Well this isn’t what Joes Place has been saying…..’COVID deaths overcounted’
- Thread starter Gus is dead
- Start date
See my above post. It's a tired question that at this point is more about trying to win some political points than actually having an interest in the
most accurate data.
Who argued against accurate data?
Assumptions?
Then maybe refrain from commenting. Just a suggestion.
It’s a good article with solid points from someone that has been fair I think this whole time in her analysis. Maybe not in agreement with mine initially but you can certainly say she seems to be calling balls and strikes.
And way more cred than our self esteemed colleague @Joes Place.
I think your analysis is starting to appear clouded by politics. Normally you seem pretty fair in your medical opinions prior but lately…I dunno. You refrain from agreeing with facts that bolster the other side when I know you know better, then chime in guns a blazing criticizing and author’s credentials that you clearly didn’t investigate. I don’t harbor any ill will at all. I’m sure you’re a good guy, but as a physician more is expected.
Then maybe refrain from commenting. Just a suggestion.
It’s a good article with solid points from someone that has been fair I think this whole time in her analysis. Maybe not in agreement with mine initially but you can certainly say she seems to be calling balls and strikes.
And way more cred than our self esteemed colleague @Joes Place.
I think your analysis is starting to appear clouded by politics. Normally you seem pretty fair in your medical opinions prior but lately…I dunno. You refrain from agreeing with facts that bolster the other side when I know you know better, then chime in guns a blazing criticizing and author’s credentials that you clearly didn’t investigate. I don’t harbor any ill will at all. I’m sure you’re a good guy, but as a physician more is expected.
It isn’t even a pay wall. It’s a ‘provide your email’ wall. I read it. Didn’t cost me a cent.
A lot of data is coming out now, for whatever reason, that contradicts the efficacy and safety data that we were originally told. You seem to be invested in the early data and ignoring more recent data. Perhaps you should be following the science instead of lecturing others who actually are.
A couple comments. U.S hospitals raked in billions in supplemental payments if an inpatient tested positive for Covid so there’s clearly an incentive to diagnose it. Nothing additional if they died. In my experience, death certificates are frequently done in a haphazard fashion with no clear guidelines, leaving plenty of leeway when filling one out. It seems clear that Covid deaths were over reported, possibly substantially, and for those clamoring for more science, one has to ask why the science hasn’t been done? It wouldn’t be complicated to assess this. Pretty clear an investigator is risking repercussions in many institutions if he/she pursues this question.
I think it is important to recognize the difference between the vaccine in Jan 21 vs today.
Delta was very deadly and Large numbers were seriously ill due to delta. The vaccine reduced the risk of death significantly with delta.
Fast forward to today. The dominant strains are not causing servere disease like delta did. the vaccine does not prevent infection, nor does it prevent spread. So we have to ask ourselves, what does the vaccine actually do.
Last time I looked, phizer and Moderna have not released their age stratified data so we would actually know who is is the most risk and who benefits the most from the vaccine. I still have no idea how they apply a broad vaccine recommendation when the risk of serious illness and death is so low for young people.
You've repeatedly tried to apply current data from current variants to early recommendations from the prior variants in an attempt to paint healthcare experts as liars. It's political for you. Nothing more.
Death certificates are kind of a weird thing. One of the docs I worked with is a pulmonary specialist. One of his patients died in a local ED. This was a high risk patient with increased risk for death but the death was unexpected. The local ED refused to sign the death certificate. So the family asked our doc to sign. Our doctor was reluctant to sign because he hadn't examined the patient and only has some sparse notes to go on. He eventually he relentless because the family couldn't proceed with mortuary services until it was signed. Apparently a lot of times PCPs will sign death certificates even though they weren't involved in the care at the time of death.
PCPs often are the ones stuck doing them. I have no idea why ER providers (frankly anyone in the hospital setting) don't have to do them. They're certainly an inexact item.
A patient comes in with covid, has a history of diabetes, CAD. Subsequently gets quite sick, ends up on high flow oxygen. Very slow to improve and develops a secondary bacterial pneumonia. Also is then diagnosed with a pulmonary embolism (a known complication of covid). Also developed heart failure from the stress and needs diuresis. But that is limited from the kidney failure that develops Eventually the patient continues to decline and goes comfort measures. They pass away.
This is a very common scenario amongst those who got very sick and died. So what's the immediate cause of death? Respiratory failure? Covid? Blood clot? Bacterial pneumonia? Heart failure? Renal failure? I would argue covid set off the whole thing so that's what I filled out.
Last edited:
Or, you could just review actual scientific papers, and avoid the unsubstantiated Op Eds...
Hospitals were paid more to care for covid patients because they cost more to take care of. Even if they weren't very sick or incidentally positive when coming in with something else, it still required gowns, gloves, eyewear/face shield every time someone went in the room. And the people who were sick with it had much longer hospital stays than the average viral illness. Increased LOS has a lot of downstream effects for a hospital.
No, there really aren't.
If there were, they'd be routinely pointed out in medical journals as "treatments".
But that's the logic here.
You put "Covid" on the death certificate, and you get a pay bonus, or something...
Right? People claiming "remdesivir doesn't work" and it not recommended by WHO, when you can go directly to WHO's and NIH's sites and see that it is still a medication listed as effective against the virus.
