- The coronavirus was reported as the primary cause of death when it was a co-factor to mortality in most cases.
- How the deaths from Covid 19 were exaggerated
The reporting of covid deaths has been irresponsible in that covid has been reported as the primary cause of death. In nearly all cases, covid has been one of many contributors to a person’s death.
Our References for This Article
If you want to see our references for this article and related Brightwork articles, visit this link.
How Have Covid Deaths Been Reported?
This is explained well at the end of the following video, which covers the reporting of the death of Colin Powell.
In the coverage of the death of Colin Powell, covid was the only reported reason for his death. As explained in this video, the important factors leading to Powell’s death are the following.
- Powell was 84 years old. The average US male currently lives to be 79 years of age.
- Powell had lethal blood cancer.
- Powell had Parkinson’s.
- Powell was fully vaccinated. (Why did the media leave this point out — if he had not been vaccinated, think of the likelihood that this would not have been mentioned)
One should ask why the media did not list or explain these other factors.
Other important factors in the video are that only 5% of deaths related to covid (reported as covid deaths in the media and at sites like World Health) are covid the only cause of death.
The Overstatement of the Mortality in Sweden from Covid
The following is from a book by a doctor in Sweden, Dr. Sebastian Rushworth, titled Why Most of What You Know About Covid is Wrong.
As mentioned in the previous chapter, average mortality in Sweden in 2020 was only 5% higher than the average for the preceding five years after correcting for population size. We can clarify this difference by presenting it another way. In 2020 95% of Sweden’s population died which is less than one in 100 people. The average for the preceding five years is point 90 this point 90%. So the supposedly very dangerous pandemic resulted in the share of the population dying increasing from point nine D percent to point 95%. To me, this is clear evidence and COVID-19 is nowhere near as deadly as presented in the mainstream media.
Analysis by Professor John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist at Stanford University with his estimate of the COVID death rate. This analysis was based on zero prevalence data, ie data on how many people were shown to have antibodies of COVID in their bloodstream at different times in different countries, which was correlated with the number of deaths in those countries, through this analysis the professor reached the conclusion that the COVID has an overall overall mortality rate of one in 434 infected people (.2%) would die of the disease. For people under the age of 70, the mortality rate was estimated at .05%. In other words, one in 2000, infected people under the age of 70 would die from the disease.
This is an excellent time to point out that this analysis is not very difficult. It is just looking at deaths by different age cohorts.
I performed this analysis back in April of 2020, and this analysis is published in the article What Who is Dying from the Coronavirus Tells Us. However, governments or even the public have significantly been reluctant to perform this type of analysis throughout the pandemic instead of generalizing the coronavirus deaths to “everyone.” The media jumped on cases where the person was supposedly healthy as evidence that “anyone can die of coronavirus” and stigmatized people that noticed the strong correlation between those already sick with coronavirus deaths as irresponsible.
This same phenomenon occurred during the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s. The data showed that the virus was highly concentrated in the male gay community (due to engaging in anal sex) and IV drug users (due to sharing needles). There is now a lot of question about whether both groups ran down their immune systems with their lifestyle. It turns out that many gay men used the party drug called “poppers,” which is highly detrimental to the immune system. There has never been any evidence presented that a virus causes AIDS.
However, for whatever reason, those were the primary risk groups.
The most effective strategy for combating AIDS would have been to concentrate on those groups, and there was no counterargument to this conclusion.
However, the US policy at that time took the opposite approach, choosing instead to scare heterosexual non-IV drug users into taking precautions with false claims of AIDS risk because “anyone can get AIDS.”
People making this claim never checked the reality of transmission through this pathway.
- First, the percentage of bisexual men is tiny.
- Second, the ability of AIDS to transmit through vaginal intercourse is minimal. Even the ultimate hypothetical scare case, where a bisexual man comes home after a secret gay encounter and gives his wife AIDS through vaginal intercourse, is also not a primary means of transmission of the virus. This analysis was well laid out in the book Innumeracy by John Allen Paulos.
I relayed John Allen Paulos’ analysis of AIDS back in the mid-90s, and I was told that what I was saying was disgusting and irresponsible — and the people telling me this was a Ph.D. candidate in the sciences.
Obedience Training and a Social Control Technology
The video points out that much of the pushing for vaccines and record-keeping is about bringing around technology and social control, which is similar to China’s social credit system. This begins with whether the individual complies with vaccinations. Still, later, the social control technology can be extended to other items, for instance, agreeing with the government or believing politically correct ideas. Max Blumenthal proposes this is a type of obedience training.
But while it’s vital that public health officials know exactly who is dying, it’s also important that the public understand the reality of this pandemic. Misinformation can have serious consequences. Unfortunately, despite the removal of damaging Facebook posts and tweets, a growing number of people question the necessity of wearing masks, maintaining social distancing measures, and restricting businesses and schools. Viral posts claiming “only 9,000” Americans have really died from Covid-19 only fuel this vocal minority — especially when promoted by the president himself.
As I cover in the article How Effective Are Masks in Reducing the Spread of the Coronavirus, masks have very low effectiveness in reducing the spread of coronavirus, and the lockdowns have increased rather than decreased mortality. How did NBC come to the conclusion that masks are effective against vaccines because masks do not have a history of being employed against viruses? For example, we don’t implore those with colds to wear masks or those around people with colds to wear masks.
This is a rather typical article from the establishment media on coronavirus. There is very little evidence supporting the strong claims, no real analysis, browbeating, shaming language, calls for censorship, and categorizing any information they disagree with as either a conspiracy theory or misinformation.