Statistics

Ignore The Rules & Restrictions Like They Do: Coronavirus Update XLV

IGNORE BAD RULES

Ignore the bad rules just like they do. Birx was the latest one caught flaunting the rules she knew were useless, and even harmful. You flaunt them, too. If anybody asks, say this is why you’re doing it.

They know, and you know. If we don’t start disobeying in significant numbers, this will carry on throughout all 2021.

Have a Merry Christmas. Don’t let them take it from you. Join the Christmas Day Uprising!

As Catholics and Americans, we have the canonical and constitutional right to freely worship.

But freedom comes with requirements…

We are calling on all Christians to fill our churches once again on Christmas Day.

We will worship the Savior of the World on His birth by disobeying civil and Church authorities who would contest our freedom to do so. Our simple protest mirrors the simplicity of our Savior.

If you are in Michigan, you can attend the Grech who stole Christmas rally in Lansing. (My dad says “Grech the wretch.)

Award winning acting, there.

Incidentally, how much of the $900 billion printed by the government to pay for their mistakes will end up more or less immediately in the hands of oligarchs? Maybe were thrown out of work, lost their business, their lives. But the $600 will make up for this.

Since it be spent, most of it right away, at Walmarts, Amazon, and the like, it’s a great deal for our elites.

A friend sent this clip from No Agenda, from a WHO representative saying lockdowns only make people poor and should not be used.

BOOK UPDATE

The book is STILL sold out! The Price of Panic.

E-book and audio book versions are still available. Last week I said “New books will be in stock in about a week.” Wrong!

Another glowing review.

Website of similar name: price of panic.
fpnaic

THE NUMBERS

Sources: daily tests, CDC official toll number one, number two (the old weekly file, now suspect). Deaths by age. Covid & flu. WHO flu tracker. All current as of Monday night.

Here’s the CDC weekly ALL CAUSE death counts, or the Perspective Plot. The late drop off is late counting, which takes up to eight weeks to get all, but most are in by three. We need to look at all cause deaths because we can’t trust the COVID numbers.

The black line is all deaths, including COVID. The dashed is all deaths minus attributed COVID, and the red, for perspective, is COVID. (Again, the drop off is late counts.) The blue line, about the same order as the doom, is flu+pneumonia (it’s the pneumonia that kills most flu patients).

IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND DEATHS ALWAYS INCREASE RIGHT AT THIS TIME OF YEAR, PEAKING IN EARLY JANUARY. DO NOT BE ALARMED WHEN THEY SAY DEATHS ARE INCREASING. PLEASE PASS THIS INFORMATION ON!

Do you see the January peak every year? It is caused when we enter our voluntary lockdowns in winter, spreading bugs. This is also the “solution” governments hit upon to stop the spread of bugs. Lockdowns kill.

Be ready for this! It will peak again in winter, and subside again in spring. This year’s totals will be higher than next year’s, and there always be fluctuation, just like with flu.

The CDC (important!) stopped reporting separate flu and pneumonia deaths midway through 2020, but I estimate them after by subtracting deaths “involving” COVID from those “involving” (their word) pneumonia or flu or COVID. That’s the dashed blue line.

We’ll get to the suspicious disappearance of flu in the US, and globally, in a moment. First, here is another way to look at the same all cause death data, week of the year all cause deaths, along with a model (black line) of what deaths would look like without COVID.

CDC has their own “excess” death model with which I do not agree. I’ve explained that in other posts; briefly, the black line is my model, based only on extrapolating population increase.
Ignore the last three points or so, which are due to late counts. We’re at about 250,000 excess deaths for the year. Which is about the proportionally as we saw in the ’57-’58 Asian flu.

Understand: these “excess” are not just COVID, but all the deaths caused by the “solution” to COVID, caused by the lockdowns, missed diagnoses, suicides, iatrogenic deaths, and on and on. Panic kills. Link: Follow ‘the Science’! COVID Lockdowns KILL: Suicides exceed COVID deaths; Drug Overdoses Spike; Delayed surgeries; Delayed cancer/heart treatments = more DEATH

I believe my own “excess” death model is a bit off at the end, being too low. Regardless, it is clear we are not in any crisis.

I repeat: we are not in any crisis. Deaths are peaking in winter just as expect them to.

Flu has gone missing. Flu + pneumonia kill about 200,000 each and every year in the US. Not anymore. That is, we don’t know any more, because nobody is bothering to check. Flu and pneumonia deaths have either vanished, or are being mistaken for COVID. The CDC classifies these deaths all in one group.

