While many health authorities still insist kids should receive coronavirus vaccinations and colleges coast to coast are making the shot a requirement for returning to class, this policy’s folly has been illustrated by yet another analysis — one showing that the average age of those dying of COVID-19 is greater than the average lifespan.
In other words, politicians kept children locked down; schools closed; people masked, distanced, and isolated; and practically stopped civilization over a disease that was little to no threat to most citizens.
What’s more, if health authorities had actually acknowledged this reality, the “science,” they could have targeted their efforts and saved many thousands of elderly. Instead, Governors Andrew Cuomo (D-N.Y.), Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.), and Patrick Murphy (D-N.J.) ordered that SARS-CoV-2 patients be, or allowed them to be, put in nursing homes, causing massive death.
Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson and his team uncovered the lifespan-related data and presented them on his show yesterday evening. As DJHJ Media reports:
“The data shows that the median age of death for COVID is often older than life expectancy,” the Fox host said. “For real. If you want to get a sense at just how completely they have hyped this virus, turning it into something that the numbers show it is not, take a look, for example, at Ohio.”
Carlson then put up on the screen the median age of death due to COVID-19 in the state of Ohio being 80-years-old when the average life expectancy there is 73. This means that about half of the people who died from COVID lived longer than they were expected to live without catching the pandemic virus. They lived 7 years longer than the average life expectancy.
He went on to provide the numbers from other parts of the US as well as the numbers found in the United Kingdom (UK). In the UK, the median age of COVID deaths is 83 and the life expectancy is 81-years-old.
And get this. All of the numbers, every state, shows that the median COVID death rate all through 2020 was were for people who lived longer than they were supposed to according to their state’s life expectancy.
(To view the segment of Tucker Carlson Tonight referenced above, click here.)
The Washington Post’s Philip Bump critiqued Carlson’s analysis, saying that he “doesn’t know how life expectancy works.” Aside from disputing the Fox commentator’s numbers, the journalist stated that it’s not correct to say that “half of the people who died from COVID lived longer than they were expected to live without catching the pandemic virus” because your life expectancy changes with age. “The older you get, the higher your life expectancy gets because you’ve already lived that long,” as Bump puts it.
“So for 75-year-olds, life expectancy in 2018 was an additional 12 years — meaning that an American who was that age in 2018 would be expected to live until 2030,” he elaborated a few sentences later.
Fair enough, and gaining a deeper understanding of matters is always good. The problem is that amidst all Bump’s facts and figuring, he misses (or obfuscates) the main point. This is that while Carlson’s report may not be as powerful as it appears on the surface, it nonetheless reaffirms what we’ve known ever since early-2020 data out of Italy showed that the average age of deceased China virus victims was 79.5 and that 99 percent had comorbidities:
COVID is a disease imperiling mainly the elderly and unwell, and there’s a large overlap between those two groups.
This is why the Centers for Disease Control’s own data indicate that someone 0 to 19 years old who contracts the virus has a 99.997 percent chance of survival; it’s why more kids die in pool drownings yearly than have been claimed by the coronavirus thus far.
Bump doesn’t seem to like this kind of talk, saying about how Carlson framed things that there’s an “inescapable morbidity to this argument broadly: These people were going to die anyway! This is no big deal!”
Now, since this comes from a guy who’s pro-prenatal infanticide (abortion), perhaps Bump is a situational pro-lifer. But it’s also ironic coming from someone who supports the very Democrat politicians who, ignoring science and data as he does, killed those thousands of aforementioned nursing home patients.
Policy can be crafted compassionately, but data are meant to be analyzed with cold objectivity. Studies have shown and reason informs that Democrats’ restrictive China virus regulations have been counterproductive and that lockdowns cost lives, not save them.
So Bump and his fellow travelers are engaging in dangerous misdirection. They appear to have forgotten that the little picture is supposed to be used to help construct the big one, not to obscure it.
