKE the flu and must be addressed as such.  

      I really like Gail’s realistic and compassionate approach (as I understand it) to protect the vulnerable while freeing those who are either not vulnerable or are willing to take a risk if they are.  So for example, the vulnerable (now identified as anyone of a certain age, immune status, weight, physical condition) could be  allowed to stay home/work from home  by employers without penalty and be respected by businesses via continued curbside shopping and delivery, etc., while those who are healthy, young, unafraid go about their business ~ aware that they have a low but real chance of experiencing/succumbing to serious/fatal illness ~ can resume normal (legal) activities ?.

      I would also hope folks would not marginalize or ignore the vulnerable.  Hopefully this approach would lead to less resentment by the young/healthy toward  the “old or fearful” expressed here at times.  The latter are actually being prudent and trying to save hospital and financial resources through preventing illness. The young and healthy do not have to think that way in the main and please know that the vulnerable rejoice for you in that!  

      • Nicole: “My concern is the morbidity of COVID 19 and the ensuing enormous strain on hospital resources and personnel which is very UNLIKE the flu and must be addressed as such.”
        In those places (like Cuomo’s New York) where hospitals were overwhelmed, Denis Rancourt argues it happened precisely because of Government actions, not despite them.

        Denis Rancourt: “I postulate that the “COVID peak” represents an accelerated mass homicide of immune-vulnerable individuals, and individuals made more immune-vulnerable, by government and institutional actions, rather than being an epidemiological signature of a novel virus, irrespective of the degree to which the virus is novel from the perspective of viral speciation.”

        • Brendan, agree that DR’s postulate certainly fits with the NY Cuomo/deBlasio atheistic utilitarian mindset and actions (and Ezekiel Emmanuel’s and Obamacare’s) leading to murderous mortality. However the fact that hospitals in TX and their personnel are also overwhelmed and the reality of the increased morbidity of the illness itself in those who sicken and require much longer care and afterwards have lingering debilitating symptoms argue for the fact that COVID 19 is different from the flu, likely due to its intended gain-of-function design. There are many ways to overcome an enemy and one is to sicken the enemy and deplete his resources and economy.

          • George Michalopulos says

            Nicole, re the Texas morbidity rates, may I ask how many of these people possessed co-morbidities as well? Last week, I was listening to Sergio Sanchez on The Dana Loesch Show and he was talking about how overwhelming the COVID numbers were for south Texas. He admitted that this was an overwhelmingly Hispanic area of the state and that Hispanic culture plus obesity contributed to a level of diabetes that was out of proportion to other demographics.

            I imagine that Mr Sanchez, who is Hispanic himself, wouldn’t have said this if it weren’t true. Is this your experience as well?

            • Diabetes comorbidity certainly seems to have had a major effect in Italy and, perhaps, Spain.

  9. CDC May 2020 Infectious Diseases article:  Face Masks and other measures ineffective:
    Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures – Volume 26, Number 5—May 2020 – Emerging Infectious Diseases journal – CDC

    Personal note: If the science is ever settled in this direction, a gamechanger for the vulnerable who will then need to stay home, outside, or safe inside an Orthodox Temple or wherever Divine Liturgy is celebrated (imho). I personally had the most wonderful experience outside under the trees with birds singing and cool breeze at an early morning ROCOR service which was heavenly for us worshippers.  The devoted priest wore the “heavy robes” to honor the Russian new martyrs but this country girl could not have been more grateful and cool.  

  10. Face Mask Ineffectiveness Redux:   “Conclusive proof” from RCTs that face masks don’t work/likely don’t work.

  11. Dear George,
    I would like to know what you think about the President’s statement today about the need for wearing masks? Why this sudden change, and why now?

    Also, I wanted to share this link with you re: Tulsa’s need for volunteers amid the current uptick throughout the south.

    So far it doesn’t look to be as bad as it was in the Northeast, but it’s certainly concerning. As someone who’s worked in healthcare, I thought you might be able to share this news among your network.

    • He also just cancelled the Jacksonville convention. Looks and sounds like he is finally understanding that this won’t disappear and it’s a real pandemic, but too late for so many poor souls.

  12. George Michalopulos says

    Lookee here! This article came from that notorious, right-wing magazine known as Newsweek:

  13. This article pretty well sums it all up:

    “It’s hard for a normal well-adjusted person to believe that anyone could be so depraved that they’d create a fake medical crisis to inflict the equivalent of a massive bombing campaign on the American people in order to create enough misery to unseat the President.

    Or that they’d insist everyone needlessly wear surgical masks in public to keep the crisis going till November.

    But, when you find yourself on the same side as Jerry Nadler, Eric Swalwell, the rest of the Democrats, the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, and Hollywood; all of them insisting that there’s some horrible threat to America we need to take extreme actions against as they ignore the obvious terrible costs, suppress all evidence to the contrary, and flood us with propaganda that would’ve made the Soviet’s envious, you might want to consider whether you’ve maybe gone astray somewhere.”

    It is jolting to understand that something this Orwellian is happening in America and no one seems to be able to do anything about it. We are no longer a free people.

  14. This is quite significant and confirms what a number of us here at Monomakhos knew all along:
    A study done in Palm Beach pops the bubble on inflated mortality numbers:
    “Few Americans know that a local CBS affiliate examined 589 alleged Palm Beach, Florida fatalities and discovered that . . .[only] a third (169) had actually died of the virus.
    Most are also unaware that the COVID-19 death tally the media has terrorized them with for months includes motor-cycle fatalities and gunshot victims.”
    CBS is no cheerleader for Trump.  What the study demonstrates according to the piece’s author is that KungFlu deaths actually due to the disease are probably only a third of what’s reported, perhaps as low as ten percent.
    That is significant.  I and some others were mocked on this site earlier this year for suggesting that this thing is really no more serious than the common flu which kills about as many Americans each year as the third of reported deaths referred to in the piece above.
    It’s just the flu, folks.  And we have destroyed the economy and made Americans paranoid in an Orwellian nightmare for no good reason – it is simply a ploy by the progressives to make Americans suffer to hurt the chances of the incumbent president in the November elections, nothing more, nothing less.
    I never thought that this could happen in America.  I knew the MSM and the Democrats were hopelessly corrupt but the idea that they would stoop as low as this simply did not occur to me.  They can no longer be trusted with power regardless of who votes for them.  They are a danger to the health and freedom of the American people and their party must be destroyed as an act of self defense.
    Thus endeth the lesson.

    • Similarly (and one wonders how often this occurs without being corrected):

      Texas DSHS
      Jul 30
      DSHS corrects COVID-19 fatality counts for the week of July 27.

      An automation error caused 225 fatalities to be included even though COVID-19 was not listed as a direct cause of death on the death certificate.
      #COVID19TX dashboard: