please check out the anti-mandate news »

« prev   random   next »



By WillPowers follow WillPowers   2020 Dec 5, 11:40am 438 views   3 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share      

Dec 5, 2020

FROM an article by Dr. Joseph P. Farrell on Giza Death Star (doctorate in patristics)

In an “study by “'Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master's degree program at Hopkins,’ that ‘crunched the numbers’ relating to covid--19 deaths in the USA. She came to ‘certain conclusions’ that were” countervailing to the current dominant narrative. For that reason it was “within a matter of a few days, Johns Hopkins had deleted the study, taken it down, and offered ‘reasons’ for doing so. Here's one article describing its ‘reasons’”:

“We decided on Nov. 26 to retract this article to stop the spread of misinformation, as we noted on social media. However, it is our responsibility as journalists to provide a historical record. We have chosen to take down the article from our website, but it is available” HERE:

SEE reasons for DELETING the STUDY:

“In accordance with our standards for transparency, we are sharing with our readers how we came to this decision. The News-Letter is an editorially and financially independent, student-run publication. Our articles and content are not endorsed by the University or the School of Medicine, and our decision to retract this article was made independently.”

So they are using fallacious reasoning to say because the publication is run by students it couldn’t have any merit. However, as Mr. Farrell notes, “the Newsletter itself states that it has been a publication of the Johns Hopkins' student association ‘since 1896.’ To my mind, that makes the original publication even more, not less, interesting, because it means that at least one student at that institution, namely Ms. Briand herself, was not asleep, and was simply following the numbers, and doing what any rational and reasonable person would do when examining them: ‘doubting the narrative’”.

I urge everyone to look at the original study because it is quite revealing about how the number of COVID-19 numbers are fudged, particularly for the older population, which the pandemic is supposed to effect in the greatest numbers, but the original study reveals quite the opposite.

According to new data the U.S. currently ranks first in total COVID-19 cases, new cases per day and deaths. Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Hopkins, critically analyzed the effect of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in her webinar titled “COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data.”

From mid-March to mid-September, U.S. total deaths have reached 1.7 million, of which 200,000 or 12% of total death, are COVID-19 related. Instead of looking directly at COVID-19 deaths, Briand focused on total deaths per are group and per cause of death in the U.S. and used this information to shed light on the effects of COVID-19.


After retrieving data on the CDC website, Briand compiled a graph representing percentages of total death per age category from early February to early September, which includes the period from before COVID-19 was detected in the U.S. to after infection rates soared.

Surprisingly, the death of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in oldeder age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.

“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” Briand said.

Briand also noted that 50,000 to 70,000 deaths are seen both before and agter COVID-19 indicating that this number of deaths was normal long before COVID-19 emerged. Therefore, according Briand, not only has COVID-19 had no effect on the percentage of deaths of older people, but it has also not increased the total number of deaths.

SKIPPING ONE PARAGRAPH: Briand asks the question: “How is it that the data lie so far from our perception” that the disease effects the older population in greater numbers?

To answer that question, Briand shifted her focus to the deaths per causes ranging from 2014 to 2020. There is a sudden increase in deaths in 2020 due to COVID-19. This is no surprise because COVID-19-related deaths increased drastically afterward.

Analysis of deaths per cause in 2018 revealed that the pattern of seasonal increase in the total number of death is a result of the rise in deaths by all causes, with the top three being heart disease, respiratory disease, influenza and pneumonia.

SKIPPING TO AS Briand says, “This is true every year.” So nothing strange there, BUT:

When Briand looked at the 2020 data during that seasonal period, COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases. This was highly unusual since heart disease has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths. However, when taking a closer look at the death numbers, she noted something strange. As Briand compared the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to 2018, she noticed that instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising, as seen in the graph below, this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes.



The CDC classified all deaths that are related to COVID-19 simply as COVID-19 deaths. Even patients dying from other underlying diseases but are infected with COVID-19 deaths. This is likely the main explanation as to why COVID-19 deaths drastically increased while deaths by all other diseases experienced a significant decrease.
“All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary,” Briand concluded.

As Mr. Farrell points out the numbers are being “doctored” to raise the number of COVID-19 deaths and put the FEAR into people for political reasons, so the Democrats could criticize Trump for the way he handled the outbreak, as the Democrats did in the 2020 election cycle.

“The bottom line is,” Mr. Farrell concludes, “graph correlations do not prove manipulation of numbers (in either case), but they do give a reasonable basis to conclude that there may be a correlation, and that reasonable rational people are right to be suspicious.”

SEE full article HERE:

Johns Hopkins study:
1   Onvacation   ignore (7)   2020 Dec 5, 3:03pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

WillPowers says
reasonable rational people are right to be suspicious.”

Not many of us left.
2   Fortwaynemobile   ignore (3)   2020 Dec 5, 6:03pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Onvacation says
WillPowers says
reasonable rational people are right to be suspicious.”

Not many of us left.

Media and tech work hard to make sure of that
3   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2020 Dec 7, 12:35pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

This is how it works: if a little bit of the truth gets out there, then the forces that be cover it up as soon as possible.

about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions