Anyone that thinks 203,229 people were hospitalized in a day already lives in fear.

 I don't know anyone that thinks when CNN says 2,000 new cases they think 2,000 people died or were hospitalized, but I am sure there are those that do.

 If they do not want educate themselves, or listen to anyone else, and let CNN control their fear levels that is on them.  

 Maybe cutting apart another study and leaving out the details will further support that idea.

 Depends on where you get your news.  I heard of a few through social media channels, and one on "the news" in TX.

https://theconversation.com/mass-shootings-in-the-us-have-risen-sharply-in-20...

 Or maybe I use open databases instead of the nightly news and websites that reinforce what I already think and Facebook to compile information and make a decision on what I think is happening.

 Bottom line is there are news outlets that still report on mass shootings.  Just because you don't see them consistently doesn't mean they don't happen consistently.  Last "mass shootings" newscasts I saw on TV were when I was in Houston.  Two in less than a week.  

 Now will CNN report on C-19 more than shootings?  Of course, C-19 is where the ratings are specific to the demographic they get advertisers to pay for.

 Don't forget the Murder Hornets.

"Howcum they run a swab WAAAY BACK in the sinuses? Why can't you just exhale on it? Spit?"

 Accuracy.  It's like saying you can hit a target with iron sights, but you can only make precise shots in center ring with a scope.  Testing ideally should be as accurate as possible, which is why blood tests are more accurate when done from vacutainer than from IV and much better than punching yourself in the nose and bleeding into a vial.

 Anterior nasal swab tests should have fluid from the entire passageway, especially for nucleic acid testing.  The test will have cleaner sample material that way and give a more accurate reading.  The lower down the passageway the more likely a test will be inconclusive.

 

"So then a better, more  competent test, for remnants of a virus like a cold, last year's regular flu, or a vaccine for any of the kind.
Just so the main 'media' can lie and scare more people with,
'XXXXXX new cases just today !'"


 Well since you reject the international definition of "case" and will not provide your own definition I'd say your input on this is confusing at best.  If a person with an infection is not a "case" then what is?

 Testing will not show that "last year's regular flu" so "the media" is really wrong there.  I say it's the person who believes that nonsense that is the problem.

There’s an unknown percentage of Covid deaths that can be disregarded from the official list. What that percentage is could never be determined with certainty, it’s to late. My guess is 25% but that’s a guess. You can look at the CDC report and see thousands who died from accidental death, intentional or otherwise. Someone killed themselves or fell off a ladder when they had Covid and they’re on the list? What sense does that make? What percentage of Covid deaths were people over the average life expectancy?

We’ll never know the real number.

As far as number of cases, my guess is it’s twice the official number. My guess is there’s far more people who felt no symptoms they related to Covid or they figured they had it based on symptoms and never got a test. That was probably more likely earlier in the year.

The response to Covid was a giant clusterfu@k and most of that was because those with access to worldwide and US wide communication, hate Trump with an unquenchable rage.

"You can look at the CDC report and see thousands who died from accidental death, intentional or otherwise. Someone killed themselves or fell off a ladder when they had Covid and they’re on the list? What sense does that make? What percentage of Covid deaths were people over the average life expectancy?"

 Its provisional coding, from what I can gather the intention was to have more information than needed as opposed to not enough.

 You present an example here when you talk of the number of people who had SARS-COV-2 and were not recorded since they did not show enough symptoms to be seen.  The question in that situation is if they were spreading it?  I'm not sure any mathematical value can be accurate in this case, or the provisional coding at this time, but at least death certs can be audited.