Public Service Announcement: stop getting your news from /r/covid19 or /r/coronavirus -- they are heavily censoring any dissent on the narrative. 📦

126    08 Aug 2020 06:04 by u/deep_muff_diver_

People have been even getting banned for posting anything that claims the c19 death toll is overestimated or anything regarding the hundreds of negative consequences of lockdown (including many more deaths than the lockdown saves). This is all happening even if citations and reasoning are provided. I would say get your news from all sources and then make up your mind but at this stage, reddit is subject to the whim of the moderators who use whichever rule they want in whichever way they want to control output. I personally was banned from the /r/coronavirus for posting that US death toll is overestimated and included MULTIPLE SOURCES. It's time to boycott reddit if you care at all about open dialogue -- regardless of your political beliefs.

37 comments

34
Indeed, /coronavirus, the main sub that reddit promotes, is nothing but propaganda from the communist Chinese government. No great surprise, seeing as how the CCP is reddit's second largest investor. Subs that post *real* information have been quarantined or outright banned from the start.
10
This. I was banned from the sub for simply stating that it was highly likely the pre z ident would contract it. They really are controlling a narrative of scaremongering the world while showing that China is doing everything right. 您将首先征服哪个美国州?
16
imo any sub that reaches r/all at that frequency has an obvious bias
10
[deleted]
2
Source?
5
Definitely don't think these subreddits should be banning folks for asking questions but no, it definitely isn't an 'established fact' that COVID-related deaths are overestimated. There's plenty of evidence that current death tolls are actually an underestimate (sources below). I'm curious as to what tiny percentage of car crash fatalities are currently being attributed to COVID-19 but if you succumb to car crash-related injuries because you are immunocompromised due to COVID-19, that would rightly be counted as a COVID-related death [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-covid-19-deaths-are-counted1/](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-covid-19-deaths-are-counted1/) [https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200701125506.htm](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200701125506.htm) [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2767980](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2767980) [https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.13.20064220v1](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.13.20064220v1)
2
[deleted]
0
I don't think they are being over reported. I think there are far more c19 related deaths that are not due to actual infection. Like panic keeping people from medical care, or like a friend of mine (no dead but could have) has a bacterial pneumonia that was treated like Covid until they finally figured it out. And of course suicide from depression because of lockdown. These aren't getting talked about enough. Loss of job, no escape from abuse, isolation are all factors.
1
Or literally millions of people starving to death from the catastrophic economic damage of global lockdowns.
0
I don't think people are starving to death. My father has been house bound for a couple of years. He's been having groceries delivered and meals on wheels and other such services. In his area those services got banned. Straight up gig economy (his area hated that anyway) got banned, but the way they wrote the order it banned any kind of delivery that wasn't parcel or post. The exception seemed to be free delivery. So you could order services to your house like a locksmith or plumber because they aren't charging you separate for coming over. My dad lives in a retirement town. The population is 40% over 60. They've shut everything down and rightfully so. So how's my dad gonna eat? This was a genuine worry of his. I almost drove the 8 hrs to his community to stock him up on can foods and shelf stable items. Fortunately there are as many churches as clinics even though my dad isn't particularly religious. They (not being able to hold services) came door to door proselytizing. The mayor tried to stop it, but it's not like they wore uniforms. They left promptly if asked (or yelled at). Anyway, they got to my dad's, house he told the Jehovah's, he told the Mormon's, he told the Baptists, it took them a bit, but even the Jewish temple made it to his house. Initially they each hooked him up with food, but eventually the labor trade people who attended these institutions worked out that they could deliver food. You'd call the church (my dad is sticking it out with the Baptists) then he'd request a "plumbing inspection" from someone on their list. Then some apprentice kid would show up with the groceries and my dad pays with a paper check or card swipe to the plumbing contractor. Lockdown has since been eased and gig economy is reopened and restaurants are reopened at least in part. Unless there are places actively preventing agricultural transactions communities are finding a way to bypass their government. Btw, the mortality rate in my dad's community is terrible. About 25% are dieing if they get Covid. Much higher than my community that sits at about 0.1%. My dad's community has super slow spread with a population of 60k they've only had about 600 cases. My population is almost a million and were closing in on 100k cases. Population density? Did my dad's community abandon it when the very strong gig economy was shut down? We can't figure out why this unregulated gig economy they've got going hasn't spread it more.
1
> I don't think people are starving to death. I'm referring to globally.
0
> Btw, the mortality rate in my dad's community is terrible. About 25% are dieing if they get Covid. Source
2
Here's another. https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/03/measuring-excess-mortality-gives-clearer-picture-pandemics-true-burden/
1
In June, 9/10 of the top causes of death were significantly below average, whilst there's been a law enacted forcing a 20% higher insurance pay out for c19 deaths. What do ya think? There's also been people listed as covid deaths even though they were never test, although I don't recall the source but can search it if you require. http://inproportion2.talkigy.com/cause_of_death_20jul.html ------------------------------------ Section 3710 of the CARES Act provides for a 20% increased in Medicare payments for COVID-19 diagnosed patient. “SEC. 3710. MEDICARE HOSPITAL INPATIENT PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM ADD-ON PAYMENT FOR COVID–19 PATIENTS DURING EMERGENCY PERIOD. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1886(d)(4)(C) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(4)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the following new clause: ‘‘(iv)(I) For discharges occurring during the emergency period described in section 1135(g)(1)(B), in the case of a discharge of an individual diagnosed with COVID–19, the Secretary shall increase the weighting factor that would otherwise apply to the diagnosis-related group to which the discharge is assigned by 20 percent. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-116hr748enr/pdf/BILLS-116hr748enr.pdf ------------------------------------
5
Overestimate death count of covid is no longer a rumour. It's an established fact, to censor it means they have an agenda to push higher numbers, probably to spread fear and panic. After 5 months, people are getting fatigued by this bogeyman.
4
Whilst I disagree with narrative that covid related deaths are being seriously overreported, I disagree with the censorship of the discussion. We can't change minds if we don't talk to each other.
1
But at the same time we have to be careful with this kind of misinformation, it kills literally people...
1
Spoken like a true fascist
2
They used misinformation to enforce a lockdown which literally kills people.
1
Which death number would you believe in? What's your source that numbers are lower than reported?
2
In June, 9/10 of the top causes of death were significantly below average, whilst there's been a law enacted forcing a 20% higher insurance pay out for c19 deaths. What do ya think? There's also been people listed as covid deaths even though they were never test, although I don't recall the source but can search it if you require. http://inproportion2.talkigy.com/cause_of_death_20jul.html ------------------------------------ Section 3710 of the CARES Act provides for a 20% increased in Medicare payments for COVID-19 diagnosed patient. “SEC. 3710. MEDICARE HOSPITAL INPATIENT PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM ADD-ON PAYMENT FOR COVID–19 PATIENTS DURING EMERGENCY PERIOD. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1886(d)(4)(C) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(4)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the following new clause: ‘‘(iv)(I) For discharges occurring during the emergency period described in section 1135(g)(1)(B), in the case of a discharge of an individual diagnosed with COVID–19, the Secretary shall increase the weighting factor that would otherwise apply to the diagnosis-related group to which the discharge is assigned by 20 percent. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-116hr748enr/pdf/BILLS-116hr748enr.pdf ------------------------------------ Stephen Crowder has a good 'Change my mind' video on this topic, and he uses difference sources to come to the same conclusion.
1
Regarding the first source, I don't exactly get their conclusion that the limited access to healthcare reduced the numbers of deaths of other natural causes. And since the reduction is double the covid deaths, where is the other half? Seems like there are actually fewer deaths to other causes. And are we now talking about US or UK? Since the first source is London and the CARES Act is US. Recarding the CARES-Act section, it's hard to say what hospitals do, this is no proof for either side. And where did the lockdown cause deaths? PS: Gonna watch the Video
1
> I don't exactly get their conclusion that the limited access to healthcare reduced the numbers of deaths of other natural causes. That is strange. Limited access to healthcare would increase deaths from other causes. You sure that's what was claimed? Perhaps that's what they meant.
1
This statement woud suggest it. It is very unlikely that deaths from heart disease, influenza, dementia and alzheimers, neoplasms (mostly cancers) and all the other top ten leading causes of death should all reduce at the same time. So what can be going on? A number of experts have warned that to restrict access to the healthcare system could have deadly consequences for significant numbers.
1
The key is that the restrictions would impact preventable deaths. Lockdown doesn't reduce preventable deaths unless the ICU is going over capacity. "New York City spent $52 million on coronavirus hospital that served 79 patients " https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/new-york-city-spent-dollar52-million-on-coronavirus-hospital-that-served-79-patients/ar-BB170MU6
1
The article says that the normal hospitals were over capacity...even with lockdown The temporary hospitals were not used due to miscommunication
1
The former due to the latter
1
So you agree the virus is that bad that the normal hospitals could not handle the cases. So there had to be actions taken, and masks, lockdown, temporary hospitals, social distancing were all the things to prevent deaths. Since the communication between the hospitals was that bad thank god there was a lockdown. Imagin it whitout it. I mean like the article says even with all these things they were over capacity.
1
>Stephen Crowder has a good 'Change my mind' video on this topic, and he uses difference sources to come to the same conclusion. Even he makes good points that we don't have a perfect statistic for every covid case that the death was directly caused by covid and would not have happened whitout it, it bothers me he uses the whole time his "25% are not confiremd covid cases"-statement. While this seems true for New York City, which he also linked in the video, this seems to be a cherry-picked statistic. The CDC-Site has no data for every state, but for the states they have data, the data is up to date and the not confirmed cases are not near the 25% he uses. [https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html)
1
Definitely stinks of government and media induced hysteria to impose authoritarian control over people.
1
Either you believe in the stats of 25% and the other data or not. But if you don't believe in any statistic there is no baseline to have a discussion
1
I don't know to what extent, but 9/10 being significantly under plus subsidising covid deaths would naturally result an oversupply.
1
This statistic is still from the UK and the fewer deaths are still double the corona cases, so the deaths of other causes were actually going back, there is no other explanation for the "missing" deaths since they are not counted as corona.
1
Oh I didn't notice that it's from the UK. Thanks for pointing that out. Yeah we can only wonder where, I guess it's more indicative than confirming. The subsidies are economic law, though.
1
This thread is already getting a few reports. As a mod, I'm going to remain impartial and happy for discussions to take place. Being childish won't be tolerated by either side of the argument.
3
It's the authoritarian brigade wishing they could censor any critique of the "do anything to stop covid deaths even if it means catastrophe in every other facet of life" narrative.
1
No one is gonna see this here though, sorry