Here is the WHO’s global flu tracker:

These, like the CDC does, are not deaths or illnesses, but counts of tests made. Testing has disappeared, because all tests are COVID tests now. And all deaths that “involve” COVID, flu, or pneumonia are though by our rulers to be COVID only. Panic destroys thought.

Here is the CDC official population mortality rates for the all causes other than COVID, and “involving” COVID (with and of).

Here are the same population fatality rates in tabular form:

POPULATION FATALITY RATES
                 Age     COVID OtherCause
1       Under 1 year 0.0000079    0.00410
2          1–4 years 0.0000011    0.00018
3         5–14 years 0.0000011    0.00011
4        15–24 years 0.0000110    0.00069
5        25–34 years 0.0000430    0.00130
6        35–44 years 0.0001200    0.00200
7        45–54 years 0.0003300    0.00350
8        55–64 years 0.0007900    0.00770
9        65–74 years 0.0019000    0.01600
10       75–84 years 0.0047000    0.03700
11 85 years and over 0.0130000    0.11000

No matter what age, there is at least about a 10 times or larger chance of dying from something else then COVID. If you are young and healthy, there is no real risk.

About masks in depth, see this article and this one.

To support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal (in any amount) click here

Categories: Statistics

27 replies »

  1. Christmas Uprising idea would be good if bishops allowed it. My local parish asked for reservations for Christmas Masses (incidentally, we’ve had 1/20th attendance on Sundays). I declined.

    “Be not afraid, except for coronavirus. Come, follow me, and I will give you masks” – Angel of Light

  2. Matt, is there a reason, other than the obvious that it is the data, you insist on putting the last three points and then have to pepper the text with “warningS”. IMO it detracts from the graph, since the line drawn through them is quite eye-catching — sort of the lines you rail against when talking data and reality.

  3. Gretchen CANNOT BE THE GRINCH or anything similar. One of the things I hated about the “Grinch that stole Christmas” was the idiot grinch gave the stuff back and there was a sappy ending. Granted, Gretchen would be my ideal grinch—steals Christmas AND DOES NOT GIVE IT BACK, but she is not the grinch of the Dr. Seuss story. People need to PAY ATTENTION to their stupid analogies. The Whos did not steal Christmas back, either. This is important. Words have meaning, but if the Right can’t grasp that…..

    All money except the measly $600 per person goes to oligarchs. Really? You have to ask??? I’m NOT spending mine and I am NOT helping the economy, not even Walmart or Amazon. The liars from Washington can shove that idea.

    The statistic “excess deaths” is 100% meaningless and used for propaganda. I hate the term. The only people who die are those who die. There’s NO SET NUMBER per year. It’s a stupid, stupid term.

    COVID DESTROYED FLU. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT. Celebrate and stop complaining so much.

  4. While I agree fully lock downs and masks do more harm than good, basing conclusions on comparisons to “excess” deaths in previous years is risky. How, for example, do the numbers reflect the role of modern scourges like the estimated 81,000 unexpectedly dead this year due to opoid abuse?

    Besides, we don’t know right now how dead dead is. You’d think this would be obvious but the excess death numbers need to be adjusted for partial death since hundreds of thousands of dead continue to vote and so must be considered at least partially alive (brain dead, of course, but otherwise ok – so count them as 90% dead maybe?)

  5. Briggs, I’m curious about all cause death numbers. I’ve seen several posts that claim CDC numbers show we may have the same or lower number of total deaths in 2020 than we did in 2019. I can’t seem to find those numbers on the CDC website anywhere. I believe you are claiming that we will have 200k+ more deaths this year than last year. While I think this whole thing has been a scam from day one, if there are 200k+ more total deaths this year, it’s easy to see how the midwits will say those are all from COVID. Am I missing something? I love to see and use the data, but it seems to be difficult to track down, especially because the CDC wants to slice and dice it into meaningless subcategories, probably to try and justify their existence. Any idea where total 2019 mortality statistics are housed?

  6. Joel, jumping in here, excess deaths providing Covidians fodder was my initial concern. But it quickly occurred to me that people in our camp can’t have it both ways. We can’t minimize the effect of Covid while, at the same time, catastrophizing the effects of Covid-hysteria. I say let’s grant Covidians their excess deaths, then have them reckon the vast numbers that were killed by panic. A good start would be the nearly one-third killed by ventilators and sedatives, per the WSJ. Then have them grapple with the ‘from’ and ‘with’ conundrum. Now the numbers that have occasioned so much panic are beginning to dwindle.

  7. Everyone everywhere has a moral and ethical obligation to oppose and ignore these inane, destructive, and unjust, tyrannical mandates and other “Covid rules” to the fullest extent possible. This madness will not end unless and until enough people simply stop playing along with the stupid game.

    Unfortunately, I don’t have much hope. People seem to like their new tyranny, home incarceration, and face diapers (perhaps many people enjoy being infantilized and thus abdicating responsibility for their own lives and health. Plus, in our idiot culture saturated with comic book superhero BS, perhaps people enjoy LARPing as masked superheros saving the world from a big bad scary virus). Ex.: Rod Dreher’s cringey Substack post this morning in which he says he and his family skipped his niece’s wedding last weekend because they’re “skittish about Covid.” Ten months on, and this hand-wringing Con Inc. pantywaist has learned nothing, and is still afraid to go outside and breathe, and act like a sane, normal human being.

    And now the media and politicians, especially in the UK, are trying to whip people into a renewed frenzy of fear and panic over “mutations” which they claim, without evidence, are more virulent and scary than the original Covid (What…is the IFR .025 instead of .02?) So what, there probably are some mutations. Flu and other viruses mutate all the time – that’s why Big Pharma tries to sell people on a new flu vaccine every year – but no one every tried to shutdown the world and destroy all life and liberty because of it, and mutations in themselves don’t necessarily mean more deadly. And mutations are also why there has never before been a successful vaccine for a Coronavirus. Yet we’re supposed to believe that 4 or 5 independent pharmaceutical companies worldwide have, within less than a year of its appearance, suddenly produced totally safe and effective vaccines – two of them mRNA “vaccines” that as of this time last year were deemed a technology many years away from being safe for human use, if ever – for an alleged “novel” coronavirus. Yeah, nothing fishy there at all!

  8. Dear JC,

    You don’t need the Bishop’s permission to go to mass. That’s absurd. You don’t need a reservation either. Just go. If the priest won’t let you in, stand outside. (Imagine nuns swinging 6-foot crosses to keep the parishioners out of the sanctuary – Bizarro World).

    Jam the parking lot. Spill out into the street and block traffic. On Christmas. Send a message to the world.

    It saddens me that Catholics would abandon mass when the new Emperors of Rome command them to do so. The martyrs put up with a lot more than silly decrees and still kept the faith. Why is our modern faith so weak? What are you cowards afraid of? You might be fearing the wrong danger.

  9. There’s been a pretty common pattern of a few days of low “attributed death counts” followed by a day or two of high death counts. It’s pretty easy to tell when we are in day of low death count reporting, since the local news will report on some other number that day (today it is “State Cases exceeding 400,000”).

  10. Ed Boondocks?

    Ed Bonderenka is joined by Matt Gibbs of wmgibbs.com, Statistician to the Stars! author and investigator.

    Is Matt the fourth Bee Gee?

  11. “It saddens me that Catholics would abandon mass when the new Emperors of Rome command them to do so…”

    Well Uncle Mike, I think Fr. john’s post helps explain why, given the lack of leadership people get from most priests and the hierarchy these days. When even a Latin Mass group that one might expect to be more open to at least hearing from those opposed to the status quo or mainstream narrative on Covid (among other things), prefer instead to censor for fear of “fanning the flames,” it’s not sending a strong signal to the faithful to stay steadfast and fight.

    Instead of martyrdom, most of today’s milquetoast parish pastors and hierarchy just want a nice comfy retirement after careers spent garnering praise for their “tolerance,” efforts to re-orient the Church in conformity with mainstream liberalism, and subordination of the Church’s rightful liberty to secular rulers.

  12. ”Ignore The Rules & Restrictions Like They Do: Coronavirus Update XLV”

    Rules for Reacticals:

    1) ignore the rules.
    2) do not ignore rule #1
    3) obey rule #2
    4) ignore rule #3
    5) obey rule #4
    6) ignore rule #5
    7) ignore rule #6
    8) ignore rule #7
    9) obey rule #8
    10) ignore rule #9

    6) Hitler rules
    7) just kidding
    8)

  13. Dennis, I agree.

    I don’t fault Fr. John for what he wrote, but rather what he didn’t write. His point throughout was that depriving people of their livelihoods counters moral principles:

    It necessarily follows that each one has a natural right to procure what is required in order to live, and the poor can procure that in no other way than by what they can earn through their work.

