The points about how the Died from a wreck or gunshot wound up listed as
Dead From Covid..

E continues to pretend that didn't happen
Even AFTER he argued For collecting those things as data,to be later removed, because
That is how its done.
So, which is it?
You Argued with me when I condemned including obviously incorrect numbers
And now you say
Never happened..
I'm confused..

"The points about how the Died from a wreck or gunshot wound up listed as
Dead From Covid..

E continues to pretend that didn't happen"

 It could happen but it is not procedurally instructed to happen, which is what is repeatedly being claimed here.  Not one whistleblower, or hundred of investigators, can offer a single physical piece of evidence out of over a million certs showing this car-accident or gunshot listing Covid as PCOD.

 It seems like you are pretending it DID happen.  Where is the actual evidence?



"Even AFTER he argued For collecting those things as data,to be later removed, because
That is how its done."

 Incorrect.  The provisional coding ICD–10 code U07.1 is not instructing people to certify car-wrecks and gunshots as dying "FROM" Covid.  It literally says not to do that.  But the procedure can cause count volume inaccuracies, which I worked to mitigate.  This means your false claims that I said "trust the CDC" conflict directly with my actual words and actions.

 I posted ICD–10 code U07.1 in full, please point out where it instructs non-Covid deaths to be categorized as dying "FROM" Covid.

 How hard is it to understand that if Entity A says something, even if it is stupid, and Entity B lies to you, then Entity B is the liar?  Why is that so hard to accept?

"They were forced to adjust the numbers down, because they included garbage in their data,they knew it was garbage when they swept it up and you said that is how its done."


 Except they said they would, which people on this very forum complained about years in advance.  We knew this would happen, the timeline is on this forum.

 "Forced" or planned?  If I tell you I am going to paint my fence pink then repaint parts of it green later, that may be stupid to you.

 When I repaint parts of it green and a website tells you I "secretly" painted parts of my fence green, would you be surprised?  Would you say I lied to you?  Or would you say "That idiot said he was going to do that." ?

 The CDC isn't handling the provisional coding how you think it should be done, but they didn't lie about it, how to do it, or request it be done the way your lying websites say they did.  But as we all know, if somebody else lies to you about the CDC's written procedures, the CDC are liars, not the people who lied.

"BUT,
that painting a fence Pink & Green,
does NOT say;  
‘everyone else HAS TO’
‘well if you are a good citizen’
‘you are endangering other people’
‘you don’t care about other people’
‘your RIGHTS are removed if you don’t'
  paint your fence Pink & Green’"


 Agreed.  However none of it is "lying" if they place their expectations of you in writing and somebody else lies to you about what that writing says.  

 SPIN it how you want, this isn't an ethics issue, it is a logic issue.  If somebody else lies to you about what I say, I am not the liar.

 Where in ICD–10 code U07.1 does it instruct anyone to categorize people dying "with" Covid as dying "from" Covid?  For that matter where is any of it being used for stat counts?  The very sources provided here say they didn't use them, which as usual, is conveniently ignored.
 

"COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused
or is assumed
to have caused
or contributed to death..."

 That is normal language for this type of activity. Here it is in full:

"COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death. Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II"

 It does not say Covid should be listed as the primary cause of death if any signs of Covid exist.  Which is what is being claimed, that if someone had Covid they are instructed by ICD–10 code U07.1 to list them as dying "FROM" Covid as PCOD.

 That is categorically false.  

 Now as for inflated payouts for false reporting of Covid needs that falls upon the organization doing it.  ICD–10 code U07.1 does not allocate funding and is not a method to evaluate those needs anyway - per the evidence provided by JoG - ICD–10 code U07.1 was not used for those evaluations.  Even though there are claims it was, his own source refutes that.


 There is abuse for sure, but that has little to do with claims the CDC "quietly" changed counts.  They said they would do it in advance, and they openly showed the process.  But since a website lied about what the the CDC publicly said and followed through on, the CDC are the liars, not the websites that lied.  Why cant we address the actual liars, like the idiots inflating Covid supplemental funding numbers, or websites that just post any garbage they know people will get upset about.