|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> The policy is, lie /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1586319394 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 04/07/20 at 21:16:34 |
|
Title: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/07/20 at 21:16:34 Are they trying to scare people? Why skew the numbers? UPDATE: Dr. Birx Confirms Anyone Who Dies WITH Coronavirus, Regardless of Any Underlying Health Condition, is Being Counted as a COVID-19 Death (VIDEO) By Cristina Laila Published April 7, 2020 at 8:45pm 219 Comments Share (700) Tweet As TGP reported over the weekend, the amount of Americans who are reported to have died from the Coronavirus is based on a CDC coding system that will “result in COVID-19 being the underlying cause more often than not.” Advertisement - story continues below Dr. Birx confirmed this on Tuesday during a COVID-19 task force briefing. A new ICD code was established to keep track of Coronavirus deaths. The U07.1 code will be used for death by Coronavirus infection. TRENDING: Colorado Man Handcuffed in Front of His 6-Year-Old Daughter at Park For 'Violating Social Distancing Order' (VIDEO) However, there’s another secondary code, U07.2, “for clinical or epidemiological diagnosis of COVID-19 where a laboratory confirmation is inconclusive or not available,” the CDC guidelines read. “The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID- 19 being the underlying cause more often than not,” the guidelines read. Advertisement - story continues below Dr. Birx on Tuesday told a reporter during a Coronavirus task force briefing, “We’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality.” “Can you talk about your concerns about deaths being misreported by Coronavirus because of either testing or standards for how they are characterized?” the reporter asked Birx. “If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death,” Birx said. There is a big difference between dying with the virus and from the virus. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/07/20 at 23:27:08 "Are they trying to scare people? Why skew the numbers?" I think if the numbers were to be intentionally skewed to scare people there would not be an open public statement. I'm wondering if it has more to do with holding a larger number base and resolving it lower than holding a lower number base and speculating it higher. It could be funding for that matter, but as I said, to make it public policy is a very poor way to create fear. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/08/20 at 01:44:29 As if the average person reads.. The average adult is running on low information and, thanks to this, admitted BULLSHIT,misinformation. Funding? Naaah.. Your holding to numbers Don't buy it. Bureaucrats who hate Trump Yeah. Anything to try to make him look bad And They get the added bonus of Demonstrable NEED for a large force to be ready for Next time.. How can usable data be generated When the data is corrupted By POLICY? You might decide you know Why they are choosing to destroy the data this way But it's fukking inexcusable. At the end of this, nobody is gonna have hard data to look at, because people who were hanging by a thread are being counted as healthy, prior to CoVid, and dead Due to it. I'm disappointed But not surprised Government,, always right.. Hmmmm,, ya Knoow,, since the asymptomatic aren't included in the mortality rate, to hold it down, or, if it is, I'm not seeing it.. And everyone who dies who tests positive is assumed to have died From it They just might make it look like they handled right... Are they testing wreck victims who weren't under doctors care? Just how stupid are they? I have a friend who has died several times, Type 2 diabetes, over 300 pounds, COPD, he teeters on the line between this world and the next every day.. so if he gets it and dies , his death will be, because of how they did the data, counted as a generally healthy person, killed by CoVid.. Right? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/08/20 at 05:36:39 27383E3924231222122A38347F4D0 wrote:
Yea England aso did this - die after testing for Covid 19 and you're dead from covod - including if you died in a skiing accident Or get shot in an armed robbery - LOL. Since several 1000 die everyday for all sorts of reasons, its got the covid 19 count overinflated. I don't think it will ever get resolved downwards - like they're dead already even if double counted. Just easier to blame Trump for both deaths (gun control and global warming causing skiiing and covid 19) So that's 4 deaths, and move on. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 06:05:00 It is inaccurate to say that if someone dies from a skiing accident, or a car wreck, that they will be classified as a SARS-COV-2 death. A car wreck does not fit within the parameters of "Underlying Health Condition" and as such can not be coded that way, but it is a good strategy to claim that so programs one doesn't agree with can be discredited. One thing left out of the article is that this is a new code and intended to include pneumonia cases that might have been SARS-COV-2 but not tested for. Also the coding isn't expected to remain an absolute, it is designed to create a data-block that is further studied. The CDC will most likely not release official numbers for years. Also people are ignoring the word "provisional". I'm still wondering why if this is a strategy to induce fear, why one would go on national television and say outright the numbers are wrong. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by oldNslow on 04/08/20 at 06:07:46 Quote:
Sounds like a very liberal approach to the truth also. This woman is - supposedly - a scientist, an expert on infectious disease ? No worry folks. we're in the very best of hands. ::) |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/08/20 at 06:43:31 5D7D7F776A7D180 wrote:
"Could" Be ???????? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 06:53:31 ""Could" Be ????????" I wouldn't proclaim to know without evidence. So it could be, or it could not. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/08/20 at 07:06:20 Say I came accost a person that fell from a ladder. I saw a piece of bone sticking out from his leg. Not being a Doctor or a Nurse, I would say that person has a broken leg. NOT ! “… So it could be, or it could not…" 0020222A3720450 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/08/20 at 07:26:27 If it was a funding issue that created a situation that forces the data to be essentially worthless, knowing the propensity for spending, Id say soeone would be pointing to the problem and demanding Munneee.. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 07:26:57 "Say I came accost a person that fell from a ladder. I saw a piece of bone sticking out from his leg. Not being a Doctor or a Nurse, I would say that person has a broken leg." I would consider the bone sticking out of the leg as an appropriate level of evidence. Since we are just imagining up unrelated things lets say this: You see a video of someone saying they fell off a ladder. They say they might have broken their leg, they can stand with significant pain, there is no x-ray, no examination. Do they have a broken leg? I don't consider one person's statement enough evidence on this topic to say it is for funding and not study, or any other reason. I've been accused of implementing policy to make money that actually cost me money. So in this case I can't say that a classification code is for funding, and not for classification, or other reasons. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/08/20 at 07:28:38 5C7C7E766B7C190 wrote:
Ya you would think - except when the person's death report etc gets filed - if they had covid 19 diagnosis at any time in the last 28 days, England was adding to that tally. That was what I heard on the Radio - NPR - essentially the excuse was that it was all overwhelming the system, and its easy to write a piece of code that adds 1 when a name is searched and found in the death certificate filing. I am not implying any malice - its easier to count it that way because I look at it from the point of view of the programmer tasked with making it happen. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/08/20 at 08:11:55 0121232B3621440 wrote:
What say you about; The CDC, 'no fly list', order, (domestic), which is enforced by the Airlines. Which say's, "...at risk for, a serious contagious disease..." Which, can, include everybody. That order, is not, 'imagining'. Wait, that is totally, 'Unrelated'. Not at all like lying about a virus's death rate, to get more funding. "The vast majority of men over 65, die with some sort of Prostrate cancer" (As P.H. would say; "The Rest Of The Story") "A very small amount of men over 65 die, from, Prostrate cancer" "...don't consider one person's statement enough evidence on this topic to say it is for funding and not study..." Which statement above, gets a bigger grant ? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by oldNslow on 04/08/20 at 09:05:12 The actual cause of EVERY death is cardiac arrest regardless of whatever brought that about. Write that on every death certificate. Problem solved. Bingo, Bango. No more Pandemic. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/08/20 at 10:22:08 Yeah, but that would be BS too.. How about we just report the truth, instead of having to adjust later? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/08/20 at 10:38:11 3B242225383F0E3E0E36242863510 wrote:
Not when ka-ching ka-ching to be made with milking the virus, so much milk from 1 virus, its better than a cow. Lots and lots of virus milk. And not when a president needs to be removed from office after a toothless and BS based impeachment failed. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 10:54:23 "Yeah, but that would be BS too.. How about we just report the truth, instead of having to adjust later?" This is a coding method. Its not how the CDC releases case study material. I'm sure people here know much more than anyone in the CDC doing the job themselves, but in this case, for me, I will just know that the stats include this provisional data collection method and not complain about how somebody does a job I've never done. Since the information is public, so public it was stated on national television, I don't consider it a lie. Saying they aren't developing a provisional code for their own usage would be a lie. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/08/20 at 11:00:11 4161636B7661040 wrote:
Well being a programmer I can see how you can code in a simple where clause (in database speak) where COD != NULL, don't increment the Covid count. But then again, these govt types have a skill of "working in govt" Anthony Fauci's skill is for 35 yrs "giving grants". Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 11:06:03 "Well being a programmer I can see how you can code in a simple where clause (in database speak) where COD != NULL, don't increment the Covid count." Maybe they will go that route at some point. There's explanation of why this method is being used, and it is fully disclosed, so again I don't see where the lies are. Especially when people won't even use this material to create educated opinions to begin with. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/08/20 at 11:24:36 1535373F2235500 wrote:
Yea no hurry, it takes 5 seconds of coding for a competent programmer, but no need to bother with one of those, we really need people whose skill is "government" to do government, especially when virus milk is readily flowing and there is an election to be won based on killing the economy. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/08/20 at 12:13:39 725250584552370 wrote:
