- Were we not lead to believe we were preventing above average death rates
- Where is the sting?
It is OK to be gobsmacked, confounded, dumbfounded and maybe more than a little ticked off by this revelation at Gateway Pundit forwarded to us by DK:
This Is Strange: Total US Deaths in March 2020 are Actually Down 15% from Average of Prior Four Years
According to data obtained from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Surveillance System website, total U.S. deaths for the first three weeks of March are DOWN 10% from the average of the prior four years for the same three week period.
The average for weeks 9 through 11 for the four prior years was a total of 170,555 deaths. For weeks 9 through 11 this year, the total is 153,015, meaning 17,540 fewer people died in America during the first three weeks of March than could be reasonably expected. And the gap between historic deaths and weekly deaths is widening. For week 11, just 47,655 Americans died, 8,773 and 15% fewer than the average for week 11 in the prior four years. And while data on week 12 is not complete, it is trending similar to week 11 and will likely be down by 15% (around 8,700 deaths less than expected) even though 1,919 COVID-19 deaths were reported (in week beginning 3/22).
Now after deaths for the entire month of March are reported, the results show that deaths in the US this March are 15% less than the average of the past four years!
IN MARCH OF 2020 THERE WERE 34,000 (rounded) LESS DEATHS THAN THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF DEATHS IN THE US OVER THE FOUR YEARS PRIOR!
According to the CDC’s website, in March 2020 there were a total of 193,000 deaths in the US. The average number of deaths in the US for March over the four years prior to 2020 (2016 – 2019) is 227,000. The difference between this year and the average for the past four years is 34,000. 2020 deaths are 85% of the average of the prior four years.
The article Gateway Pundit references also relates anecdotal information from doctors as to “where are all the heart-attack cases/ admissions“?
VeritasPAC observes that sure, if most of the country is locked down, there will be less deaths from accidents at work (no one is working) less traffic deaths and indeed maybe less disease of various sort spread! But the statistics reveal the hysteria if not lies about the extent of the “pandemic”. There is a death rate in this country and every country and the concern should be focused on stopping increases but if we have to stop the economy in order to do so, well what is the use, as the economy is the lifeblood of all.
Iatrogenic deaths attributable to the public health experts and political leadership will go up if the economy is permanently damaged or the wrong lessons learned. Those won’t be counted as Wuhan deaths but they should be counted as public health deaths. They will arise due to the forgone doctors visits we see in play now, despondency from lack of work or loss of home or retirement, devaluation of money requiring people to work more or longer in order to make ends meet, lack of resources to bailout the next “pandemic” due to a reversed economy, less resources for research . . . more alcoholism and drugs . . . a malaise the likes of which Jimmy Carter could not pretend to fathom.
In all of this there may be some appropriate best practices and preparations to be established . . . but no more stopping the economy for every respiratory virus threat of this sort.
Now moving on to an article by Christopher A. Ferrara writing at The Remnant. Excerpted here via LifeSite News which reprinted it. Bold our emphasis, the entire article is worthy. Ferrara excoriates the public health “experts” we are relying on.
Numbers don’t line up: Case for panicking over coronavirus is falling apart
It is becoming increasingly clear that “mitigation” has done nothing but cause a pointless, catastrophic disruption of social and economic life.
To sum up where we stand today, April 6: Based on the pretext that we must “limit the spread” of the Wuhan virus, the American economic boom of the past three years has been reversed in a matter of days, millions have lost their jobs, tens of thousands of small businesses have been shuttered and will probably never reopen, and three-quarters of the American population has been subjected to some form of house arrest by state, county and city governments.
All over the country people are being fined or arrested and jailed for violating suddenly imposed restrictions on their every movement and gathering, often with the aid of their neighbors, who turn them in to the police, following instructions on how to be a snitch. Attendance at religious services has been forbidden altogether or limited to ten people, even in vast cathedrals, while “permission” is granted to crowd supermarkets and convenience stores, buy booze, purchase cannabis and have pets groomed.
. . .
America’s almost instantaneous transformation into a police state is based on “models” that “predicted” upwards of 2 million deaths from the Wuhan virus without “mitigation” in the form of a preposterous attempt to quarantine 330 million people. And the people have obsequiously bowed to every ridiculous command.