Total clowns here that deny facts....
This is a good point. These is not always a clear single reason for admission or death. The final determination is up to the discretion of the provider.
I will add, I dont know any providers who added covid just to increase payments for the hospital. In my experience, most providers do what they think is best. Hospital administrators on the other hand frequently push for the diagnosis that pays better.
Didn't expect you to understand the Op Ed, which mostly refers to "hospitalizations" and does not address the US excess deaths rates, if Covid is not the culprit.
And this is EXACTLY the point. Covid DOES exacerbate many conditions and co-morbidities. Which is WHY it is listed as a cause of death on death certificates, when one of the string of causes is directly known to be an outcome from Covid.
Could some of them be "coincidence"? Maybe. But the better bet is that Covid made the condition worse and led to the death.
Every time I point out that Covid deaths are 3x-10x (and >30x) higher than influenza deaths across most all demographics, people either get pissypants, or they ignore that data.
Those data are telling us something, and that something is that Covid is still a serious disease for the unvaccinated, and for those at-risk.
Those "solid points" are primarily aimed at "hospitalizations" 'with Covid' being overstated. Which I'm sure is the case.
The article provides almost NO evidence that Covid deaths are being overcounted. And if they are, they are not by nearly as much as is being implied.
If Covid deaths were being overcounted, we would not still be seeing high deaths rates in the US. We'd be seeing fewer deaths from "other causes", which simply has not been the case here.
And, FWIW, one of the nations with the highest vaccination rates (including young people) is Sweden, and their deaths rates are running "low" in 2022. Which would imply those extra vaccine doses are protecting their population......from Covid, not "flu".
Same people:
“Covid deaths are over counted”
And
“Everyone dying age 0-70 from heart attacks is due to the COVID vaccine”
“Covid deaths are over counted”
And
“Everyone dying age 0-70 from heart attacks is due to the COVID vaccine”
Somehow, the genes in the Swedish population are immune from those "Covid vaccine adverse events"....
Weird.
It’s well documented that hospitals profits skyrocketed during COVID despite having to buy more gowns and masks, limiting elective procedures and surgeries, etc. What are the downstream effects of increased LOS for a hospital? They don’t make money when beds are empty.
WTAF????
Elective procedures and surgeries are what they make much of their revenues off of!!!!
Good lord this is dumb.
Most hospitals across the country are in serious financial situations because of covid. They're still trying to climb out of the financial hole.
Increased LOS means less turnover, less patients. When the hospital is full, that means it's going to take longer for a bed to open up for an admitted patient who's still camping out in the ER. That means the ER has less beds to work with. Less patients, longer wait times.
Hospitals are not paid by the day. They're paid based on the diagnosis codes. An admission for respiratory failure with pneumonia is expected to discharge in x number of days and cost Y to care for so they will reimburse Z amount. If they are there longer than that, the hospital isn't making any more money.
You make a good point here, covid does exacerbate some conditions. During the Delta wave, if you had heart failure, or kidney failure, you were at extremely high risk of severe illness or death.
That is not the case with current strains. this is why the hospitalized patients with covid don't mean much. We can't tell from those statistics if covid is actually exacerbating other conditions, or if covid is an incidental finding.
Saw this happen many times. A provider minimally involved in the patients care reluctantly signs it.
Some truth there, but it’s political for many on both sides of this. The announcement of vaccine efficacy and its release was slow played until after the election for obvious reasons. Both Biden and Harris raised doubts about vaccine safety before the election, then changed their tune after. Vaccine skepticism grew because of the continued efforts of government, industry, and now we know , their partners in social media to control and limit the flow of information to the public. That’s my opinion and everyone is welcome to theirs. I made a decision to get vaxed and boosted once based on available data and now I’m done short of some compelling new data. Unfortunately the corruption of science is ongoing. It was there even back in the 80’s when I was a researcher, but it’s at a different level now
Not as bad, that's certainly correct.
But those risks still exist with the current strains. Still more dangerous than influenza, but not nearly as bad as the Delta strain. Trend since Omicron has been less severe, but still more infectious which can still result in high numbers of serious illness and death, just based on how fast it can spread.
No. They did not.
They raised doubts IF the recommendations of FDA and review bodies were over-ruled by the Executive Branch to "release a vaccine before election day".
That did not happen, but it was a viable concern.
No. Vaccine skepticism grew because of rightwing media pundits badmouthing it, while pushing useless medications like ivermectin and HCQ.
And MOST of those mainstream pundits were fully vaccinated, themselves.
How do you know covid is more dangerous than influenza? I posted an article earlier showing that covid and influenza had similar outcomes for kids. So what are you basing these assumptions on?
Delta was more dangerous, but not onicron on.
I assure you, it's reluctant. The vitals recording system is the worst piece of software I've ever had the displeasure of working with. I hate filling them out because it's so cumbersome.
It has killed 3x more young kids than influenza did this year.
And that's the lowest ratio among all demographics. 10x more infants <1 year.
That can be due to either being more virulent (more deadly) OR being similar in virulence and just spreading and infecting many more people.
Did you already forget what has been previously discussed in this thread?
The data you are using for these numbers is flawed. Therefore it is impossible to make accurate assumptions from flawed data.
