Looking at the new CDC Covid Data

Yesterday there was information out there that the CDC had changed their numbers to more accurately reflect the truth of Covid and death rates and the new truth was pretty minimal and in no way justifies ANY of the measures that governments have taken to “flatten the curve”.

The initial post was confusing though, and we here at this site put out a call for anyone who cared to, to provide analysis of the new data in a way that was comprehensible to the majority of us.

And this answer came:


I hope this answers your questions from this data:


Go to: Comorbidities
And: Table 3

Note, comorbities definition: the simultaneous presence of two chronic diseases or conditions in a patient.

The CDC data is defining dying “from” Covid and dying “with” Covid and that the average number of comorbirbities that a individual had was 2.6.
Each individual that died had 2.6 other diseases that could of, and possibly, did kill them.

Note: It is still pretty convoluted data because Covid can cause pneumonia and that kills frequently on its own and to complicate matters even further, it is combined with influenza accounting for 68k total deaths.

So, 68k people possibly died from pneumonia caused by Covid or from the flu and Covid.

They state that only 6% of all deaths “from” Covid had no underlying, possibly fatal conditions, and that they simply died from Covid alone.

I like to look at these things in a slightly different manner, and that is:

There is a slight amount of excess deaths in some sections of the world / USA and that number is about 5% more than average for certain age groups at certain times.
If an average of 1,000 people in any given area die naturally, this year there is about 1,050.

Some age groups have a higher percent and some lower percent.

Have a great day!

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

6 Replies to “Looking at the new CDC Covid Data”

  1. Case definitions
    WHO periodically updates the global surveillance for human infection with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) document, which includes surveillance definitions.

    Definition of COVID-19 death: COVID-19 death is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID-19 disease (e.g., trauma). There should be no period of complete recovery between the illness and death.


  2. Yet another report about the Wuhan in cats and minks: “Felines, hamsters, and monkeys are susceptible for the same reason, as are bats, from which the virus originates in China.”

    Blame the Bat?! Not so fast… ProMed email comment:

    “The last part of the sentence is asserting/affirmative that the virus originated in bats in China. This is a common mistake done in the media. The origin of the virus is yet unclear, and although the closest relatives of SARS-CoV-2 have indeed been found in Asian _Rhinolophus_ species, the divergence between the SARS-CoV-2 and its closely related virus in bats is estimated to have occurred decades ago….

    The host of the most recent common ancestor of SARS-CoV-2 and the closely related bat viruses is yet unknown, although, of course, it can be hypothesized it was a bat (e.g., a _Rhinolophus_ species), but this remains a hypothesis, not an established fact.

    So we are still missing decades of evolution of SARS-CoV-2. There are many unknowns/uncertainties in this emergence, and it would be very important to make these clear and not jump to conclusions too quickly.”

    “Also, ‘bats’ is an entire order with more than 1421 species … and the closest relatives to SARS-CoV-2 found in bats have only been found in _Rhinolophus_ species (represented by ‘only’ a few 10s of species in China).

    It would therefore be wise to be as specific as possible and avoid implicating an entire order. Indeed, sarbecoviruses have only been found in a few of the 21 bat families, despite intensive searches in the order (more than 50 000 samples).”
    • Bat origin NOT “established fact”…
    • Don’t blame ALL bats because MAYBE one bat somewhere got something…
    …that maybe it came out of a virology lab.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *