"Have never seen it done that way."

 I asked you the specifics of research multiple times and you haven't responded with useful information.  Just said things take too long, like 6 months of ICU data.

 I have presented previous years to 2020 variance with both the CDC provisional coding/known national averages and the CO specific coding, and yes it is percentage based even though it was claimed I did not use percentages and only whole numbers.  

 Why would comparative mortality rates not compare to other years?

 Why would we exclude the very information we are looking for?

 Point is what I get as "proof" are meme pictures and websites that don't even provide the material they are referencing.  What is anyone supposed to do with that information?

Eegore wrote on 11/16/21 at 07:52:56:

Refresh my memory of that.


“...  Why would comparative mortality rates not compare to other years? ..."

Pre c-19. A person, is very overweight, very.
His doctor says  do this and that, or you will have only 3-6 months to live.
He dies in 4 months.
He is autopsied, finding he died of,  …
so he is in that category.

Post c-19. A person, is very overweight, very.
His doctor says  do this and that, or you will have only 3-6 months to live.
He dies in 4 months.
He is autopsied, finding he had c-19,
So now he is the category,
‘died FROM cv-19’, with one of the other things, as contributing.

Are the numbers, pre covid,  of death by (one of the items listed)
Different than post covid ?
The Same ?
Higher ?
Lower ?
Or is that information, adjusted, squed, manipulated,
to benefit those that want to control.


 "... Why would we exclude the very information we are looking for? ..."

Is that not the information,
that people are looking for ?
And only finding wildly SPUN/SKEWED data.

"Post c-19. A person, is very overweight, very.
His doctor says  do this and that, or you will have only 3-6 months to live.
He dies in 4 months.
He is autopsied, finding he had c-19,
So now he is the category,
‘died FROM cv-19’, with one of the other things, as contributing."

 Incorrect.  He would have C-19 as contributing based off the sequencing that has always been done.  The only different portion is a provisional code.

 I have posted the exact forms as requested by the CDC.  What part of those forms and directives indicate that "FROM" C-19 is how that person should be coded?  Nowhere.  This is spin, just like saying someone who died from a car crash is coded as dying "FROM" covid 19.  If this is true why won't a single person post an actual death certificate?  Wouldn't that go a long way in proving that case?


Ignoring that the NCHS does not implement U07.2 for mortality statistics won't make that fact go away.

"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."
 
 How does that mean to code people as dying "FROM" Covid?


 Besides at the end of the day certifiers are mostly using best-judgment based off evidence.  Standardization applies but mortality statistics in general are a lot of guesses and always have been.