. . .
White House press briefings that have fueled nationwide panic. Tony and Deb have since revised their “models” downward to predict 40,000 to 178,000 deaths. And that prediction has already been lowered again as the IMHE model Tony and Deb have been touting during the briefings now “predicts” 81,766 deaths by August 4. That prediction would require some 18,000 people to die every month between now and then, even though at 10,000 deaths since February 29 — a number consistent with a heavy flu season — we appear to have reached the peak and a decline is already evident.
At some point, Tony and Deb will be “predicting” precisely what has already happened, as we saw with the “models” that first predicted Hillary Clinton was certain to win the Presidency. And when the final death toll fails even to approach what they first predicted in order to panic the whole country into a nationwide lockdown never before seen in human history, they will make the unprovable, non-falsifiable, junk science claim that “mitigation worked.”
As the actual numbers belie the pseudo-scientific prophecies of doom, however, the lockdown of America that began with Democrat governors and mayors now exhibits a curious and hardly coincidental fissure along party lines. As of today, nine states, all headed by Republican governors, refuse to join the lockdown regime and now provide embarrassing counterfactuals demonstrating that officially mandated lockdowns were never necessary and have probably made the situation worse by preventing the development of “herd immunity” to this virus, like all the others, from the normal interaction of large populations.
The following are the nine states that have refused to impose lockdowns. All of them have minimal death tolls from the Wuhan virus, including the populous South Carolina, and five of them have not enacted even local lockdowns:*
Arkansas — 14 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Iowa — 14 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Nebraska — 8 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
North Dakota — 3 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Oklahoma — 42 deaths.
South Carolina — 40 deaths.
South Dakota — 2 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Utah — 8 deaths.
Wyoming — 0 deaths.
[Data as of this writing on April 6 at 9 p.m.] . . .
Tony (Presidential advisor Anthony Fauci) also finally — finally! — admitted (hour 2:47:55) that herd immunity will develop for this virus as for all the others, but then declared nonsensically (hour 2:48:16): “I hope we don’t have so many people infected that we actually have that herd immunity.” Come again, Tony? You don’t want herd immunity so that the virus is largely neutralized as it has been with the flus that no one bothers to contain because containment is impossible? What sort of epidemiologist is this? I will tell you: one engaged in a massive con job.
Exposing all his previous dire predictions as a sham, Tony added that “as you get data in you modify your model. And I’ve always said: ‘Data always trumps models. Always.’” And then, further preparing the way for his unprovable post hoc “mitigation saved us from a gazillion deaths” argument, he added: “I don’t think anyone has ever mitigated the way I’m seeing people mitigate right now.”
You’ve got that right, Tony! And note the implicit admission that this ongoing National Quarantine Theatre of the Absurd, of which he is one of the principal directors, has no precedent in epidemiological history. And with good reason. This kind of “mitigation” was never deemed necessary or conceivable during even the worst pandemics of previous years. And it should not have been attempted in this case either, which will turn out to be no worse or not much worse than the swine flu pandemic of 2009, which infected tens of millions and killed 18,000, most of them not elderly.
Finally, Tony admitted (hour 2:51:05) that “I don’t accept every day that we’re gonna have two hundred to two hundred thousand deaths. I think we can really bring that down no matter what a model says. Because when the data comes [sic] in you’ll start to say maybe you are, essentially, overshooting the model.”
In other words, his and Scarf Lady’s original and revised predictions were misleading guesswork, junk science like that of “climate change,” which have contributed mightily to the worst mass panic and self-inflicted economic damage in American if not world history.
As the real data emerge and the vast contours of Coronagate come into view, I have a sense that this absolutely incredible farce will reach its climax within the next week to ten days. Then the question will be whether the denouement will be a triumph for Trump or a debacle that will usher in the terminal Democrat dystopia. The horrendous human cost of this farce and the immense stakes in Trump succeeding aside, the next two weeks will make for a fascinating study in the sociology of induced mass panic in a mass democracy.
Pray that the final outcome will somehow correspond to truth and justice.
*Ed.Note: Iowa’s response while not as draconian as many other states has some bewildering aspects or so predictably marginal in effect so as not to be exemplified.
Perhaps the lockdown has caused a reduction of death from other causes.