]
If there are no numbers or analysis that can be trusted, then we have only relativism . . . .
Show me the numbers or analysis that proves a substantially lower death rate from a reputable source.
On our massive Covid thread, from late May until July, posters persistently pointed to the sharply falling numbers especially of deaths from JHU. Now with the reported increases the numbers are worthless . . . .?
Congrats on the realization that we "only have relativism." That part of my work here is done.
See if you can follow to the next logical step.
-No one has enough specific data about the deaths to say anything meaningful-
This is purposeful. It was started with the change to flu reporting protocols where they began to list as flu deaths those that didn't die OF THE FLU, but were merely diagnosed with or supposed to have had it. They could have died tomorrow of cancer, heart failure, or natural causes (old age), but if they died today with a runny nose or other flu symptoms, they could be counted as a flu death. If they had the flu virus in their system, they could be counted as a flu death.
Weird thing is which older folks DON'T have the flu virus in their system, since most of them, especially in long term care facilities, get it injected once each year?
Why did they change how flu deaths were counted?
The naive might say "to protect people" since they'd try to be healthier. The wise would understand it was done to sell more flu vaccine. (Why do you think Eastmann/Kodak just got into the vaccine buisness?)
So this is put in a sports-related understanding-
If you wanted to make QBs look better, you'd credit them with all of the passing yards with which they were involved. In truth, the real work is done by the OL and those receiving the ball. If the QB had neither, they'd have no stats but what they earned on the ground on their own.
As it is now- We don't have enough detailed stats to tell the whole story of whether or not a QB is more effective than another from just a single game or season comparison, unless we also add in wins and losses of the team, total yards (rushing yards, too), and watch the performances.
What the new protocols have done, relatively speaking, is credit the QB with the rushing yards gained by the rest of the team AND the defense's ability to limit the opponent's offense. They do this by inserting "flu related" into the equation (the rushing yards where the QB took the snap or called the play), AND flu "suspected" where someone was clearly dying of something else and only symptoms were present but flu was not detected (where the defense gave the QB more snaps by taking the ball away quicker, though the QB had no direct involvement. IOW someone or something else did all the work and the QB just capitalized on it).
I hope the illustration helps people understand what they've done to manipulate the data to sell shots that they've never proven are effective. All they have is correlation, as they've never done any studies as to safety nor effectiveness.