(Most probably said with tongue in cheek) So then, the CDC, has stated: "... The criteria for adding people to the Do Not Board and Lookout lists are; Known or believed to be infectious with, or at risk for, a serious contagious disease that poses a public health threat to others during travel; and any of the following three: Not aware of diagnosis or not following public health recommendations; Likely to travel on a commercial flight involving the United States or travel internationally by any means; Need to issue travel restriction to respond to a public health outbreak or to help enforce a public health order. Once a person is placed on these lists, airlines will not issue a boarding pass to the person for any commercial flight within, arriving to, or departing from ..." the United States" Then you totally admit, freedom, is dependent on a, person/committee. (Which no one knows, who he/she, or they, are) Defining what: "...or at risk for, a serious contagious disease..." (Which can be EVERYBODY) Really means ! |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/08/20 at 12:28:22 Not everyone hears the truth and those who did, may not grasp the importance of chalking up everyong who dies WITH CV as dying FROM it.. AND, every News reporter who broadcasts the number of dead just says how many have Died,, they dont add But these numbers don't include the people who HAVE CV, but are asymptomatic, AND, the dead who have CV, but also had COPD, Diabetes, Hep C, Kidney disease,, whatever,, that May Well have been what ACTUALLY killed them,, Our Death From CV numbers are ridiculously inflated as is the mortality rate.. C'mon Trump,,, make them tell the truth.. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/08/20 at 15:45:52 203F393E23241525152D3F33784A0 wrote:
Sadly Trump is becoming part of the problem JOG. He's pulled $$$ from China. I'm really hoping he would send them lots of $$$$ in neat 410 million packages filled with good stuff like polonium and U235 and what not. Something with a nice and slow decay rate. If it will just destroy people and not touch buildings - well it may be a boon to the people of Taiwan and hong kong and the weigers in the west. But for sure don't use that kind in Wuhan and Beijing. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 18:07:17 "Then you totally admit, freedom, is dependent on a, person/committee. (Which no one knows, who he/she, or they, are) Defining what: "...or at risk for, a serious contagious disease..." (Which can be EVERYBODY) Really means !" Isn't that like saying you are ok with people infecting others all over the country because they can never be told not to get on a plane? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 18:09:34 "AND, every News reporter who broadcasts the number of dead just says how many have Died,, they dont add But these numbers don't include the people who HAVE CV, but are asymptomatic, AND, the dead who have CV, but also had COPD, Diabetes, Hep C, Kidney disease,, whatever,, that May Well have been what ACTUALLY killed them,, " Then stop using news reporters as your education source. Use more reliable material. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/08/20 at 18:34:24 1B3B39312C3B5E0 wrote:
Since I'M Making the point, and since I"M arguing against the lame bullshit reporting, isn't it OBVIOUS I have already done that? I was calling this before it was public. They arent using the asymptomatic,, C'mon, dude, 't be insulting my intelligence . Or my desire for Truth..The avearage person is being misled, not me,, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/08/20 at 18:35:25 That was THE most lame assed thing I can remember you saying,, You should be embarrassed |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/08/20 at 18:43:56 0A2A28203D2A4F0 wrote:
Nop LOLOLOLOLO A Swing and a Miss, Try Again |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/08/20 at 19:04:18 That is correct, the policy is a lie. Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. “Last Friday I received a 7-page document that told me if I had an 86-year-old patient that had pneumonia but was never tested for COVID-19 but some time after she came down with pneumonia we learned that she had been exposed to her son who had no symptoms but later on was identified with COVID-19, then it would be appropriate to diagnose on the death certificate COVID-19,” Dr. Scott Jensen said. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/huge-mn-senator-dr-reveals-hhs-document-coaching-overcount-covid-19-cases-copy-document-video/ Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/08/20 at 19:35:29 6374727E7161130 wrote:
A-Yep I have known Scott for 40 some years. He used to be my physician before he got to busy with politics. In fact got a 'bulk' email today saying he was going to be on Fox tonight ! It said: "...I will be joining Laura Ingraham tonight at 9pm on Fox News to share my thoughts on COVID-19. I will not apologize for refusing to give in to groupthink. The steps we are taking against COVID-19 are damaging our economy. Even more importantly though we are denying Americans’ access to medical care and instilling panic. We must refocus and restore basic freedoms and personal responsibility ... " 0525272F3225400 wrote:
I wonder if eegore now has evidence enough ? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 20:30:36 "Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. “Last Friday I received a 7-page document that told me if I had an 86-year-old patient that had pneumonia but was never tested for COVID-19 but some time after she came down with pneumonia we learned that she had been exposed to her son who had no symptoms but later on was identified with COVID-19, then it would be appropriate to diagnose on the death certificate COVID-19,” Dr. Scott Jensen said." That isn't CDC coding. But it is a poor way to go about it, I would have issue with it if I were in his position. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/08/20 at 20:32:03 "A Swing and a Miss, Try Again" Same for you. I did not freely admit Freedom relies on a committee. Try again, or even better try to have an adult conversation about the topic and not random analogies. "I wonder if eegore now has evidence enough ?" No. That article does not indicate to me that the reason is for CDC funding. I think it could be, I also think it could be for the reasons stated by the CDC. I, at this time, do not have enough evidence about the new coding to say that it is absolutely a funding based change. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/09/20 at 11:38:17 032321293423460 wrote:
Sounds like you admitted, just not freely. So who, forced you, to admit, Freedom relies on a committee? “… have an adult conversation about the topic and not random analogies …” Not a problem of mine, or anyone else’s, if you do not understand a concept. Not going to waste my time any longer, ’splayin tings to ya. “… do not have enough evidence …” Can understand that only someone, that is affected with TDS, doesn't believe, when a copy is in front of their eyes, of the Vital Statistics Reporting Guidance, which has been mailed to all the Minn Doctors, (perhaps others also), that tells Doctors to falsify their reporting of deaths. And the reason ? Rather clear, ‘Someone’, wants to inflate the numbers here. As they have been deflated in China. The question, Why ? Could be a form of repression suppression, coupled with Stockholm syndrome. More research needed. (Or as TDS affected people would say, ‘More Tin Foil’) LOLOLOLLOL |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/09/20 at 12:52:22 Gonna hafta come to some other answer,, It's a CHOICE to LIE.. Period.. Why? Well,, I have an idea, but the Big Government is the Answer folks won't agree.. Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. Advertisement - story continues below “Last Friday I received a 7-page document that told me if I had an 86-year-old patient that had pneumonia but was never tested for COVID-19 but some time after she came down with pneumonia we learned that she had been exposed to her son who had no symptoms but later on was identified with COVID-19, then it would be appropriate to diagnose on the death certificate COVID-19,” Dr. Scott Jensen said. Dr. Jensen explained that this is not a normal procedure. Dr.. Jensen said for example if the same patient had pneumonia during flu season and he didn’t have a test confirming the patient also had influenza, he would never diagnose the patient with influenza on the death certificate. TRENDING: MUST SEE: Watch That Look President Trump Gives AG Barr After Trump DESTROYS Liberal Media at Presser (VIDEO) WATCH: Chris Berg [ch10004] @chrisbergPOVNOW SHOCKING: MN Sen & Dr. @drscottjensen said that he received a 7 pg doc from @mnhealth to fill out death certificates with a diagnosis of #COVID-19 whether the person actually died from COVID-19 or not. Why is #MN inflating COVID-19 death numbers? Embedded video 26K 7:21 PM - Apr 7, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy 28K people are talking about this Advertisement - story continues below The Gateway Pundit has a copy of the HHS letter sent out to doctors across the country on counting COVID-19 victims. The document is here. US HHS Document to Doctors … by Jim Hoft on Scribd |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/09/20 at 13:25:53 6747454D5047220 wrote:
Funny how all the evidence seems to need funding regardless of what the evidence is. That is why simply put we don't trust any of it. Like the doctor who orders $3000 worth of tests to put you on a medication that costs $4 a month and has no side effects. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/09/20 at 15:54:16 This isn't a poor way to do anything. This isn't a funding issue. This is a policy of LYING. Period, full stop.. Figuring out WHY someone would want to inflate the number of dead is up to you. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/09/20 at 18:01:27 "This is a policy of LYING." I agree. Again because you have trouble understanding when I agree with you: I Agree With You I was only answering the very first sentence that You posted on this thread: "Are they trying to scare people?" I would say that if you go on national television stating your process, you most likely aren't going to use duplicity as a measure of strategy to scare people, since they would know your numbers are not accurate - because you went on national TV. Period. Full Stop. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/09/20 at 18:09:11 "Sounds like you admitted, just not freely. So who, forced you, to admit, Freedom relies on a committee?" Nobody, I never said "forced". I don't think telling someone that they can not fly on an airplane removes their Freedom. Unless they detain that person, which is not the recommendation for this exact guidance. You are concerned about the phrase "at risk for, a serious contagious disease" which makes sense, which is why I asked what part(s) you recommend for change or removal. Instead you say I admit to removal of Freedom. I am asking what you would change. "Can understand that only someone, that is affected with TDS, doesn't believe, when a copy is in front of their eyes, of the Vital Statistics Reporting Guidance, which has been mailed to all the Minn Doctors, (perhaps others also), that tells Doctors to falsify their reporting of deaths." What does Trump have to do with this? "Could be a form of repression suppression, coupled with Stockholm syndrome. More research needed. (Or as TDS affected people would say, ‘More Tin Foil’)" It could be many things, or a combination of things. I do not consider this to be an absolute funding grab. It could be, but this letter isn't enough for me to take to court and say "Here's proof the CDC is using this exact policy to make money". |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/09/20 at 18:54:49 I explained how even though SOME people know about the lying, how many don't? I'm sure you know how ignorant the average person is, and how many think for themselves. The fact that half on one ship who had been exposed to the virus were asymptomatic means nothing to lots of people.. What MATTERS is the hourly news blurb The total dead The number s mounting Most people don't know THE NUMBERS ARE LIES. So, yeah, they are trying to scare people. Why are they knowingly Choosing to lie? Who gains? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by oldNslow on 04/09/20 at 18:58:21 Quote:
