Only working on my first cup of coffee...bear with me...
Data is an interesting thing, and it also can be a rabbit hole. We have to be careful of ALL the data, how it’s collected, measured, and how it’s normalized. I think the MSM as a whole does a poor job of doing that.
I’m not picking on you, Kevin, but I don’t know if that 3000 people/day average death rate is accurate (I haven’t Looked at the numbers), but let’s assume it is.
In examining the death rate data, we have to take in account that there are also many other factors to consider. You have to dig into the right data in the right WAY to be able to tell the whole story.
How many people (upon average) would have died each day in traffic (MVA) fatalities? Since we are under ‘quarantine’, we (presumably) have less traffic on the roads. This translates to less accidents, which means less MVA deaths. How does this change the 3000 deaths/day stat? Does this reduction in traffic, and traffic related deaths correlate with the NORMAL rate of MVA related deaths per day?
Additionally, now many people would have normally died in work related accidents (WRA) that are NOT dying in these type of accidents because of the lockdown?
How many people WOULD have died due to a bee sting that are not now...because not as many people are working in their yards? By the same token, how many wives were killed by their husbands (or vice versa!) from being quarantined together for too long?! Silly example, I know..but it illustrates the point.
I’m quite sure we are going to see interesting stats on death rates overall as a result of this. How we dig down into it if extremely important.
HOW the data is counted is equally, if not MORE important than the data itself. Remember the 1994 Clinton Crime bill (that gave us the AWB), and how ‘they’ told us it ‘reduced’ crime? When we dug into the data further, it was determined that the AWB had negligible effects on the crime stats...that new/innovative policing strategies and techniques had the most drastic effect on crime reduction, as did economics. Correlating the AWB to the reduction in crime was simply NOT the true picture.
Accurately differentiating between actual deaths caused BY COV-19, and deaths of people WITH COV-19 is extremely important. Of those who die OF it, factors have to be normalized for other data (health risk, age, etc). Same as seasonal flu...people dying OF it have other factors to consider. Example...If 72 year old John Smith DIDNT have COPD, and heart disease, would be have died of the flu? Would the flu be any more/less deadly? What about Sally Adams? Sally is a 24 year old female with no known major health risk factors, why did she die of the flu?
MANY factors have to be normalized for/taken into account in the statistical equation for COV-19 deaths.
Among them: age, race, economic status, education (yes, even that), underlying health factors (by category)....many, many things...before an accurate model can be determined. It takes a lot of data and time to sort through the data before we are able to see the true picture.
Yes, I realize I’m making very general statements (as opposed to using real data examples), but I’m trying to keep it simple in order to illustrate the point...(and it is worth saying AGAIN) be careful with data, how you collect it, count it, measure it, and weigh it against statistical norms.
In the mean time, (yes, people are dying, I know that’s important..and scary for some), we have to wait for the true picture. True statistics considerably lag data....so while we wait, be safe, careful, keep your head about you, and don’t panic over all this.