Blog

COVID-19 Pandemic Paradox: 2020 Has Fewer Deaths Than Five Years Prior

Scientists in the United Kingdom have coined a new term: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic paradox. The term refers to the comparison between the mortality rate in the early months of the pandemic to the last five years during the same months. Researchers at the Warwick School of Medical collaborated with the Institute of Digital Healthcare, University of Warwick, to conduct a statistical analysis of death records for the last five years in England and Wales.

The time period studied started from the inception of the pandemic in December 2019 until the end of March 2020. Data was collected from the Office of National Statistics. Weekly deaths on average were taken into account during the study period. Researchers also looked into death rates related to respiratory illnesses and created a subgroup, since COVID-19 causes respiratory trouble in serious cases. Also, shortness of breath is one of the early symptoms noted in COVID-19 patients. 

Furthermore, the research took into account population growth and other individual trends for the last five years. Finally, the researchers found that national death rates had declined in the first four months of the global outbreak compared to previous years. Particularly, the months leading up to the pandemic that was declared on March 11 by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

It is important to note that the decline in mortality rate observed early this year was only in comparison to the past five years during the corresponding months (December to March). “We used government data in England and Wales to compare weekly mortality rates during the COVID-19 pandemic and over the previous 5 years. Death rates were elevated during each week of December 2019 excepting one and throughout the first half of January 2020,” the paper explained about the trends observed.

“However, since that time, there have been consistently fewer deaths each week compared with the average over the previous 5 years: the total number of weekly deaths dropped from 11,548 to 10,841 in mid-February and from 11,498 to 10,895 in mid-March,” the paper elaborated with statistics.

Keep reading

Nearly 1 In 4 College Students Say They’ll ‘Likely’ Protest If Trump Wins Election, Survey Says

Around 40% of college students said they will likely or certainly protest if President Donald Trump wins the election, according to an Axios poll released Friday.

Exactly 22% of students surveyed said they are likely to protest and 17% said they will protest should Trump win the 2020 election, the College Reaction/Axios survey found. More students, 30%, said they would not protest if Trump won and 31% said they are not likely to protest a Trump victory.

“The dissatisfaction with the status quo is also reflected by the number of students who are willing to protest Trump reelection with 40% of college students saying they will likely or certainly participate in protests,” the survey said.

Only 1% said they are “absolutely certain” to protest if Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden wins the election, according to the survey. Almost three quarters, 70%, said they “absolutely will not” protest if Biden wins the 2020 election.

Keep reading

Before The Bidens “Did” Ukraine, There Was Iraq… And Serbia

Today many people remember Iraq, some have a clue about Ukraine. But Serbia, which preceded them, is off the radar screen of most Americans. To recap:

As a Senator in the 1990s, Joe Biden was one of the most militant advocates of U.S. military action against Serbs during the breakup of the Yugoslav federation, first in Croatia (1991-95), then in Bosnia (1992-95), and then in Serbia’s province of Kosovo (1998- 1999). (As has been said about others like Hillary Clinton and the late John McCain, Biden evidently has never met a war he didn’t like. Along with Hillary, in 2003 Biden helped to whip Senate Democrat votes for the Bush-Cheney Iraq war.) Channeling his inner John McCain, Biden continually called for the U.S. to bomb, bomb, bomb bomb the Serbs while (in a foreshadowing of the Obama-Biden administration’s support for jihad terrorists in Libya and Syria, which ultimately resulted in the appearance of ISIS) pushed successfully for sending weapons to the Islamist regime in Bosnia and then for the U.S. to arm the Islamo-narco-terrorist group known as the “Kosovo Liberation Army” (KLA).

Joe Biden was the primary sponsor of the March 1999 Kosovo war authorization for military action against Serbia and Montenegro, S. Con. Res. 21. (As a little remembered historical note, Biden’s resolution might be seen as the last nail in the coffin of Congress’s constitutional war power. While S. Con. Res 21 passed the Senate, it failed in the House on a 213-213 tie vote, with Republicans overwhelmingly voting Nay. It didn’t matter. Bill Clinton, reeling from the Lewinsky scandal, went ahead with the bombing campaign anyway.) The ensuing 78-day NATO air operation had little impact on Serbia’s military but devastated the country’s infrastructure and took hundreds of civilian lives. (Even now, more than 20 years later, Serbia suffers from elevated cancer levels attributed to depleted uranium munitions.) But for Jihad Joe even that wasn’t punishment enough for people he collectively demonized as “illiterate degenerates, baby killers, butchers, and rapists.” In May 1999, at the height of the NATO air assault, he called for the introduction of U.S. ground troops (“we should announce there’s going to be American casualties”) followed by “a Japanese-German style occupation.”

Eventually the bombing stopped in June 1999 when then-Serbian strongman Slobodan Milošević acceded to temporary international occupation of Kosovo on the condition that the province would remain part of Serbia, as codified in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. It was a promise the U.S. and NATO, not to mention their European Union (EU) concubine, had no intention of keeping. Under the nose of the NATO occupation, ostensibly demobilized KLA thugs were given virtually free rein to terrorize the Serbian population, two-thirds of whom were driven out along with Jews and Roma, the rest sheltering in enclaves where they remain to this day. Orthodox Christian churches and monasteries, many of them centuries old, were particular targets for destruction and desecration. KLA commanders – who were also kingpins in the Kosovo Albanian mafia dealing in sex slaves, drugs, weapons, and even human organs – were handed local administration.

In 2007 Senator Biden praised the new order as a “victory for Muslim democracy” and “a much-needed example of a successful U.S.-Muslim partnership.” A year later, the Bush administration sought to complete the job by ramming through Kosovo’s independence in barefaced violation of UNSCR 1244 and despite strong Russian objections. But instead of resolving anything the result was a frozen conflict that persists today, with about half of the United Nations’ member states recognizing Kosovo and half not. Touting itself as the most pro-American “country” [sic] in the world, the Kosovo pseudo-state became a prime recruiting ground for ISIS.

But hey, business was good! Just as in Iraq, the politically well-connected, including former officials instrumental in the attack on Serbia and occupying Kosovo, flocked to the province fueled by lavish aid subsidies from the U.S. and the EU, which for a while made Kosovo one of the biggest per capita foreign assistance recipient “countries” in the world. One such vulture – sorry, entrepreneur – was former Secretary of State Madeleine we-think-a-half-million-dead-Iraqi-children-is-worth-it Albright, a prominent driver of the Clinton administration’s hostile policy on top of her personal Serb-hatred. Albright sought to cash in to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars on sale of the mobile telephone company PTK, originally a Yugoslav state-owned firm that was “privatized” (i.e., stolen) in 2005 as a joint stock company, but who later dropped her bid when it attracted unwanted publicity. Also in the hunt for Kosovo riches was former NATO Supreme Commander and operational chief of the Kosovo war General Wesley Clark, who reportedly cornered a major share of the occupied province’s coal resources under a sweetheart deal that seems to have vanished from public scrutiny since first reported in 2016.

At the moment there seems to be no smoking gun of a direct Biden family payout, à la Ukraine, but there is a possible trail via Hunter’s Burisma-buddy Devon Archer and Archer’s fellow-defendant John “Yanni” Galanis, who in turn is connected to top Kosovo Albanian politicians. In any case, the Biden clan seems to have paid a lot of attention to Kosovo for not having skin in the game. Joe’s late son and Delaware Attorney General, Beau, worked in Kosovo following the war to train local prosecutors as part of an OSCE (Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe) “rule of law” mission (admittedly a big task in a mafia-run pseudo-state), for which a road was named after him near the massive U.S. base Camp Bondsteel. With Hunter on hand for the naming ceremony, Joe Biden took the opportunity to express his “condolences” to Serbian families who lost loved ones in the NATO air assault – of which he was a primary advocate.

Keep reading

Make America Cringe Again

Other than the fly that landed on Pence’s head, and stayed there for a hypnotising two minutes, Harris’s sassy deflections of the vice-president’s non-interruptions were key moments of the night. And not in a good way. While liberal cable news channels clipped the exchanges, and Twitter proclaimed ‘SLAY KWEEN’, I’m sure many voters were reminded of the kind of identitarian posturing from Democrats that they have come to loathe.

Harris has particular form in this regard, proving herself willing to throw around accusations of bigotry (and worse) to score political points and damage her opponents. Even her now running mate hasn’t been spared this. In one debate during the Democratic primary, she essentially called Joe Biden a racist over his former opposition to bussing. She also said, prior to the primaries, that she ‘believed’ the women who had accused him of sexual assault.

Keep reading

Factional warfare erupts in New York Times over the 1619 Project

The immediate trigger for Sulzberger’s memorandum was a Friday column written by Times opinion writer Bret Stephens, “The 1619 Chronicles.” Stephens is one of the Times’ leading columnists. An anti-Trump conservative, he pointed to the absurdity of many of the Project’s historical claims as well as its disregard for basic journalistic principles. Stephens concluded that the 1619 Project was “a thesis in search of evidence.”

Stephens quoted at length from historian James McPherson’s interview with the World Socialist Web Site, to which he provided a link. In early September 2019, the WSWS produced the first major exposure of the racialist falsifications of the 1619 Project, a few weeks after its rollout amidst an unprecedented media blitz. The WSWS followed this with interviews with scholars who dismantled the 1619 Project’s major claims—McPherson, Victoria Bynum, James Oakes, Gordon Wood, Dolores Janiewski, Adolph Reed, Jr., Richard Carwardine, and Clayborne Carson.

The Stephens column brought into the open the bitter conflict raging at the Times over its creation and promotion of the 1619 Project.

Keep reading