Covid Deaths vs Non-Covid Deaths (StatsCAN - First Wave)

[TeeJay]

StatsCAN published some rather amusing death rates which show just how fake the Covid pandemic really is

They have an estimated 10,090 deaths more than what they would expect in an "average" year

But from March 2020 to June 2020 the total excess deaths were 1,292 and of those only 872 of those were elderly (aka Covid victims)
So the First Wave killed less than a thousand people; the remainder of deaths are all well within statistical norms

From May 2020 to October 2020, we had 1,385 excess deaths in people 43 years old or less (aka non-Covid victims; suicides, drugs, etc)
So during the First Wave we saw MORE dead due to lockdown measures than Covid deaths (1,385 vs 872)

Go check out the nice info graphs; Covid deaths were an issue from March to June (fig 1) Non Covid deaths (which are HIGHER) were an issue May to Oct (fig 2)

Second Wave stats not final but I suspect we will get similar figures once released

The Daily — Provisional death counts and excess mortality, January to October 2020

COVID-19 continues to affect communities and families across the country and many have lost family members and friends. Beyond deaths attributed to the disease itself, the pandemic could also have indirect consequences that increase or decrease the number of deaths due to various factors...

www150.statcan.gc.ca

And for historical reference

Deaths, by month

Number and percentage of deaths, by month and place of residence, 1991 to most recent year.

www150.statcan.gc.ca

 

[Valcazar]

But from March 2020 to June 2020 the total excess deaths were 1,292 and of those only 872 of those were elderly (aka Covid victims)

You read that wrong. Those numbers are for just the month of October, not the first wave.

Of the 1,292 excess deaths observed over the period from the end of September to the end of October, just over two-thirds (872) were attributable to people older than 64.

 

[TeeJay]

You read that wrong. Those numbers are for just the month of October, not the first wave.

That is for the "excess" deaths
If you read above it says the total deaths were inline with norms, the spike starts in end of Sept (into Oct)
The numbers being compared are only those for the spike vs the lockdown restrictions


By July, the weekly number of deaths fell back and were mostly within the range of what would have been expected had there been no pandemic. However, since the end of September, excess mortality is once again being observed at the national level.

 

[Valcazar]

You said this.

But from March 2020 to June 2020 the total excess deaths were 1,292 and of those only 872 of those were elderly (aka Covid victims)
So the First Wave killed less than a thousand people; the remainder of deaths are all well within statistical norms

That is wrong according to the text you linked to.
Please show your work if you want to argue otherwise.
(It's a summary, so it is possible it is badly enough written that you are correct.)

 

[Rako3]

StatsCAN published some rather amusing death rates which show just how fake the Covid pandemic really is

They have an estimated 10,090 deaths more than what they would expect in an "average" year

But from March 2020 to June 2020 the total excess deaths were 1,292 and of those only 872 of those were elderly (aka Covid victims)
So the First Wave killed less than a thousand people; the remainder of deaths are all well within statistical norms

From May 2020 to October 2020, we had 1,385 excess deaths in people 43 years old or less (aka non-Covid victims; suicides, drugs, etc)
So during the First Wave we saw MORE dead due to lockdown measures than Covid deaths (1,385 vs 872)

Go check out the nice info graphs; Covid deaths were an issue from March to June (fig 1) Non Covid deaths (which are HIGHER) were an issue May to Oct (fig 2)

Second Wave stats not final but I suspect we will get similar figures once released

The Daily — Provisional death counts and excess mortality, January to October 2020

COVID-19 continues to affect communities and families across the country and many have lost family members and friends. Beyond deaths attributed to the disease itself, the pandemic could also have indirect consequences that increase or decrease the number of deaths due to various factors...

www150.statcan.gc.ca

And for historical reference

Deaths, by month

Number and percentage of deaths, by month and place of residence, 1991 to most recent year.

www150.statcan.gc.ca

First wave numbers were not immense, as the disease was just getting a foothold. The danger was exponential growth. When it was doubling every couple weeks or less, it was very clear the first bunch of weeks would be relatively small numbers, but extend that an extra six weeks and it would be explosive. Only precautions kept that from happening.

Are you not familiar with logarithmic growth? Do you not understand how left to its own devices the numbers could have gotten catastrophic?

States like North and South Dakota, which fought mask usage, became the worst places for infections in the world per capita. Then and only then did they start wearing masks and the numbers came down.

To call the pandemic "fake" is truly blind, though I know it's your central pillar and you're on here a lot insisting on it. But lockdowns saved us, as much as they're annoying and financially crippling for some. There are instances of going too far, and the amount of fear that was whipped up was necessary only as far as some people need to be clobbered over the head to get compliance. If everyone responded to a need for precautions easily and automatically it would be so much easier, though you'd probably term them "sheep" for being obedient. But time and again the people who take precautions fare better than those who insist there is no pandemic to fear...and then come down with the disease.

The "sheep" in China, who are much more used to wearing masks and enforced lockdowns, have largely avoided mass Covid deaths, and life has very much returned to normal. You'll probably say how can we trust their numbers, and do we really believe their news, and they probably created the disease in the first place, but if you talk with people on the ground there, or talk with families who have friends and family over there, you'll learn there really is no widespread panic, no mass burials, no refrigerated trucks serving as temporary morgues. In fact, I know of Chinese who are fearful of visiting family in North America because it's dangerous to come to the US and Canada with our Covid numbers. If only we could be a little more cooperative (call it "sheeplike" if you will) and kept the genii a little better corked in its bottle.

 

[Valcazar]

First wave numbers were not immense, as the disease was just getting a foothold. The danger was exponential growth. When it was doubling every couple weeks or less, it was very clear the first bunch of weeks would be relatively small numbers, but extend that an extra six weeks and it would be explosive. Only precautions kept that from happening.

Are you not familiar with logarithmic growth? Do you not understand how left to its own devices the numbers could have gotten catastrophic?

All true, but as far as I can tell he also just got the numbers wrong from the report.
Just to take one month - April excess deaths appear to be 3,297 according to the tables he linked to.
Of those, 2,987 are from people 65 and over and 70 are from people 44 and younger.

That one month has more than twice as many deaths in the over 65 age group than TeeJay says happened in the entire first wave of the pandemic.

 

[squeezer]

All true, but as far as I can tell he also just got the numbers wrong from the report.
Just to take one month - April excess deaths appear to be 3,297 according to the tables he linked to.
Of those, 2,987 are from people 65 and over and 70 are from people 44 and younger.

That one month has more than twice as many deaths in the over 65 age group than TeeJay says happened in the entire first wave of the pandemic.

So basically Teejay once again proves to everyone he's full of shit? LOL

 

[TeeJay]

2019 Deaths = 284,082
2020 Deaths = 241,257 (up to Oct 31 2020)

These are indisputable facts sourced from StatsCAN
I dont know what drugs you are all on, but we did NOT have an additional 50,000 deaths in NOV + DEC !

So yeah majority of the fools in this thread are wrong; our death rate pretty much remained flat, and we had spike in things such as suicide and overdoses to account for a good number of these deaths

2020

The Daily — Provisional death counts and excess mortality, January to October 2020

COVID-19 continues to affect communities and families across the country and many have lost family members and friends. Beyond deaths attributed to the disease itself, the pandemic could also have indirect consequences that increase or decrease the number of deaths due to various factors...

www150.statcan.gc.ca

2019

The Daily — Deaths, 2019

There were 284,082 deaths in 2019, the highest annual total since the vital statistics registration system was introduced in 1921. The increase in the number of deaths is expected and is due to population growth and aging.

www150.statcan.gc.ca

 

[idcloak]

2019 Deaths = 284,082
2020 Deaths = 241,257 (up to Oct 31 2020)
These are indisputable facts sourced from StatsCAN
I dont know what drugs you are all on, but we did NOT have an additional 50,000 deaths in NOV + DEC !

Just released:
Provisional death counts and excess mortality, January to December 2020
2020 Deaths: 296,373 (up to mid-Dec 2020)
excess of 13,798 deaths
"about 5% more deaths than expected in that period, after accounting for changes in the population, such as aging, and about 7% more deaths than the 277,276 observed within the same time frame in 2019."

 

[TeeJay]

Just released:
Provisional death counts and excess mortality, January to December 2020
2020 Deaths: 296,373 (up to mid-Dec 2020)
excess of 13,798 deaths
"about 5% more deaths than expected in that period, after accounting for changes in the population, such as aging, and about 7% more deaths than the 277,276 observed within the same time frame in 2019."

Yeah Val quoted above
We shall see where chips fall at end of year

Just as an FYI though since all major cities are under lockdowns / curfews the majority of new deaths are the suicide / overdoses etc and not actually covid deaths (they state as much in the report)

 

[squeezer]

Yeah Val quoted above
We shall see where chips fall at end of year

Just as an FYI though since all major cities are under lockdowns / curfews the majority of new deaths are the suicide / overdoses etc and not actually covid deaths (they state as much in the report)

Yeah right okay and if we didn't have the lockdown/curfew and mask mandates where would the covid death numbers be?????

 

[Valcazar]

Just as an FYI though since all major cities are under lockdowns / curfews the majority of new deaths are the suicide / overdoses etc and not actually covid deaths (they state as much in the report)

No. They don't say that.

They say, "The direct impacts of COVID-19 cannot fully account for the excess deaths observed in Canada in 2020, particularly in the fall"

COVID-19 alone isn't responsible for the excess. They don't say anywhere that suicide/overdoses are the "majority of new deaths", not even for the fall.

More specifically,

In the early months of the pandemic, the weekly number of excess deaths and deaths caused by COVID-19 were closely aligned and mostly affected older populations, suggesting that COVID-19 itself was driving excess mortality in Canada. However, more recently, the number of excess deaths has been higher than the number of deaths due to COVID-19, and these deaths are affecting younger populations, suggesting that other factors, including possible indirect impacts of the pandemic, are now at play.