cui bono. I don't know. But I do know this. It's time for Trump to shi*t can Fauci and Birx. They are deliberately misleading him and us. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/10/20 at 03:01:47 "I explained how even though SOME people know about the lying, how many don't?" Lots. But when trying to collude and mislead the public, going on national TV to disclose the method assists in misleading how? Why go on national TV when trying to orchestrate a cover-up? If you were trying to cover up something would you go on record, on video, telling the lie? "So, yeah, they are trying to scare people." Why choose a less efficient method than not bringing it up, on record, in front of millions. Millions of people saw that video, about 60 million have viewed it online. How smart is it to let 60 million people in on your lie? I think if they were using this provisional internal coding method to instill fear, they wouldn't tell millons of people about it. If they didn't mention this on national TV they would have a huge advantage. But instead they will just rely on mass ignorance to compensate. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/10/20 at 17:10:04 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xlluxI-vGQ&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR2UCqq5vaN_93urqQKrqn5geQpvVRf6xkBN0Mvg6JEA8QtYxxla_KtVsJ0 And this, is who he is ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhbuHVNDMYc |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/10/20 at 17:47:20 5D7D7F776A7D180 wrote:
Really ? YOU, said: "... I did not freely admit Freedom relies on a committee. ..." Then explain exactaly why, YOU said; "... I did not freely admit Freedom relies on a committee. ..." Then explain: "...I don't think telling someone that they can not fly on an airplane removes their Freedom ..." Which I totaly believe it does, for for the simple reason, 'Freedom by Committee', has decided that, "At Risk For", (which means EVERYBODY). Except, the high ranking, 'Socialists', who,'Have papers'. The people that don't have the, 'papers', (Or Enough BRIBE money), they are, "at Risk For", and cannot Pass. Ain't that sompton. The tt and clones, say 'SOCIALISM' is the NEW PROGRESSIVE WAY. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/10/20 at 18:08:57 " Nobody, I never said "forced". "Really ?" Yeah. Please point out where I said "forced" prior to that statement. I was responding to this statement: "Then you totally admit, freedom, is dependent on a, person/committee." I am not totally admitting that "freedom" is dependent on a person/committee because I don't think being told you can not get on a private airline removes your "freedom". You are free to leave, charter a private plane, file a court case, go on social media, boycott the business, etc. If you were detained then I would say your freedom was removed. If you are drunk and are not allowed to board a plane, they did not remove your freedom. If a cabbie won't let you in a cab he didn't remove your freedom. If a State says you can't drive commercial freight without a CDL they didn't remove your freedom. If a gun dealer wont sell you a fully automatic weapon they did not remove your freedom. So no I did not "totally admit" a revocation of freedom because my definition of freedom is obviously different than yours. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/10/20 at 18:26:25 1434363E2334510 wrote:
(Now you, changed it, to a,"Private", airplane) LOLOLOL Aw sum, DEFLECTION !!!!! "...So no I did not "totally admit" a revocation of freedom because my definition of freedom is obviously different than yours...." Again, explain what the word/s, 'FREELY ADMIT" means, when YOU said: "...I did not freely admit Freedom relies on a committee ..." |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/10/20 at 19:23:52 "(Now you, changed it, to a,"Private", airplane) LOLOLOL Aw sum, DEFLECTION !!!!!" Name a public airline. I notice you start to argue semantics when you want to avoid the topic. Lets just say "airplane" and call it done. "Again, explain what the word/s, 'FREELY ADMIT" means, when YOU said: "...I did not freely admit Freedom relies on a committee ..." " I said the word freely in place of the word totally. For me, there is not a considerable difference as I did not "totally", or "freely" admit anything. If anything I declared, or said, that I do not think a person or committee removed anyone's freedom by not allowing them to get on an airplane. Why do you think one's freedom is removed if they are told not to get on a plane? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/10/20 at 19:31:24 Why do you think one's freedom is removed if they are told not to get on a plane? Are saying it's Not? Being denied access to a mode of transportation ISN'T infringing on a person's freedom? It's a RESTRICTION isn't it? A far cry from enhanced freedom, right? How you can demand an explanation for what is clear and obvious is amazing. Ohhh, waitaminnitt,, you're trying to pretend he's saying All of someone's freedom has been removed if they can't fly, right? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/10/20 at 19:45:05 "Are saying it's Not?" Yes that is what I am saying. I am saying that, to me, one still has their freedom even if they can't get on an airplane, or in a cab, or a train. They can still seek alternatives, sue, do something. Being denied access to a mode of transportation ISN'T infringing on a person's freedom? I would say it's closer to "infringing" than "removing" as I think the removal of freedom would include all other things, like walking away pissed off. It's a RESTRICTION isn't it? Yes. A far cry from enhanced freedom, right?" Yes. So now that we know that our definitions are different, can we move on? Or do we need to re-hash our opinions more with the full knowledge that they aren't going to change? I for one would like to know what changes you would like to see specific to 42 U.S. Code § 264 which makes a lot of these, removals, restrictions, infringements, opposite of enhancements, etc. etc. etc. part of the structure of modern US law. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/11/20 at 09:05:43 How many actually KNOW what was said? How many only hear the daily totals, and never understand that other problems were the actual CAUSE of death? Yeah, inorance, in spite of fact being out there.. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/11/20 at 09:39:48 "How many actually KNOW what was said? How many only hear the daily totals, and never understand that other problems were the actual CAUSE of death? Yeah, inorance, in spite of fact being out there.. Considering you are either unaware of what provisional coding means, or are choosing to ignore that part, I would say plenty of people don't "KNOW" what was said. But if I were orchestrating a strategy to instill fear I would definitely not hand the strategy out to millions of people and rely on ignorance. I would make it much easier on myself and not say a word. Why ignore the part about how abysmally poor of a decision it is to notify millions of your plan? It's like telling a few million people I plan to jump out of the closet and scare my domestic cohabitation sentient being and rely on ignorance of the masses so my roommate won't know I plan on jumping out of the closet. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/11/20 at 13:26:17 Kinda like Biden throwing himself a Surprise birthday party? Odds are, he would Still be surprised,, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/11/20 at 13:27:04 Are we gonna have an Efficiency of government debate? Maybe she wasnt supposed to spill the beans,, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/11/20 at 15:01:53 5777757D6077120 wrote:
All TPTB need is a body count and it is game, set, match for the uninformed masses who are unable to think critically. Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/11/20 at 19:12:33 "Are we gonna have an Efficiency of government debate? Maybe she wasnt supposed to spill the beans,, " Then why publicly post it online prior to her press statement? They accidentally fully disclosed procedure there too. All I'm saying is this process seems way too poor of a method to say fear is the primary driving factor and not other reasons. Is it most likely a bad decision? Yes. I just don't think fear is why they are doing it. As for ignorance I think the real issue is that people heard this and assumed, without doing any research, that provisional coding is how the CDC releases mortality rates. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/11/20 at 19:33:33 Okay. Why Knowingly put out figures that aren't Just wrong, but unnecessarily wrong? They Know they are attributing deaths to CV that simply aren't, they are Instructing people to Do That, and I'm not seeing the mortality rate being tempered by the number of asymptomatic.. SO, Someone is doing their best to make it Look worse than it is. If fear isn't what they want, what's your best guess? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/11/20 at 20:29:14 I guess someone kinda Had to admit it.. It was coming out.. But who is actually making the point that the numbers are lies? I don't watch T.V.news, but I doubt anyone is talking about it. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/11/20 at 23:50:53 "Why Knowingly put out figures that aren't Just wrong, but unnecessarily wrong?" The CDC is not using this provisional coding for the purpose of "putting out" numbers. It is the opposite, it is data collection categorized in a way that it is classified specifically for change. "I guess someone kinda Had to admit it.. It was coming out.." Yeah, provisional coding changes have been done for decades so I image someone would have known about it in this case considering the scale of the disease. "But who is actually making the point that the numbers are lies?" Anyone that knows what provisional coding is would know it's not intended for definitive release information. Literally the word provisional means it can be changed later. Why is it the CDC's issue if other people are idiots? Provisional coding, historically, on the initial phase is inclusionary. So there is, with provisional coding, the largest data set that can be gained with associated factors. So historically, provisional coding, has had huge data pools that are cut into pieces. This isn't the first time this has been done. This has been done with, from what I have been exposed to, Avian, West Nile and H1N1, the initial data pools are gigantic and then categorized. Many get removed from the final infection and mortality rates. This is why official CDC information takes years to get, you don't get 2019 final statistics until 2022 or later for instance. This process I have seen before and not really seen signs of provisional coding, specifically provisional coding and no other coding, like West Nile, to be a statistic that is publicly released in the first place, however the information is public. The difference is West Nile didn't get on the nightly news and no other President has had CDC members up at press conferences talking about this particular issue, specifically this issue and no other issue. My guess is that it is implemented now to do what it historically has always been used for, and that is to create a large data pool. This metric is possibly, and likely used in funding analysis so I imagine that helps the CDC a lot. They mentioned that there are pneumonia patients being classified as exclusively pneumonia that may have been SARS-COV-2. There has to be a coding method to include these and that is why this particular code was described as being implemented. Now has it been misinterpreted? Absolutely. Can it be abused? Yes. Should the CDC change their procedures that they have used, reliably, for decades because people won't educate themselves? I don't think so. I think they should do what they have been: be forthright about their data collection methods. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/12/20 at 00:44:37 "This section on the death certificate is for reporting the sequence of conditions that led directly to death. The immediate cause of death, which is the disease or condition that directly preceded death and is not necessarily the underlying cause of death (UCOD), should be reported on line a. The conditions that led to the immediate cause of death should be reported in a logical sequence in terms of time and etiology below it." "When a death is due to COVID–19, it is likely the UCOD and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate." Based off of this, a public document, I would say that the provisional coding is not an attempt to cover-up leading mortality cause. If you filed this type of paperwork you would see that the lowest line is not typically what would be considered the cause of death. I don't exactly have issue with the examples provided in the appendix of VSRG Ro#03, what would you change? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/12/20 at 05:17:16 Bear with me here for a second but this is why the secretary of defense is usually not a military person. The reason is because a military person, having seen the horrors of war, may be hesitant to order soldiers into battle. That’s why they are often political appointees. Such it is political leadership. The nation cannot be run by an economist. It also cannot be run by a virologist. It must be run by a political leader who balances the needs of the people against the advice from two competing schools of thought. The people at the CDC live for this. This is their Nirvana. Everything they have studied for years is coming to fruition right before their eyes. It would be impossible for them not to become enthralled with this virus and overestimate it’s destructive ability. They are like kids on Christmas day. The same is true for an economist. The millions and millions of variables right in front of him give him the ability to play with his excel sheet miles till the cows come home. The leader in charge has to balance these two. I read a story about how wonderful the mayor of San Francisco was compared to how poor the mayor of New York was. Maybe that’s true in this situation. But the next event might be relatively minor and the mayor of San Francisco, remembering her “success“ during this virus, may demand draconian measures completely uncalled for. It’s not an easy task and I don’t envy anyone in charge. Our company‘s CEO has made decisions that I would not want to be the one responsible for making. But somebody has to do it. On this Easter Sunday, I’m going to give everyone the benefit of the doubt and assumed they analyze the information presented them and made the best decision possible based upon the cards on the table in front of them. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/12/20 at 06:56:37 Good article: http://nautil.us/issue/84/outbreak/how-covid_19-picks-on-the-weakened |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/12/20 at 08:48:10 Provisional coding Provisional coding Not truthful ,knowing it's not truthful Telling people to alter reasonable codes to known lies.. Bullshit |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/12/20 at 11:02:48 http://https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WlkV44Ihuaw/Xo3VlFfmkuI/AAAAAAADMhA/9Z76suntAQo97mKI1I_AGmTNhNgVVXU0ACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/rigging%2Bthe%2Bnumbers.jpg Ther IS no excuse for this.. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/12/20 at 13:27:30 647B7D7A6760516151697B773C0E0 wrote:
Sure their is, Just ask anybody in a medical/care/research/study field. It is FUNDING. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/12/20 at 15:53:13 "Not truthful ,knowing it's not truthful Telling people to alter reasonable codes to known lies.. Bullshit" Where is the lie exactly? What I see is a truthful disclosure of data collection methods and people that don't know what that means. It may not be the best method, but you aren't being lied to. It is truthful - because it is called "provisional" and they are disclosing fully the procedure. Provisional data isn't used for final rates, so where is the lie? Because you don't know how it works doesn't make it a lie. But lets leave that part out so we can call it a lie. Lets just pretend the CDC is releasing this information to the public as final statistics so it sounds worse. Also lets not read the forms so we have plausible deniability. Is it the best process? I doubt it is, but since you know, from public sources - again - from public sources, you aren't being lied to. It may be a bad process, but it's not a lie just because people are ignorant. It's like saying I want to classify all vehicle related deaths as automobile deaths, including people that committed suicide in a stationary vehicle. Then later I go through the provisional data and cut out all vehicles that weren't in a collision. I lied? I lied because I literally told you I was collecting and classifying all vehicle related deaths to include suicide in stationary vehicles. Then I work the metrics and provide a death toll in categories ranging from suicide in vehicle to hit and runs, to collisions in a segmented readout with references. Lies. Even though it was right in front of you the whole time. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/12/20 at 16:47:29 Attributing deaths when it's clearly not so is Lying. They aren't saying every time they spout the toll But a bunch of these don't belong So WHY DO IT? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/12/20 at 16:50:49 "Just ask anybody in a medical/care/research/study field." Well to be fair not "anybody" just the people that agree with you. I've worked in the medical field for 15 years now, 11 of them in a care and research facility. Not everyone I work with considers provisional coding like this to be exclusively a funding grab. I've asked about 300 people what their take is on this, 44 have responded, 44 have said that this particular coding change is not specifically enough to say that it is absolutely for funding, but could be. So don't ask anybody, just ask the ones that agree. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/12/20 at 16:59:35 "Attributing deaths when it's clearly not so is Lying." So if I tell you I am including all vehicle related deaths into my metrics, even those that are not from the vehicle itself how exactly am I lying to you about my collection method? Remember this is not data I am using to tell you how many people died from vehicles, I am only telling you how I am collecting the information. How is that lying? "They aren't saying every time they spout the toll But a bunch of these don't belong So WHY DO IT?" It says very clearly in the forms you linked why. If you can't be bothered to read all of the information you provided it's not the CDC's responsibility to change their process to accommodate anyone's ignorance. Also the "toll" hasn't been calculated, these are estimates, and those estimates include the provisional UCOF. That process everyone has been told about, it is disclosed online and in multiple preliminary release numbers. It's literally in the release stats, so how is it a lie? Again the process may not be the best, but it is shared in multiple ways, and it is included in the release stats. So maybe the issue is that people are getting their information from websites, or news channels that do not do their due diligence to explain all factors of a data release metric. Imagine that, news not being as accurate as your own study on a topic. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/12/20 at 18:12:55 Celebrate the pandemic man, and Trump will absolutely crush Biden by saying he's tough on china, he's been tough on china, and he's the best at dealing with china like he did for 3.5 yrs. This Pandemic gives me the work form home ability, forever, gives my work space "modernization" project a shot in the A$$ and really I don't see the down side. Better for environment, better for the company's bottom line better for the infrastructure, and better for me personally. Enjoy the quarantine, then enjoy the aftermath. Stock market will hit 25K soon and slowly climb back to 30K in a few months. We'll be mail ordering more, and telecommuting more and spending less and less and less on gas and automobile related crap. AKA $1.50 gas is here to stay, empty roads too, and if you wanna ride your bike in peace - oh yea that's there for the taking. Enjoy. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/13/20 at 01:21:11 https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/how-mitch-mcconnell-became-trumps-enabler-in-chief Stuart Stevens, a longtime Republican political consultant, agrees that McConnell’s party deserves a considerable share of the blame for America’s covid-19 disaster. In a forthcoming book, “It Was All a Lie,” Stevens writes that, in accommodating Trump and his base, McConnell and other Republicans went along as Party leaders dismantled the country’s safety net and ignored experts of all kinds, including scientists. “Mitch is kidding himself if he thinks he’ll be remembered for anything other than Trump,” he said. “He will be remembered as the Trump facilitator.” |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/13/20 at 05:27:01 McConnell and other Republicans went along as Party leaders dismantled the country’s safety net and ignored experts of all kinds, including scientists. No one dismantled anything. This is a precursor to what we’re going to see. Leftist will ignore facts and analysis that require logic to follow. What we’ll see is selected stories of and lies repeated so often, they’ll be assumed as facts among the leftist. We’ll further our nation’s divide by the “Trump is solely responsible for tens of thousands of deaths and the other side will say Trump is responsible for saying millions. Neither is true but that won’t matter. It’s the game that counts. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/13/20 at 07:03:39 WM, just saying about everything you don't like "it's a lie" is pretty silly, it's easy sure, but silly nonetheless. Trump is not in any way responsible for the Covid-19 outbreak, but he is responsible for a crucial period of about 3 or 4 weeks delay in response. When the dust has settled, the truth will come out in the end. This is just one of many Trump fcuk ups, which unfortunately this time has resulted in extra needless dead citizens not millions, but some number of thousands which we won't know for a year. Like it or not, it is what it is. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by srinath on 04/13/20 at 08:02:25 3B293D3E292F2D480 wrote:
Atleast partially due to China's cover up going back to Dec, and their current lies about their 81K infected. And the very fact that they let it get out should be reason to look at the china Tarriffs with a more favorable POV. They're a slave camp that manipulates their currency destroying US industry, then spreads diseases destroying the whole world's economy and way of life. Tarriffs should have been stiffer, and they need to be made stiffer now. I don't know what else can be a takeaway here. Trump should have paid more of our tax $$$ to a black hole called CDC and have had the same effect bla bla bla is just Bogus Bull crap. Here is a good way to throw $$$ at this problem. IMHO one of them Nuclear missiles costs 10 million. I'm very happy to allocate 100 - 200 mill to fix this problem. Just strategically deliver them to various spots in china. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/13/20 at 10:22:29 6F7D696A7D7B791C0 wrote:
The truth is leaders made different decisions based on the information available to them at the time. Had Trump shut down all travel into the USA the second the word Coronavirus was first heard, sure, there’d be a difference. But the only leader who would have done that is a fictitious one on Hindsight world. There will be massive lies told in the future and your history indicates you will be pushing any narrative that makes Trump look bad regardless of the validity of the allegations. So prepare your drive by ammunition. Fire into a house and leave. It’s expected. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/13/20 at 11:04:42 Ultimately, it will be virtually impossible to analyze without having access to all the data. Media sites have chosen sides and will put their slant on any story. Just look at the way they’re handling the Biden abuse allegations vs the way they handled Brett Kavanaugh. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/13/20 at 11:08:43 "Ultimately, it will be virtually impossible to analyze without having access to all the data. Media sites have chosen sides and will put their slant on any story." Yeah but if we acknowledge that we can't argue our points with any semblance of validity. For instance if I read the 7 page report I linked I cant claim it represents something that I want it to represent, instead of what it actually does. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/13/20 at 11:26:12 5575777F6275100 wrote:
Can you elaborate? Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/13/20 at 16:59:20 I worked in administration and security. This involves all physical security, digital security, nuclear medicine logistics, and all material movement to include patients, inmate patients, research material (like live virus), forensic material (cadavers) etc. I am not a licensed provider of medical care, I was a logistics and policy administrator. I as probably the only other one besides the ES admin that actually worked alongside everyone and not in an office. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/14/20 at 05:34:41 Here you go my Aussie friend. Skip ahead to the 7:20 mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8skK9_hr7H0 PS: You’re welcomed. If this is a cardio day, you can skip it. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/14/20 at 16:52:11 @wm, LOL. Yes sweetie, I read about his mad conference/campaign rally. I cannot find the actual particular article where it pointed out all the discrepancy and lies and how dates were missing and clips were out of order in the timeline. I remember that the article pointed out how Trump played up his banning of Chinese to the USA, and that it was in fact visitors from the EU who were bringing it into the US. If I can find the exact piece I'll post a link but these might do, not that you'll read any of it. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/13/trump-us-coronavirus-briefing-latest-media https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/04/14/trumps-totalitarian-streak-hits-overdrive/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/heres-what-really-matters-about-trumps-despotic-claim-total-authority/ However the TL ; DR bit is that when the full seriousness of this world economic catastrophe became apparent and the unanimous advice of every expert was to begin the social distancing, Trump spent a crucial 3 or 4 weeks doing nothing, and creating more chaos. Now a month later because of the 4 week delay in how Covid takes a couple of weeks to show and then a couple of weeks to kill, we see the results. Remember when Trump ludicrously thought it would be 'beautiful' to open the economy back up by Easter, well look at today's stats... https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ you can press the 'yesterday' and 'today' buttons, today's not done yet but deaths in the US are already 50% higher than what they were yesterday, 2.2k vs 1.5k yesterday. This is due to the few weeks that Trump wasted.One minute Trump claims he takes "no responsibility" the next minute he claims "total authority" well if you really do have total authority, then you automatically have total responsibility. Easter is over and the US rate is still accelerating. But I must say I'm really enjoying Trumps new look, his new 'presidential look', which seems to be a very serious scowl that makes his face look like a slapped ass. He's also had his whacky bouffant somewhat toned down, removing the curl at the end and putting a bit more of brown into the blonde. Trump is pure T.V. and no doubt he's a master showman. I'm lovin' this new corona virus world I must say. There's an old aphorism that says 'cocaine is nature's way of telling you, you have too much money', and Covid-19 is nature's way of telling the world to 'slow down'. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/15/20 at 16:26:30 Easter is over and the US rate is still accelerating. Don’t think that’s true, you lie on a regular basis so I doubt one more is a problem. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/15/20 at 16:43:04 "Easter is over and the US rate is still accelerating." "Don’t think that’s true, you lie on a regular basis so I doubt one more is a problem." Well it depends on how one wants to wordsmith it. If "accelerating" means more cases today than on Easter then yes it is accelerating. If one wants to say "accelerating" means a proportional growth of cases equal to the span of time from Easter to Today, then no it is not accelerating. Also we would need to establish what "rate" actually means. Cases? Deaths? I guess there's no way to tell if a lie is being told or not. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/15/20 at 17:07:00 @Eegore Also we would need to establish what "rate" actually means. Cases Deaths? I guess there's no way to tell if a lie is being told or not. This is what I wrote: ...you can press the 'yesterday' and 'today' buttons, today's not done yet but deaths in the US are already 50% higher than what they were yesterday, 2.2k vs 1.5k yesterday... ======================================== @WMyou quote me..."Easter is over and the US rate is still accelerating." Don’t think that’s true, you lie on a regular basis so I doubt one more is a problem. I do not lie on any basis, however you are a fcukwit on a regular basis. Why should anyone even bother to answer your imbecile posts, you just call everything 'a lie'. Sure it's easy, but its also very very fcuking dumb, as in brain dead kinda dumb. So it was 1.5k deaths two days ago, 2.4k deaths yesterday and so far (days not over yet) 2.48k deaths today. As I said this is the result of what was happening 4 weeks ago. You're now seeing the lag catch up with reality. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ Maybe the dead people are lying, you know they could be democrat libtards pretending to be dead in order to hurt Trump. Seeing as you're so into 'lies', surely you have something to say about Trump's now obvious lies... https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/04/trumps-lies-about-coronavirus/608647/ |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/15/20 at 19:00:23 Lies added to lies,, equal More.. I don't giveaFUKK about Bullshit numbers any more. I don't believe the numbers, because I know smashed thumbs and hangnails are being called CV. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/15/20 at 19:46:52 @JoG, well then if you are going to call anything not spewed forth from Trump's cake hole , 'lies', if you are going to greet any objective facts with 'I don't believe it'. Then what is the point of you posting other than to suck Mn's and Pg's pee pees? It's a serious question. All you become is Trump's surrogate mouthpiece, even Faux News doesn't go quite that far. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/15/20 at 20:04:30 Youre ignorANT of the facts then. TheyADMIT Lying, Calling it whatever they want. Eegore has argued its NOT Lying, because they ADMIT its lies.. But You missed those posts, huhh? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/15/20 at 22:16:34 "Youre ignorANT of the facts then. TheyADMIT Lying, Calling it whatever they want. Eegore has argued its NOT Lying, because they ADMIT its lies.. But You missed those posts, huhh? " Incorrect. You think it's lying. I know what provisional data means and you refuse to answer my questions, and refuse to read the very paperwork in this article. You also seem to think this coding is how they release UCOD and DCOM rates, even though, in writing, it says it is not. As far as I can tell you think the CDC is lying because the average person might not understand what provisional coding means, and sh!t news media might not make it clear. If I tell you, publicly, write it down and post in multiple publications that I will collect all vehicle related deaths, including one's where a vehicle was not in motion, and a person committed suicide in that vehicle, into a provisional data pool, am I lying? Is very specifically the statement that I am choosing to collect data in that way a lie? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/15/20 at 23:19:00 News reports telling us about deaths, telling us it's CV, when it's not, call it what you want, it's LYING. Right now, everyone who listens to the news believes yesterday was terrible, but nobody knows how many were even related to cv. Because they are lying.. Provisional coding my tushy, Alternative facts much? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/16/20 at 01:53:16 reposted elsewhere |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/16/20 at 04:20:24 Is this provisional? Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/huge-mn-senator-dr-reveals-hhs-document-coaching-overcount-covid-19-cases-copy-document-video/ Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/16/20 at 05:41:36 0A2A28203D2A4F0 wrote:
Yes there is Eegore. It Eau. His only purpose is to display his out of control hatred for Trump and his excessive jealousy at him as well as all things American. He’s lying. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 10:20:22 "Is this provisional?" Yes. Did you read my response and go over the forms when I responded to this the first time? ""This section on the death certificate is for reporting the sequence of conditions that led directly to death. The immediate cause of death, which is the disease or condition that directly preceded death and is not necessarily the underlying cause of death (UCOD), should be reported on line a. The conditions that led to the immediate cause of death should be reported in a logical sequence in terms of time and etiology below it." "When a death is due to COVID–19, it is likely the UCOD and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate." Based off of this, a public document, I would say that the provisional coding is not an attempt to cover-up leading mortality cause. If you filed this type of paperwork you would see that the lowest line is not typically what would be considered the cause of death. I don't exactly have issue with the examples provided in the appendix of VSRG Ro#03, what would you change?" |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 10:26:18 "News reports telling us about deaths, telling us it's CV, when it's not, call it what you want, it's LYING." News reports. Not CDC reports. So when News reports say something about Trump and do not include all the facts does that mean Trump is lying? You are saying the CDC is lying because the news reports their public disclosure information wrong. Right now, everyone who listens to the news believes yesterday was terrible, but nobody knows how many were even related to cv. Because they are lying.. The CDC lied because people believe the news. So again since the "news" that you in another thread said is typically wrong, should be trusted in this one issue? Fake news only exists if you like the source material, but its Good news if you don't like the source material? "Provisional coding my tushy, Alternative facts much?" By this I can only assess that you do not know what provisional means. It is literally a situation that is intended for change, and all of it may be excluded from release data. I will ask again, and you will probably ignore it again: If I tell you, and submit in writing that I am creating a data pool of vehicle related deaths that Include suicides in non-moving vehicles as a provisional count, not intended for final count purposes, am I lying? Am I lying to you if I tell you how I am collecting my data? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/16/20 at 10:57:50 5F7F7D75687F1A0 wrote:
Read that a bit slower. "...and all of it may be excluded from release data..." In my experience, ‘...work in administration...', (for a government, or private entity, which depends on Grants/Donations), means. The absolute and precise movement of a piece of paper from one side of a desk to the other. And, ‘...physical security...', (for a government, or private entity, which depends on Grants/Donations), means. Tough Guy saying: ‘do what your are told to do, or else’. Did not know that a side effect was the total and complete understanding/knowledge, (to the exclusion of anyone else that has studied the event/s), of how entities, which rely on donations/grants, use numbers/statistics, gathered by means those entities have themselves directed how to record, and how those numbers are used, by a organization, which relies on, Grants/Donations. The stats count all Suicide, as School Shooting. If the Suicide is committed on owned or leased School property. Now why, would someone do that ? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 11:19:21 "‘...work in administration...', (for a government, or private entity, which depends on Grants/Donations), means. The absolute and precise movement of a piece of paper from one side of a desk to the other." Incorrect, I very specifically said I didn't work at a desk or office, but you chose to remove that part. Now why, would someone do that ? "...physical security...', (for a government, or private entity, which depends on Grants/Donations), means. Tough Guy saying: ‘do what your are told to do, or else’." Incorrect. Physical security are walls and locks, you are referring to manned or personnel security. "The stats count all Suicide, as School Shooting. If the Suicide is committed on owned or leased School property. Now why, would someone do that ?" Multiple reasons, one may be, (read that as slow as you want) funding. If I tell you, and submit in writing that I am creating a data pool of vehicle related deaths that Include suicides in non-moving vehicles as a provisional count, not intended for final count purposes, am I lying? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/20 at 11:52:24 Evidence has been presented that they are using non CV death to inflate the numbers. People are being TOLD, DAILY about the deaths. They are Intentionally generating fear. Now, you can posture and twist however you want, but THAT is what is HAPPENING. You think that because someone has Said they will revise the numbers toward a more accurate figure Later that the numbers they are telling people, inaccurate, INTENTIONALLY AND UNNECESSARILY inaccurate, isn't LYING. Well, that's what I call it. You call it whatever you need to call. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 11:56:38 "numbers they are telling people," Who is they? Is the CDC "telling" these numbers or some "news" source? You are saying the CDC is lying but you aren't referencing CDC data, you are referencing "news". What part of the CDC forms are false? If I tell you how I am collecting data, am I a liar? Or is the guy taking my data and telling you false numbers the liar? Any particular reason you won't answer that question? I don't ignore yours. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/16/20 at 14:29:02 7E5E5C54495E3B0 wrote:
Not only is providing a diagnosis with a lab test is dishonest, it is fraudulent. To say otherwise is simply asinine..... Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/16/20 at 15:01:04 @wM, It Eau. His only purpose is to display his out of control hatred for Trump and his excessive jealousy at him as well as all things American. OK, now we can go down a more interesting route, please tell me what I would be jealous of? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/20 at 15:07:03 7050525A4750350 wrote:
How am I supposed to KNOW exactly who is lying? Did you see the instructions to the doctor? Is the DOCTOR LYING? Id deaths are Attributed to to CV because someone who had a poaitive result post mortem but they died in a wreck,, I call that a lie,, CAN you ATTEST your SOURCE IS honest? wEVE SEEN SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SERIOUSLY QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THE NUMBERS WE ARE BEING TOLD. who, exactly IS crEATING THOSE NUMBERS, who the fukk knows? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 16:07:31 "Not only is providing a diagnosis with a lab test is dishonest, it is fraudulent. To say otherwise is simply asinine....." That's not what I am talking about. I am saying that the act of disclosing the provisional coding method, publicly, and in writing, is not a lie. It is the opposite - it is telling the truth about how the provisional coding is being done, and they provided examples. I already said I don't think it is the best method, but if you read the entirety of the process you would know they aren't considering UCOD as SARS-COV-2 in COD statistics. JoG claims the CDC is releasing these numbers, and also saying its from "news". Which is it? Is the CDC lying when they disclose their data collection method, or is the "news" lying when they release information the way they do? So again: I don't exactly have issue with the examples provided in the appendix of VSRG Ro#03, what would you change? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 16:22:54 "How am I supposed to KNOW exactly who is lying? Did you see the instructions to the doctor?" Yes, in full. I also read and did the exercise in VSRG#03, did you? What part of those orders, specifically reference the words, and what you disagree with. "Is the DOCTOR LYING?" No. The doctor provide verifiable evidence, did you read all of it, then reference the supplemental materials? If so what part of that material is dishonest, and how can disclosure of method even be dishonest? "Id deaths are Attributed to to CV because someone who had a poaitive result post mortem but they died in a wreck,, I call that a lie" I'd call that a lie too, except the documentation you linked doesn't say to do that. If it does, and I missed it, please point out, in the actual documentation where it says to place SARS-COV-2 as UCOD outside of standard etiology practice. "CAN you ATTEST your SOURCE IS honest?" Its your source I am referencing. And the totality of the evidence points to yes, since the material is documented thoroughly and exists on what appears to be live unaltered video. "wEVE SEEN SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SERIOUSLY QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THE NUMBERS WE ARE BEING TOLD. who, exactly IS crEATING THOSE NUMBERS, who the fukk knows?" I agree. Except you are saying that the act of telling you how those numbers are coded temporarily is a lie. The CDC is lying when they tell you how they are collecting data for their own use. So I answered your questions, and I expect you will continue to refuse to answer mine but here it goes anyway: If I tell you, and submit in writing that I am creating a data pool of vehicle related deaths that Include suicides in non-moving vehicles as a provisional count, not intended for final count purposes, am I lying? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/20 at 16:35:09 Is spreading Knowingly inflated numbers LYING? Fukkin sure is. I don't givafukk how you Adjust them later. Including KNOWN FALSE DATA , reporting it, scaring the crap outta ignorant people and giving those of us who know data that really tell us nothing Is LYING. You play with it however you want. We are needlessly being fed numbers that only cause concern for the ignorant and leave people like me with exactly ZERO useful information. Yeah, fits my definition of a lie.. Who is responsible for it? FukkifIknow.. Whoever is demanding doctors report death as CV CAUSED, when it wasn't is lying. Why include what doesn't belong, so you can LATER remove it? Funding? Yeah, Bullshit, it takes MORE time to work through data and remove what doesn't belong than to not demand Bullshit Be included. Stop being an apologist for shoddy work. Liars,, that is what they are. You done? Because I am. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 17:22:56 "Is spreading Knowingly inflated numbers LYING?" Yes. Is the CDC doing this or your sh!t news source? "Including KNOWN FALSE DATA , reporting it, scaring the crap outta ignorant people and giving those of us who know data that really tell us nothing Is LYING." "reporting it" Is the CDC reporting this, or your sh!t news source? Since people are ignorant they shouldn't disclose how they collect information? Too scary. "We are needlessly being fed numbers " By the CDC or your sh!t news source? "Who is responsible for it? FukkifIknow.." You claim the CDC is lying so they are responsible by your definition. "Whoever is demanding doctors report death as CV CAUSED, when it wasn't is lying." So you are choosing to ignore the appendix of VSRG Ro#03, or never bothered to read it. What would you change? "Why include what doesn't belong, so you can LATER remove it?" Collective pooling of data is very common. Provisional coding is a normal practice among many fields of work. You collect data, then categorize it. Instead of only collecting data that fits your categories. " it takes MORE time to work through data and remove what doesn't belong than to not demand Bullshit Be included" Yes it does. It is also more accurate because you can create categories and metrics based off of evidence, instead of ignoring data that doesn't fit a category you created before you had all the data. But what do thousands of people working in data collection over hundreds of years know? Less than you it seems. "You done?" No. I respectfully answer your questions and you continue to ignore mine. My assessment is that you refuse to answer because it proves a point you are unwilling to accept, or discuss. But I will ask again: If I tell you, and submit in writing that I am creating a data pool of vehicle related deaths that Include suicides in non-moving vehicles as a provisional count, not intended for final count purposes, am I lying? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/20 at 17:25:36 Unless you Disclose at every time you give out numbers that The Numbers LOOK higher han they really are and tell people they are being given inflated figures that they really cant USE in their daily lives, YES.m You are. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 17:40:29 "Unless you Disclose at every time you give out numbers that The Numbers LOOK higher han they really are and tell people they are being given inflated figures that they really cant USE in their daily lives, YES.m You are. " I agree with that. So, where is the CDC publishing official counts, with the provisional coding methods not disclosed? That's a real question. If this is being done somewhere I have issue with that. In your examples I am interpreting it more like this: I tell you I am including suicides in non-moving vehicles as part of my initial data pool, and that the data will change as evidence is analyzed. It makes no sense. I submit it in writing, then on national TV. Citizens Against Bad Cars LLC publishes a video that includes non-moving vehicles as vehicular homicide cases. CNN repeats the story to millions. Ignorant citizens get scared of cars because they chose to use the video, and CNN as their primary education on the issue. You call me a liar. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/20 at 18:03:26 Someone is CHOOSING to spread information that includes deaths NOT CAUSED by CV. They have admitted it. Some people dont even know that yet. For whatever reason, THAT's How they are doing it. I Dont CARE WHY.. Its irrelevant. Its a CHOICE. The data could just as easily be provided without the aarmtwisting theyre doing on doctors, telling them to include deaths that HAVE NO BUSINESS being included..I dont CARE how NORMAL in some environments such behaviors ARE, They are KNOWINGLY choosing to give people INFLATED numbers. That LYING |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 19:27:01 "For whatever reason, THAT's How they are doing it. I Dont CARE WHY.. Its irrelevant." That's part of the ignorance you are complaining about. You wont even read the very material you are providing as proof. Because its irrelevant, except for that one part, that wasn't even quoted correctly. So you can now claim things that don't exist in that material through plausible deniability. "The data could just as easily be provided without the aarmtwisting theyre doing on doctors," So the data could be provided without developing a method for collecting it? I want data about suicide cases in vehicles, but I don't collect it. "They are KNOWINGLY choosing to give people INFLATED numbers." But the CDC isn't, unless you can point to one.. That's you calling me a liar because Citizens Against Cars LLC made a video incorrectly displaying how I punch data into a computer. Somebody else is selling you garbage, and you want the process changed so the idiots broadcasting inflated numbers don't scare people who are ignorant. I get it, but that doesn't make me a liar. The people broadcasting false numbers are liars. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/20 at 19:45:01 Yeah, they are. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/16/20 at 20:21:24 @Eegore, To Jog: That's part of the ignorance you are complaining about. You wont even read the very material you are providing as proof. Because its irrelevant, except for that one part, that wasn't even quoted correctly. Lol. Are you having fun yet? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/16/20 at 20:30:28 "Lol. Are you having fun yet?" I don't intend it to be an insult, I see how it can look that way. I didn't have it read back to me before posting. All I am saying is that the "Policy" is a collection method, and that method is publicly disclosed. I don't think its the best method, however I am not an expert in etiology classification. To say the policy is a lie because other organizations abuse it is inaccurate. I think it's excessive to call anyone who discloses a procedure voluntarily a liar. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/17/20 at 00:41:59 @Eegore, You misunderstand me, I meant that you are being so patient with JoG but he's never going to answer anything. Like myself we both waste our time replying to these people but they are never, as in never going to give an inch, nay, they are never going to give a micrometer. Take "the absolute power" thread, I quoted William Barr who is more Trump's personal attorney and has prostituted himself at the altar of Trump, then I quoted Thurley, who was the one Constitution lawyer the the GOP could find to support Trump in the Impreachment hearings, as well as a GOP loyalist and Trump supporter, yet all three said basically, 'no' there is not absolute power. Does that make any difference, nup. Did I think it would. No I didn't I just find it amusing to pull the rug out from under these Trump supporters who will invariably just say 'lies', or 'biased' as a general answer. So I quote people who have authority and are staunch Trump enablers, one of them quoting the actual words of the constitution. Just to see if they could undermine them. In this case they just pretend I said nothing. This was a good exercise to prove, if any proof were needed that trying to play a straight bat and bring in some dispassionate arguements is just silly because they will never ever do anything other than spout Trump. You seem to be talking to them as if you perhaps think that JoG might have actually read his own links. It's madness. So are you having fun bashing your head agains a brick wall, is what I meant. I loled because I thought your reply to JoG was nicely understated. You asked me once if I expected you to read all my posts and I perhaps responded a little harshly as I took it to be a sly attack, I see now that it was you just being literal and dispassionate. I should have simply answered 'no'. But now enough time has passed that surely you must see as I do that it's utterly crazy to try and think these people JoG, Mn, Wm, pg, are engaging in good faith. Of course they aren't but you still talk to them as if they might. This is why I'll come out with some mindless abuse when they trash talk me, because why not. Look at you you are polite and patient but for what, does it make any difference. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/17/20 at 03:26:37 2631373B3424560 wrote:
Not only is providing a diagnosis with a lab test is dishonest, it is fraudulent. To say otherwise is simply asinine..... Best regards, This is what I posted. Is this provisional? Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/huge-mn-senator-dr-reveals-hhs-docum... Best regards, [/quote] Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/17/20 at 03:28:53 5F4D595A4D4B492C0 wrote:
Your posts speak for themselves and the fact you have been condemned by the mods twice recently. Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 05:33:09 This is what I posted. Is this provisional? Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/huge-mn-senator-dr-reveals-hhs-docum... Best regards, I replied to this citing the information contained within the documents you provided. Did you go through all of them and cross reference them with the CDC requests? The CDC coding U07.2 is provisional. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by WebsterMark on 04/17/20 at 05:46:55 Eau to Eegore: This is why I'll come out with some mindless abuse when they trash talk me, because why not. Look at you you are polite and patient but for what, does it make any difference. Does his attitude make a difference? I’ve had several disagreements with Eegore. I respect Eegore for his logic and openness to different points of view. I have a vague memory of getting him to reconsider a position one time, but he’s presented data and connected dots that’s made me reconsider my conclusions many times. My thought is he comes by his opinions based on real life experiences as I can honestly say I do as well. I, like most of us on here I would guess , respect Eegore. You, on the other hand, are a talking head. If I had to guess, I’d say you’re in full time academia or something where the inputs you receive are entirely electronic. I doubt you’ve ever had a significant P&L hanging over your head. I’m going to treat you like that despicable character who sat down at this table for a while, Mavi. Which is to say you offer me nothing of value so I’m ignoring you going forward. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/17/20 at 09:58:33 2707050D1007620 wrote:
I have a question about coding. About 6 weeks I was in Ajo AZ, I cut my hand and needed some stitches. Went to the local Medical Center, and not having been their before, had to fill out a ream of paperwork. The Doctor looked at my hand, shook his head asked what happened, told him some rusty barb wire in the desert 'bit' me. He laughed and said next time wear leather gloves. We talked and joked about the event while he numbed the area, then ran some stitches in it. Then told the nurse to give a Teninis shot. That's IT !!! My Question is: What is code 1220F. The bill I have just received, (remainder after insurance), says, "PT Screened For Depression". What is that ? Was not tested in any way shape or form, nor asked any questions about depression. So why is it their ? Can you explain why someone, is making a decision, by only assumptions ? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 10:34:57 "What is that ? Was not tested in any way shape or form, nor asked any questions about depression. So why is it their ? Can you explain why someone, is making a decision, by only assumptions ?" I can't explain that however the medical center you were at most likely could. I recommend getting a hold of their patient representative and make an appointment. Maybe they can outline how depression screening is done in that particular facility. If this happened at the facility I worked at, Providers interacting with you, in person and in video, are considered to be screening during the entirety of their interaction with you. If you show no signs of depression, you still have been screened by being treated and interacting with staff, they just observed no signs of concern. That being said there was a time when every patient was asked if they had any thoughts of hurting themselves or others, feel depressed etc. etc. but that mandatory questioning has been removed. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/17/20 at 11:19:39 725250584552370 wrote:
So you are saying it’s perfectly OK, for each facility to do something, which a universal Code applies to, a completely different way ? I certainly understand, their is more than one way to skin a cat. However I am surprised that in the precise Medical field, a National Code, for a thing, depends entirely, on someones feelings, not a strict, repeatable, universal, way of doing that thing. “… there was a time when every patient was asked if they … ... but that mandatory questioning has been removed …” I do believe it was removed, because several Million people told the Doctor/Nurse, (When they asked: ‘Do you have a Gun’) “ It’s none of your F’en Business ! " |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 11:54:20 "So you are saying it’s perfectly OK, for each facility to do something, which a universal Code applies to, a completely different way ?" That is not a universal code. If you look under AAPC the CPT Code 1220F is patient history. "However I am surprised that in the precise Medical field, a National Code, for a thing, depends entirely, on someones feelings, not a strict, repeatable, universal, way of doing that thing." Depression is not the same as a cut on the hand. Psychology is not the same as Surgery, which is why they are considered different fields. For instance you can't cut open hundreds of thousands of human brains, remove depression, and stitch them back together. You can do that with a human hand, and even at that, there is no strict, repeatable, universal, way of treating a cut on a hand. There are best practices, and multiple ways of fixing the same laceration. This is why second opinions exist. Also the coding you mention is the act of screening, not the result. Not sure how feeling applies, you were either screened, or you were not. The real question if we take it into context of this topic on this thread is: If the medical center tells you exactly how they want staff to enter code 1220F, are they lying to you? Or are they telling you the direct truth of what their expectations are, even if those expectations are ridiculous. "I do believe it was removed, because several Million people told the Doctor/Nurse, (When they asked: ‘Do you have a Gun’) “ It’s none of your F’en Business ! " At our facility it was done due to an increase of child trafficking and prostitution. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by pg on 04/17/20 at 14:38:29 1B3B39312C3B5E0 wrote:
No the burden is on you, I challenged your position. I see nothing in your argument that would alter my view in the least. 'Not only is providing a diagnosis with a lab test is dishonest, it is fraudulent. To say otherwise is simply asinine.....' Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/17/20 at 16:04:55 Entity 1, tells entity 2, exactly how to put wording in a, ‘code’. Entity 3, uses information from entity 1’s, code, which are the direct it result of entities 1 instructions, to entity 2. What would be the reason, entity 1, would tell entity 2, to code a certain way, knowing full well entity 3, would use information, from entity 1 ? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/17/20 at 16:15:29 45574340575153360 wrote:
A lesson learned from the UL, DFI, FDS, Socialists ! When they, yell, Racist/etc/etc/etc/etc/etc, at every opportunity ! |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 16:27:03 "No the burden is on you, I challenged your position. I see nothing in your argument that would alter my view in the least." I'm not attempting to alter your view. If you don't see that the CDC has stated, clearly, that U07.2 is provisional then I don't know what to tell you. To me, when I read the forms you provided, referenced the material and read the word "provisional" and in other sources can see and hear the word "provisional" being used to describe this coding method I think it is provisional. If you don't agree, that's fine. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 16:40:32 "Entity 1, tells entity 2, exactly how to put wording in a, ‘code’." I'd like clarification on this. Coding classifies content into a program so when the content is reviewed it can be found faster. Like in old libraries when they used Dewey Decimal. You used the DD system to find a book, but that system did not "tell" the author what had to be inside that book. It only classified the book into sections, like fiction, or reference. Entity 3, uses information from entity 1’s, code, which are the direct it result of entities 1 instructions, to entity 2. Entity 3 can access the information in the patient chart, that has been put into a specific category by Entity 2 by following the instructions of Entity 1. What would be the reason, entity 1, would tell entity 2, to code a certain way, knowing full well entity 3, would use information, from entity 1 ?" Entity 1 does not input information so Entity 3 would not get information from Entity 1, they would get information from Entity 2. Its so the information is standardized, and one can look up "Patient History" by accessing CPT Code 1220F in that Entities system. So Patient X is extracted from a vehicle by Emergency Services 01 with life threatening injuries and take Patient X to Entity 3 because Entity 3 is closest. Entity 3 accesses Patient X's medical file and has to convert the System A information that was input by Entity 2 previously to System B so they can begin looking for things like medications, chronic conditions, etc. The time it takes for Entity 3 to convert Entity 2's System A information to System B can take time that could otherwise be used to treat Patient X and potentially save their life. So to apply this to the topic of this thread: If Entity 1 disclosed publicly that Code 1220F means to their organization "depression screened", are they lying? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/17/20 at 17:44:07 0525272F3225400 wrote:
Entity 1 - CDC Entity 2 - Doctor/office/Hospital/Nurse Entity 3 - Media Entity 1 does not input information Correct. Entity 3 would not get information from Entity 1 Incorrect. In other words, the CDC tells Doctors/etc, what/how, to put in 'code'. Knowing full well the media will use that information. Totaly regardless of the fact that the information, or whatever information was put into the 'code', may change, after a period of time. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/17/20 at 17:52:01 As long as i Tell you the numbers I'm giving you are useless, inflated and littered with counted AS DEATH FROM CORONAVIRUS, while I Know some of them Had the antibodies, but were asymptomatic of CV, then, hey, now I'm not lying. Just admit you're lying, then lie, See? All good. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 20:01:08 "As long as i Tell you the numbers I'm giving you are useless" Again, where is the CDC releasing these numbers? Where are you seeing official release numbers of PCOD from the CDC? If I tell you how I collect information for my own use, and somebody else lies to you with that information, I am a liar? I should adjust my process, that I've used for years, because someone else lies, and other people are stupid. I cant collect information in the categories I want to because "the media" lies, and people are stupid. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/17/20 at 20:24:05 I called you a liar? I don't think so. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 20:27:13 "I called you a liar? I don't think so. " Let me revise: "When the CDC tells you how they collect information for their own use, and somebody else lies to you with that information, the CDC are liars?" The CDC is a liar because the media was dishonest, and other people are stupid. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 20:33:23 What about this: Trump knows that "the media" misconstrues, lies, fake news, misuses his statements regularly to mislead the public. Millions of people believe what they see from "the media". Is Trump a liar, if he says things that the media misrepresents to the public? He knows this happens, he coined "fake news", but he continues to post in Twitter. Lets say he tells the world on TV, and the White House releases a day previous that he will be making a series of Twitter posts that may not be entirely accurate, are for his own use, and may change over time as he gets more information. Is he a liar by proxy because he is aware that "the media" will spin what he posts, and people are ignorant? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/17/20 at 22:11:21 5E7E7C74697E1B0 wrote:
Who is demAnding the Bullshit cases included in the totals? CNN? Fox? NIH? CDC? Stop pretending I'm too stupid to not know it's possible they are all lying. Here's the thing We are being lied to. You want to pretend that since they are accumulating data they Say they will revise WHILE INCLUDING KNOWN TO NOT BE DEATHS FROM CV, It's DOCUMENTED,, I'm Mutherfukking Done |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/17/20 at 23:59:53 "Who is demAnding the Bullshit cases included in the totals? CNN? Fox? NIH? CDC?" No totals have been released using that data. See that's the problem, people are using garbage news so they think the CDC has released totals with the data they requested. That ignorance doesn't make the CDC disclosure a lie. "You want to pretend that since they are accumulating data they Say they will revise WHILE INCLUDING KNOWN TO NOT BE DEATHS FROM CV, It's DOCUMENTED,," You obviously didn't read the documentation. The CDC want's a large data pool, and they are disclosing that. The disclosure is not a lie. That's the same as saying that if Trump discloses something and the media spins it, and people believe it because they are ignorant, Trump is lying. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/19/20 at 08:24:49 7F5F5D55485F3A0 wrote:
Yet, Who is telling the POTUS what to do ! “...the U.S. will also implement “CDC recommendations” to immediately institute blanket refusal of entry for anyone on both the northern and southern U.S. border that does not have proper documentation for lawful entry. This replaces the existing practice of processing and holding in Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facilities at the border those attempting to cross. …” https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/20/u-s-closes-mexican-border-to-all-non-essential-travel-due-to-coronavirus-crisis/ |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/19/20 at 14:19:20 6C5E59484F5E49765A49503B0 wrote:
That's a rather interesting take, because of how the truth is about as opposite as it's possible to get. The people who are firmly in the crosshairs of my writing are the very academics themselves because I have developed a completely new body of work that undermines the entire field of academics whose subject matter is (and believe me I hate using this word because it sounds made up) sexology. And because 'sexology' is a soft science and because people are so frightened of the subject matter, it allow the so called self styled 'sexologists', the room to spout utter garbage without any serious peer review other than by equally vacant academics in this field. So you got that one wrong. P&L, is that a profit and loss statement? If so you got that wrong too because money is not my motivation, my work is about knowledge, I even pay to have no advertising on my wordpress site, and I pay even more for my completely separate site where I have total control, just in case I piss off enough academics on wordpress. I came across this video this morning on the beeb, https://www.bbc.com/reel/playlist/sexual-revolutions?vpid=p089qcr1 and it is chock full of the sort of nonsense that I will be deconstructing. My works is entirely original, paradigm shifting ground breaking and has taken 32 years to build, so once again you could not be more incorrect to think that I need the inputs, electronic or otherwise of so called academics in this field. My work is for the next generation of teens growing up in a world where the only information they get about human sex and relationships is handed down not by adults but by overgrown children. Physically they are adults but emotionally they are children. Here is the sort of dangerous academic rubbish that I'm talking about and that I will be deconstructing. https://academic.oup.com/asj/article/36/4/469/2613943 |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/19/20 at 14:40:20 Golly Gee !!!!!!!!!!!! ANOTHER Doctor, outing CDC, WHO, Fauchi. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D853TA_Dls&fbclid=IwAR3rnayRYHFlPFIWJr4UsY7upRHYjsLc2C9SknOYTUmiffJXHzRxqXuO2AU And a little tidbit of info. If you have ever had a Flu Shot, you will test False Positive for C-19 If your Panties are in bunch and cannot wait, go to 14:00, - 16:00 Interesting isn’t it !!!!!!!! LOLOLOLOL |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/19/20 at 14:51:03 54465251464042270 wrote:
WOW, your Syntax, Style, Content, has dramatically changed, Dramatically ! Reminds me a lot of the person called 'tt', (and clones), who often Ranted, Spun, and Deflected about a subject. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/19/20 at 19:01:57 "Yet, Who is telling the POTUS what to do !" Show me an example of the CDC giving PCOD final results, without disclosure of method, especially to the POTUS, since those are what this is about. The CDC is lying because they publicly disclose their collection method and "the media" does what they want with that information. No different than Trump knowing his Twitter posts will be altered to fit a news programs agenda, so Trump is a liar? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/19/20 at 21:39:33 2F0C3112100B0C05620 wrote: Reminds me a lot of the person called 'tt'... If you have something to say, then say it, don't imply it. WTF is the above supposed to mean, you're not trolling me by suggesting that I'm posing as other posters? Or are you. On another note regarding the concept of 'respect' which you brought up, let me quote Picasso, If the wise man disapproves, bad; If the simpleton applauds, worse. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/19/20 at 23:20:02 MnSpring claims I am multiple people too. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/20/20 at 01:17:19 5F7F7D75687F1A0 wrote:
Interesting information, I think it would be fair to conclude that Mn is one of either WM or pg, or perhaps someone else. Sort of like the way Trump accuses others of what he himself does. That would explain his overly elaborate mark ups, that way if he just keeps it for the Mn account it would be less obvious. Because it's clear that he obsesses over "syntax", and neither of the above three post in the regular forums. |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by MnSpring on 04/20/20 at 10:33:49 5D4F5B584F494B2E0 wrote:
133331392433560 wrote:
"Methinks thou dost protest too much”. Over a observation ! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :D |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by Eegore on 04/20/20 at 10:48:31 Its not a protest. Its an observation. So if I observe that forums members are assessing that some may be multiple people posting as one, and I inform publicly how I am collecting this data, and that data is temporary because I may be wrong, am I a liar? Or am I only a liar if the media takes that information and lies to you with it? |
|
Title: Re: The policy is, lie Post by eau de sauvage on 04/20/20 at 20:06:01 @PgSpring, whatever floats your boat. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |