• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Unvaccinated Texas man first in US to die of Omicron variant

roguenuke said:
It says right at the top that they actually do include each one, which is why they can't be added up. There are multiple causes of death, contributors to death included on a lot of death certificates in the US, not just a single thing. If there are multiple things on the death certificate listed as possibly contributing to the death, then each is in fact put into that table. If you added all those up, they would come out to far more than over 300k things to have died from (this was a table from last Dec btw, not recently).

The circumstances of his specific event are what determine those odds. You are trying to attribute general numbers to a specific case where you don't even know anything about the person besides their age range. That's not okay. And people do beat any sort of odds you can present. Specific circumstances do matter.

The fact remains though just in relation to that particular death, you don't have enough info to know what happened, to know if it was wrongly coded or if in fact he died from Covid after being struck by lightning.
Click to expand...
Coding mistakes might be a good guess.. for example, if theyre using ICD9, the code for lightning strike (994.x) could have been mis keyed as 993, which would be 'affects of air pressure' like high altitude - which a COVID illness in the backcountry at altitude could certainly kill someone.
 
Threegoofs said:
Coding mistakes might be a good guess.. for example, if theyre using ICD9, the code for lightning strike (994.x) could have been mis keyed as 993, which would be 'affects of air pressure' like high altitude - which a COVID illness in the backcountry at altitude could certainly kill someone.
Click to expand...
Without more information, we simply don't know what these deaths were. But the go to of these CTers automatically assuming is ridiculous. I'm even willing to say that almost certainly some of these were marked wrong. But then we also very likely had it the other way too, where there were many deaths that weren't attributed to Covid which should have been.

I'm fine with reviewing the deaths, but I'm willing to bet that it isn't really what people think it is, that many of these "suspicious" deaths/contributing factors are in fact part of the story but with Covid also being a main factor.
 
jonny5 said:
But he might not be alive due to the flu instead. And he wasnt naturally immune. Plus we dont know if he ignored the symptoms when he could have gotten regeneron or some other treatment. Or if he could have improved his health in the last couple years. Was he smoker? That would have a big impact.

To much rush to use tragedy to push politics. Not you, just in general.
Click to expand...

None of what you said changes that if it were not for catching covid he would still be alive. Would he have died a week or two later from flu? Maybe or maybe not. We'll never. Because covid killed him. Not the flu. By the way, most people dying from flu do NOT die directly from it. They die from pneumonia or some other condition caused by flu.
 
jonny5 said:
More people should move to Canada
Click to expand...
Most are welcome but our immigration policies are designed in such a way as to be welcoming but prudent. One of our biggest protections is that Fox is not allowed a broadcasting licence here which keeps the most undesirables of undesirables out!
 
Slavister said:
None of what you said changes that if it were not for catching covid he would still be alive. Would he have died a week or two later from flu? Maybe or maybe not. We'll never. Because covid killed him. Not the flu. By the way, most people dying from flu do NOT die directly from it. They die from pneumonia or some other condition caused by flu.
Click to expand...
Of course it does. We dont know if he could have made decisions to improve his immunity, or gotten treatment. If you get covid and get treatment right away, it reduces the risk of dying. He could have gotten covid and still been alive under different conditions. 99% of peopel survive covid, so its more unlikely he died from covid, than something other factor.

Also ALL people who die from COVID, or the flu, do not die directly from it. They die most commonly from inflamation in the lungs which also leads to pnuemonia. Dying from a virus or from a secondary result is a distinction without a difference.
 
Last edited:
Callen said:
Most are welcome but our immigration policies are designed in such a way as to be welcoming but prudent. One of our biggest protections is that Fox is not allowed a broadcasting licence here which keeps the most undesirables of undesirables out!
Click to expand...

Well then more liberals should move to Canada.
 
