SecondJon @SecondJon@qoto.org

Okay okay, but he doesn't mean tweet.

@JustJim @ParkerTechGuy each kid gets one birthday dinner there. We have several kids. The food...won't get worse, so I see this as a chance it'll get better.

@thekatatonic @ParkerTechGuy I drove through Hell one February day years ago with a friend. It was all snowy and frozen over. Disappointing.

https://notthebee.com/article/this-1963-report-on-how-the-communist-party-wanted-to-take-over-america-is-ridiculously-relevant-for-today

This 1963 report on how the Communist Party wanted to take over America is so relevant for today that it's unreal

#uspol

@freemo oh. Right. Yes, I'm referring to numbers as they're communicated to the public. We can't really blame the public for running with the only information made avaliable to them, right?

@freemo How was it? Historically accurate?

@freemo yep, agreed. That's why it was a problem when the state was only publishing on their official covid data website what you call a pointless tangent with no relevance! Glad they fixed that.

@freemo Yes, of course they couldn't update the official covid death numbers for past dates without having a separate, previously unpublished data source. All along this is what I've been trying to communicate.

The only officially published numbers until last May included deaths presumed to have been caused by covid and deaths not presumed to have been from covid.

I'm glad that we now have both sets of numbers.

Still, many of the numbers are subjective, not objective. A covid caused death is a covid caused death whether there's any laboratory confirmation that a person had covid. If for no other reason than we know there were not enough tests avaliable at different times in different places, so some had to make a presumption. That's the best we have and we can work with that.

@rose_myrtle shalom isn't necessarily far off... One biblical meaning is peace, quiet, tranquility.

Jesus did refer to himself as Lord of the Sabbath. It wasn't written in Hebrew words as a name, but would that count?

@freemo yes, that article from 7 months after they adjusted the number is different. Same state, same calendar year (barely), but different topic.

I'm tired and probably irritable, unrelated to this thread, so really trying to not be bombastic or anything here. Bear with me if you will.

My comment about Colorado was that there was only one set of numbers being presented by the state, which included anyone who died while having covid regardless of cause of death and when it hit the news that the only reported numbers included car accident deaths, Colorado changed how it reported.

You at first seemed to write off the idea of that kind of list... I'm sure it exists but it's not really relevant. Now I read you saying that of course it exists, it's super relevant, there's always and forever been two, and anyone who is educated would never think otherwise.

Here's one more source for you to read or ignore.

_____
DENVER (May 15, 2020): The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) today explained the way it has been counting deaths among people with COVID-19 and announced an addition to data reporting going forward. 

CDPHE explained that to date, its data dashboard included deaths among all people who had COVID-19 at the time of death. This included deaths caused by COVID-19 and deaths among people who had COVID-19 at the time of death, but the cause or causes may not have been attributed to COVID-19 on the death certificate. This is the standard way states report to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

Going forward, the state will present both numbers: Deaths among COVID-19 cases and deaths due to COVID-19.
_____

This is all I've been saying.

They changed how they reported the numbers after media reports about non covid cases being included in what this link says was the only list being pushed out AND saying it's not just Colorado but that every state was reporting to the CDC. Then this site says the state CHANGED how the Colorado government would report, to BEGIN distinguishing between the two lists.

Is this fox news? Some wild conspiracy theory website from the dark web?

https://covid19.colorado.gov/press-release/state-explains-covid-19-death-data-reporting

I'm glad they did the right thing on May 15, publishing both sets of data. For the first time. But that's not a conspiracy theory or a bad media source. It's the state directly.

Side note : I just read through the slide deck linked by that article. Covid as a probable or presumed cause even without any laboratory confirmation are included in the official death by covid ICD-10 code. That's interesting, but really, at all knew there weren't enough tests for a long time ago the numbers had to be presumed to some level.

@freemo Like I said, we were looking at the state department of health official numbers covid19.colorado.gov .
Of your argument is that the Colorado government from which we were directly getting information was pushing bad data, then are on the same page.

I don't believe men become angels when they become bureaucrats, politicians, or even doctors.

Just like a person writing a media report can convey false information, so can governmemt officials.

I took another 30 seconds to find another news source reporting, hopefully the liberal Denver Post isn't as triggering as a fox affiliate link.

https://www.denverpost.com/2020/05/15/colorado-covid-coronavirus-counting-deaths-fatalities/

Here's another, also not fox.

https://www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/05/16/colorado-changes-how-coronavirus-deaths-state-counted/5198485002/

I'm surprised given previous discussions at how this interaction has gone. My only point is that it's reasonable to believe the data isn't accurate/consistent/unbiased /complete, but we should strive for consistency in how we choose to interpret it.

@freemo

So here in Colorado we all were daily watching the official Colorado department of health state wide numbers go up and up. Then one day there was a big drop. Not just to total numbers, but daily numbers on past dates. That's when we found the state had been keeping two sets of numbers and the official report was based on deaths with covid until that point. Then they switched out which set of numbers were officially reported.

You and I both agree that's not how things should be. So I look at this and it clarifies my perspective, reality does not align to my assumptions. You look at this and just deny the reality, and call me a conspiracy theorist and attack the name of the website that quoted the government leader who explained the change.

Well, OK then. When the response is calling me names because I belive my lying eyes rather than your assumptions, the conversation has lost value.

We'll interact better again on other topics, I'm sure.