Flu and Pneumonia Now Deaths Exceed Epidemic Levels

May 1, 2020 Hunter Wallace Health 11

It is difficult to keep up with the epidemic of sophistry, lies and disinformation coming from conservatives, libertarians and conspiracy theorists about COVID-19, but last month one of the major talking points was the drop in pneumonia deaths due to a normal reporting lag.

CDC:

Now, the CDC is reporting a huge spike in pneumonia deaths over the past five weeks which haven’t been counted as COVID-19 deaths in the official death toll.

If memory serves, here is a short list of deaths that haven’t been counted as COVID-19 deaths:

  • Presumed positive deaths outside of New York City, which is to say, a patient who dies under the care of a doctor with all the symptoms of COVID-19, but doesn’t have a positive confirmed test result.
  • People who have died at home without a confirmed positive test result.
  • People who have died in nursing homes.
  • Flu and pneumonia deaths without a confirmed positive test result.
  • Excess deaths which are above historical norms, but which haven’t been attributed to COVID-19.

The official death toll is overwhelmingly people who died in hospitals with a confirmed positive test result for COVID-19.

When conservatives and libertarians say that COVID-19 deaths are due to comorbidities and say, well, the CDC says that people with a confirmed positive test who die with coronavirus should be counted as a COVID-19 death to inflate the numbers, they are trying to disingenuously dismiss people who might be elderly or overweight or who have diabetes, but who die of severe double pneumonia which is totally unrelated to their underlying conditions as having somehow not died from COVID-19.

About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

11 Comments

  4. I’ll point out for–What? The third time, Mr. W?–that you presented, a week or so ago, a piece about the supposed number of total deaths above average. That’s the only number that counts. It doesn’t matter how many deaths within the usual number of deaths you think might be attributable to Covid.

  5. One thing. The US will recognized Taiwan as a result of this plague. Just to goad the Chinese into something dumb.

  6. Hunter, could you please comment on this….

    In my opinion, this outrage and protests are no different than the outrage and protests over indoor smoking bans.

    I am a non-smoker, and a boomer. I vividly remember flying coast to coast in the mid 1970s and 80% of everyone on the aircraft was smoking non-stop; chain smoking. I was sick when I arrived at my destination, smelling like someone’s ashtray.

    When smoking bans went into effect, I cheered, because for the first time I could fly, or go into a bar and have a margarita without being forced to inhale other people’s disgusting smoke.

    Smokers, of course, were enraged. There were angry protests, threats against elected officials, etc.

    Their argument to me and other non-smokers was, “Go to Hell.” “We have the absolute right to smoke in bars, restaurants, and on airplanes. If you don’t like smoke, then don’t fly, or go to a bar, or eat out at a restaurant.”

    So how are “Lockdowns” and requiring people to wear masks in public any different?

    If it is “overreach” by government, or “oppression” then what are indoor smoking bans?

    If Government has no right to make people wear masks in Walmart, then how can they enforce smoking bans? Both: are public health measures designed to protect the MAJORITY of people: not a handful of smokers or gun-toting, protesting “patriots” who want to “open up” and “business as usual” in the midst of a lethal pandemic.

    Your thoughts please?

    • I think the analogy breaks down on some levels, public smoking bans don’t throw people out of work for instance, but it’s a similar idea. Modern Americans do not even know what liberty is, to say nothing of the obligations that come with sustaining it. Classical republicanism, which sees liberty as a tool for the common good, was replaced with liberalism, which sees liberty as license, or the absence of all social constraint. This destroys liberty, and security, as we are finding out now.

    • Their argument to me and other non-smokers was, “Go to Hell.” “We have the absolute right to smoke in bars, restaurants, and on airplanes. If you don’t like smoke, then don’t fly, or go to a bar, or eat out at a restaurant.”

      It wasn’t so much an “argument” as it was the general preference people have for doing what they’ve always done. Changes annoy them.

      I was a smoker back then (more of a weekend warrior really), and I was initially bummed that I could no longer smoke in clubs and bars, but I really had no argument against it except to say that these specific venues were a “natural” fit for smoking, so in them it was the non-smokers who would have to make to else stay away. That was just halfhearted attempt to salvage the situation rather than an iron conviction.

      I think I also had a bias towards defending existing practices because my parents were non-smokers but they used to let visitors smoke in the house. I hated it, but their reasoning was it would be rude to ask them not to. I guess I felt like if I could put up with it, so can everyone else.

      If it is “overreach” by government, or “oppression” then what are indoor smoking bans?

      Intellectual libertarians would point out that “your right to swing your fists stops where my nose starts.” In other words, bothering people with your smoke is a form of “initiating violence.” And they’re not wrong. But the average person who gets excited about libertarian “muh freedom” views without really getting into the philosophical nitty-gritty just hates the idea of anyone — cops, bosses, judges — telling him what he can and can’t do period.

      Well tough luck for them, because government, when you get down to it, is ALL ABOUT making people do what they otherwise wouldn’t or preventing them from doing what they otherwise would.

    • I loathe fale equivalencies. Bans on public smoking, especially in enclosed spaces like an airplane cabin, improves public health. As Hugh noted – a ban on public smoking doesn’t throw millions of people out of work It doesn’t crush the food supply. It doesn’t force people to stay inside, and make infection rates WORSE. A public smoking ban doesn’t set a horde of badge fags to harass and abuse honest citizens going to the beach, or taking their children to a playground, It doesn’t cause Governors to become deranges, and grant themselves MASSIVE powers which they have no right to take, and abuse the liberties and lives of AMERICAN CITIZENS. A smoking ban doesn’t babble about enforced vaccines and needing an official Government-issued license to go to work, shop, or go outside.

      So LIE TELLER – since a fair number of Commentors seem to be exceptionally THICK – those masks HURST health. YOU KEEP RE-BREATHING THE PARTICLES THAT YOUR BODY IS TRYING TO EXPEL. Get it, DUMMY? You are inhibiting the intake of oxygen you need, and suppressing your immune system DUMMY.

      • So LIE TELLER – since a fair number of Commentors seem to be exceptionally THICK – those masks HURST health. YOU KEEP RE-BREATHING THE PARTICLES THAT YOUR BODY IS TRYING TO EXPEL. Get it, DUMMY? You are inhibiting the intake of oxygen you need, and suppressing your immune system DUMMY.

        Thank you Denise for clarifying again that the silly masks not only don’t protect you from viruses – since they do not properly seal – but, more importantly, you really do re-breath in all the junk your lungs are indeed trying to expel.

  7. Pretty sure the headline should read “Deaths Now” instead of “Now Deaths.” No need to publish this comment.

Comments are closed.