VanceMack said:
"and had an underlying health condition."

in 2020, counted among the COVID deaths (and this is a short list...I dont have time to examine the whole document) there were 12,586 terminal cancer patients. Thousands of diabetes patients with multiple comorbid ailments. Over 4000 cases of death due primarily to lack of normal physiological development. 6600 cases of general ailments. 600 deaths due to falls. Over 1026 cases of choking. 17 cases of people dying from burns. 470 drug overdoses. 40 deaths by alcohol overdose. 43 suicides. 735 deaths as a result of non-COVID related surgical procedures (including reactions to xrays, reactions to catheters, reactions to anesthesia, reactions to transplants...etc.. 183 deaths resulting from falls and vehicle crashes. 41 deaths by chemical burns. 1 killed in a terrorist attack using chemical weapons (I kid you not). 85 deaths from car, motorcycle, and boating accidents. 1,178 deaths from falls...including slipping on ice, falling from scaffolding, falling out of a wheelchair, etc. 10 people died in fires. 261 deaths by accidental poisoning.

oh yeah...and 2 dead from war activities.

and 1, due to lightning strikes.
Click to expand...
Did they have Covid at the time of the lightening strike?
 
anatta said:
was he given therapeutics? that's the key question. vaxxing people with underlying conditions still leaves them vulnerable
therapeutics are the treatment, when the preventive ( vaxxing) doesnt work
Click to expand...
Is ivermectin, bleach or iodine therapeutics?
 
bongsaway said:
So it was the underlying condition that killed him? You are just insistent on downplaying the covid part.
Click to expand...
it's like if you are in the hospital for something and get an infection and die- the pneumonia would kill you but the underlying condition is why you die
 
anatta said:
it's like if you are in the hospital for something and get an infection and die- the pneumonia would kill you but the underlying condition is why you die
Click to expand...
Are you saying covid doesn't kill people, underlying conditions do?
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL. No. He died from what he died from. All we know is that a physician determined it was COVID and that the lightning strike was a complicating factor.

You can calculate all the numbers you want, but its not going to tell you anything useful.
Click to expand...
That's not what the table indicates though. I wish people would even read the source material before spouting nonsense.

Directly from the tablet, first line, linked in this thread, the table content is explicitly defined:

"This table shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)"

Deaths involving COVID-19. I feel like I'm living in crazytown here.
 
anatta said:
i realize deaths and hospitalizations lag behind case counts -but is this really...?
“We are looking at a winter of severe illness and death for the unvaccinated — for themselves, their families and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm,” (Biden)

case counts dont really matter if the symptoms are mild ( you get acquired immunity if so)--
and Europe is freaking out...

are we jumping the shark?
Click to expand...
It all depends on your perspective I suppose, but as the quote goes: "chance favors the prepared mind", so it's better to be prepared for it to be bad and it turning out ok than the opposite since that often means reacting to a bad situation in a less than optimal way. The big question mark is how bad will Omicron be based on population demographics, and since deaths are a lagging indicator, the situation in Europe will better inform us of what to expect here.
 
It's early days yet as far as data go for this new variant. Once there are many thousands of documented, well-detailed cases of the Omicron strain infection available, statements from reputable sources worth reading will appear.

Until then, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.
 
remember the Trump Republican here who, early on in this pandemic, said it was just nature culling the herd?
 
fireflygmf said:
That's not what the table indicates though. I wish people would even read the source material before spouting nonsense.

Directly from the tablet, first line, linked in this thread, the table content is explicitly defined:

"This table shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)"

Deaths involving COVID-19. I feel like I'm living in crazytown here.
Click to expand...
Yeah… it’s not unreasonable to assume that this is indicating patients with active COVID disease who died- not just a positive lab test.

But you’re crazy town stance is that you know exactly what this disembodied table shows, you know where it’s from, snd you understand that somehow, being stuck by lightning immunizes you from dying from COVID.
 
Threegoofs said:
Yeah… it’s not unreasonable to assume that this is indicating patients with active COVID disease who died- not just a positive lab test.

But you’re crazy town stance is that you know exactly what this disembodied table shows, you know where it’s from, snd you understand that somehow, being stuck by lightning immunizes you from dying from COVID.
Click to expand...
Well, I said nothing about just a positive lab test, but we know they had detected COVID to one degree or another.

It's crazytown to me because if we are all being honest here all we can calculate the chances that this individual died from on event or the other. The data is without context (aka. disembodied data, as you rightly say), so it is mathematically correct to calculate the chances using aggregate averages, unless more specific data comes light about this individual case.

Also, I don't say I know 100% that he died via lightning strike, just that the overwhelming chance is that he did. It's 2000% more likely than having died from COVID but does not make him "immunized" - don't even know why you'd bring that up - nor does it mean his death could not have been primarily by COVID, it's just extremely unlikely given the rates of other coinciding events.
 
fireflygmf said:
Well, I said nothing about just a positive lab test, but we know they had detected COVID to one degree or another.

It's crazytown to me because if we are all being honest here all we can calculate the chances that this individual died from on event or the other. The data is without context (aka. disembodied data, as you rightly say), so it is mathematically correct to calculate the chances using aggregate averages, unless more specific data comes light about this individual case.

Also, I don't say I know 100% that he died via lightning strike, just that the overwhelming chance is that he did. It's 2000% more likely than having died from COVID but does not make him "immunized" - don't even know why you'd bring that up - nor does it mean his death could not have been primarily by COVID, it's just extremely unlikely given the rates of other coinciding events.
Click to expand...
I would say it’s extremely likely it was due to COVID because a rando lightning strike victim who arrives DOA isnt going to be exhibiting COVID symptoms.

And, you apparently didn’t catch my sarcasm about the immunization comment.
 
Threegoofs said:
I would say it’s extremely likely it was due to COVID because a rando lightning strike victim who arrives DOA isnt going to be exhibiting COVID symptoms.

And, you apparently didn’t catch my sarcasm about the immunization comment.
Click to expand...
So, just to sum up your position:
  • A person had COVID to one degree or another
  • Said person was also struck by lightning
  • Said person dies at some point thereafter
  • Published death rate from lightning strike ~ 10%
  • Published death rate from COVID infection ~ 0.5%
Given no more context about this case, your guess: "it’s extremely likely it was due to COVID"

I mean, wow.
 
fireflygmf said:
That's not what the table indicates though. I wish people would even read the source material before spouting nonsense.

Directly from the tablet, first line, linked in this thread, the table content is explicitly defined:

"This table shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)"

Deaths involving COVID-19. I feel like I'm living in crazytown here.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it feels like you're on the other end of this,
OIP.2-670tMgt9hn86TCBRDJHgHaF_
, doesn't it?
 
fireflygmf said:
So, just to sum up your position:
  • A person had COVID to one degree or another
  • Said person was also struck by lightning
  • Said person dies at some point thereafter
  • Published death rate from lightning strike ~ 10%
  • Published death rate from COVID infection ~ 0.5%
Given no more context about this case, your guess: "it’s extremely likely it was due to COVID"

I mean, wow.
Click to expand...
The death rate of people who die from COVID is (checks notes) 100%.

You’re looking at a table where someone- either a coroner or attending MD- listed COVID as a contributing cause.

Again, it could literally just be a coding error. But it’s not some random statistical datapoint where you can calculate odds. I thought you did this stuff for a living?
 
Threegoofs said:
The death rate of people who die from COVID is (checks notes) 100%.

You’re looking at a table where someone- either a coroner or attending MD- listed COVID as a contributing cause.

Again, it could literally just be a coding error. But it’s not some random statistical datapoint where you can calculate odds. I thought you did this stuff for a living?
Click to expand...
Indeed I do.

As I understand it, this is *not* the case of COVID as a part I death certificate cause, it could be listed in part 2 as well, this the designation of "involving COVID" rather than "due to COVID". I have taken those words to be explicit, as I expect such people to be careful with their words. If COVID was the primary cause in all of these listed items, it would be designated as such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom