Yes they have.
When recording 'COVID deaths' statistically, they are deaths that are caused by COVID.
Same as the way they statistically record flu deaths.
Mandatory Vaccinations And Medical Exemptions
- Thread starter Goosecat
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Yes they have.
When recording 'COVID deaths' statistically, they are deaths that are caused by COVID.
Same as the way they statistically record flu deaths.
Yes some very smart people think that COVID deaths are inflated so that the pandemic seems worse than it is, which can be used by the lizard government/New World Order/Dan Andrews/CCCP to take over the world.
"But for covid infection, would they have died today?"
Thats the question. The only important question.....
And just so we are clear...not one person in Australia would have "Covid" written on the death cert as the cause of death.....The cause of death is what they died from THAT day, such as ARDS, pneumonia, cardiac arrest for example. Everything else that contributed to the death is listed as an antecedent. People dont die of "covid", they die from the complications of covid....
So: person admitted to hospital with resp. distress. Found to be covid pos. Past Hx of copd. Dies 2 days later of pneumonia.
Death cert would be: COD: Pneumonia.
Antecedents: Covid, COPD and likely smoking.
"But for covid, would they have died today?".....
"A COVID-19 death is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID-19 disease (e.g. trauma). There should be no period of complete recovery between the illness and death."
Thanks for this post. Clarifies what I thought would be the case.
I had seen people use what I assumed was a bit of a ridiculous argument along the line of 'car crash victim is found to have covid, this is being recorded as a covid death and inflating the statistics!'... Now I'm more sure that it's a ridiculous argument.
I'm not convinced it makes much difference except in terms of personal risk acceptance. If these people didn't get Covid they wouldn't have died, so they died from covid. But equally the vast majority that atent old or have underlying health issues won't die with covid. Simple fact is that without the extra risk factors, you're much, much less likely to die.
Those people just like to be pot stirrers, but dont actually have a clue about how its all actually done.
This is a good summary: https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1205.0.55.001
"The new coronavirus strain (COVID-19) should be recorded on the medical cause of death certificate for ALL decedents where the disease caused, or is assumed to have caused, or contributed to death".
This is literally like every death cert. i have ever written: What they died from, what lead up to that death, and then other conditions....
"But for covid, would they have died today?"
And those risk factors associated with covid deaths, come straight from the death certs and hospital coding......
Hypertension is a major risk factor. What do you think the prevalence of HTN in Australia is??
In addition to this, the prevalence is the people who know they have it...many more dont...
Isn't that what kingswood71 is saying. Covid isn't listed on a death certificate so where are the figures coming from? I don't know know the answer, but my only assumption is that it is anyone diagnosed with covid, whether they were covid positive with no symptoms and had a heart attack or if they actually died of a lung issue caused by covid. I'd love someone to provide more insight as my only inference is that it's just anyone who is covid positive.
I know the UK data states that a covid death is "anyone who tested positive for covid within the last 28 days" which is a ludicrous position to take.
Kingswood can probably explain it better but from a simplistic perspective:
The patient's cause of death may be recorded on their certificate as pneumonia, but if that is due to the presence of covid then that would be included as a covid death. If the person's cause of death was from physical trauma in a car accident, for instance, and they were found to have covid, it wouldn't be included as a covid death.
So... The question that decides whether they are included in the covid stats is... Would they have died if they didn't have covid?
Nope mate...Covid would be listed on the death cert if someone died of a condition that covid directly lead to...for example ARDS, Pneumonia...
The actual cod is what they died from, Covid would be listed as an antecedent cause if it indeed was. So if someone is admitted with covid, ends up in icu, develops ARDS and dies, cod is ARDS, covid as an antecedent.
see the link i posted earlier, that explains it also
RedV3x
It's about time some mods started being fair
Like the word "soccer" - from official word to an embarrassment connotations.
And just to make it clearer....
No one dies from "influenza" either...
If a patient is admitted unwell, tests positive to influenza and dies from viral pneumonia, the cod would be viral pneumonia with influenza as an antecedent.
No one dies from "influenza" either...
If a patient is admitted unwell, tests positive to influenza and dies from viral pneumonia, the cod would be viral pneumonia with influenza as an antecedent.
- Mar 20, 2009
- 14,393
- 16,743
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
- Other Teams
- Jacksonville
- Banned
- #3,640
Is pneumonia common in covid positive cases?
Depends what you mean by "common"?
Average non-admitted covid case? not always.
Admitted patients, yes common
- Mar 20, 2009
- 14,393
- 16,743
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
- Other Teams
- Jacksonville
- Banned
- #3,642
Yeah I had it, was just wondering how common it actually is from another perspective
- Jun 16, 2018
- 8,809
- 15,797
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Does she do the trials herself? Be honest.
- Jun 16, 2018
- 8,809
- 15,797
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
I believe 'scientists' do whatever they are paid to do.
They're not some saintly class of people.
They do what they are paid to do.
- Jun 16, 2018
- 8,809
- 15,797
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Do hospitals get more funding for covid patients?
Pfizer fine 'should act as deterrent'
The world's biggest drug maker has been fined a record amount by US regulators for fraudulent marketing.
www.abc.net.au
Have you got anything from the past, say, twenty years?
5% hospitalisation rate is a good indicator still.
No one here is claiming that they are a saintly class of people. You've added that in yourself for whatever reason you see fit.
So, if they are paid to develop chemicals to treat a particular condition, then you believe that's what they are doing?
If they are paid to test the effectiveness/safety of a chemical that's been developed to treat a particular condition, then you believe that's what they are doing?
I may be incorrect here, so apologies if I am, but it feels from your posting that this is not what you believe they are doing.
- Jun 16, 2018
- 8,809
- 15,797
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
'If', 'if'.
I'm not sure. Maybe you could find the data on that and come back to me. In any case, do you think hospitals all over the world have decided to universally fudge their covid results to increase their funding?
Pfizer fine 'should act as deterrent'
The world's biggest drug maker has been fined a record amount by US regulators for fraudulent marketing.
You haven't quoted my entire sentence in the lead to your reply, which is a little deceptive. I asked, "Can you give me an example of a pharmaceutical company that should have gone out of business based on failing products?". This is not for failing products, this is for deceptive practice. I'm not excusing them for this at all as it is shocking behaviour for which they were duly punished for, but it is not an example I was asking for.
Before I do more work for you (still waiting on the research I originally asked for, btw), can you comment on the article I provided. I explained it was old but explained it's relevance to the discussion.
OK. Can you show me evidence that points to this not being the case?