    No argument there. But my expectation from a parish priest is that depriving the Faithful of the Sacraments ought to be his paramount concern. Unemployment is a problem, no doubt. Shuttering churches is a bigger problem, in my opinion, especially for a priest.

    Fr. John does not say which “traditionalist institute” of “Latin Mass saying” priests refused to publish his remarks. I would like to know whether those priests are fighting for religious freedom and the natural right to worship, given that they are ordained and have vowed to administer that worship.

  14. Heard on the radio while on a long drive (as close as I can recall).

    “People say that there is an over 99% survival rate for COVID-19. While that is technically true, if you get admitted to the hospital, your survival rate is low. And if you need to be put on a ventilator, your survival rate is even lower still, with it being lower the longer you are on it. I’ve seen old people walk out of the hospital and 30 year olds die, so you can’t know what your survival rate is. If you are 30 years old, your survival rate might be 1%, not 99%, and you won’t know until you are dead. So it makes sense to be afraid.”

    I was wondering if this can be made sense of statistically. The first part is talking about conditional probabilities, and makes sense. If you are forced into the hospital than we can safely say that you aren’t part of the population that can easily fight off the disease, so your expected chance of survival is lower with this new piece of information. But the last part about having a personal chance of survival looks like nonsense no matter how I slice it.

  15. Rudolph, it seems that some have avoided hospitalization and survived do to access to HCQ, like Joe Oltmann, while the wrong hospital might not be willing to give you the pharmaceutical regimen required due to politics.

  16. “But my expectation from a parish priest is that depriving the Faithful of the Sacraments ought to be his paramount concern”

    Indeed, Uncle Mike. But perhaps Fr. John simply took that as a given for most of his audience and the focus of that particular article was on lockdowns in general and their impact among people who’ve had lives and jobs upended. And in a largely Protestant country which doesn’t understand the Sacraments (witness the Gov. of Virginia’s recent claims that shutting down churches is no big deal anyway because God can hear you can pray just as easily at home as in a church building), that might be an easier case to make to some.

    Rudolph: It seems the guy making that argument simply doesn’t understand basic logic and how do differentiate the general average from the particular, and wants to impose irrational fear of particular outcomes on the general population through continued extreme measures in response to a virus with an IFR around .02 (more like 99.98% survival rate, not just 99 flat you quote above – that extra .08 makes a big difference in terms of raw numbers). And his apparent attempt to create a category called “your survival rate” just obfuscates the issue around proper response by seeming to argue that because we can’t know the precise outcome in every particular case, public policy should be based on the most restrictive measures possible assuming the worst case scenario for everyone. That is not a sound basis for public policy (and it has a distinctly Rawlsian “veil of ignorance” stench about it).

    Anyway, the IFR is a general average for the entire population at large without regard for particular cases. Do individuals in some demographics or with certain underlying conditions and co-morbidities have a greater chance of getting seriously ill or dying from it? Of course. But that’s the same with absolutely every other virus or disease also. An 80 year-old with multiple co-morbidities, or even a 45 year-old with obesity and diabetes, are both statistically more likely to be at risk of serious illness or death than I am, not only from Covid but from ordinary flu, pneumonia, etc. That’s life. (I’m also skeptical of his claims that he’s “seen 30 year-olds die” without more evidence of underlying conditions. If true, my guess is these were not simply ordinarily healthy 30 year-olds, but those with already very severe health problems. Basically healthy 30 year-olds – or even 50 year-olds, and most 75 year-olds – are not just randomly dropping like flies because of Covid. Anecdotal aside: I heard last week from a family member of a former client who is now 94 and in a nursing home, that she had Covid a couple months ago, but is now doing well. 94! I don’t know all the details, so its possible, of course, that she was a PCR false positive and never really had it. I digress).

    Anyway, did this same radio guy advocate lockdowns, the destruction of society and the economy, and forced face masks every flu season before this because some people somewhere might be at a greater particular risk of dying from flu than the vast majority of other people? Of course not. That would be an absurd basis for public policy, but Covid seems to have driven people insane and incapable or rationally assessing risk or making sound public policy arguments. Public policy has to be based on the generality, not the particular, which can never be known in advance and thus cannot be a rational basis for public policies affecting everyone.

  17. Rudolph-

    The radio commentator you mentioned was playing a rhetorical game that obfuscates the numbers and implies that rare outcomes are common, thus stoking the fear emotion in the audience.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.