I must immediately warn readers who may be wasting their time reading this publication. The author does not offer answers to numerous questions related to the coronavirus; on the contrary, it formulates questions that I would like to receive answers to.
The answers without which it is impossible to objectively assess the situation with the “pandemic”. We are talking about the quality of statistical information distributed by officials, authorities and the media, and the terminology that they constantly use.
It was in January
Suppose, such a "simple" question: how many people in Russia are infected with COVID-19? The official government portal "Stopkoronavirus.rf" provides operational data on "cases of disease", including per day. But what exactly is meant by "sick"? And this is an extremely important point that needs to be clarified.
Let’s take the standard text of an informational message with which the media space is now full:
“Coronavirus was confirmed in 45 people in the suburbs. Over the past day in the suburbs recorded 45 cases of infection with coronavirus. In total, doctors help 305 patients recover. “Over the past day, 45 new cases of coronavirus infection have been identified ... - reports Mosoblstab.”
Is “fixed”, “revealed” and “confirmed” - is it the same or not at all?
In January, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation developed the Interim Guidelines “Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of a New Coronavirus Infection (2019-nCoV)”. According to this document, the statuses “suspected case of infection”, “probable case of infection” and “confirmed case of infection” are introduced.
In this case, the diagnosis is confirmed not by testing, but with the help of a laboratory study. The patient undergoes PCR diagnostics (polymerase chain reaction) of the taken biological material. To get the result in this case, it will take from several hours to two days.
It was logical to assume that all kinds of “pandemic headquarters” would use the classification proposed by the Ministry of Health and categorize potential victims of COVID-19 into three groups, but they would arbitrarily operate on some vague definitions. Hence another question: is it terminological sloppiness or conscious brain dusting?
In any of the options described in the Temporary Recommendations, the person is subject to hospitalization. What happens next? On March 31, Denis Protsenko, chief physician of the Infectious Diseases Hospital in Kommunarka, said that 314 people were being treated at the medical facility, including 59 with confirmed and 127 with a probable diagnosis of coronavirus infection, with a diagnosis of pneumonia being made to 202 patients.
As you can see, even the doctors of the head specialized clinic need time to confirm the diagnosis of coronavirus in their patients. However, all patients with pneumonia who have come under the supervision of infectious disease specialists have obviously already fallen into the frightening statistics of “infected with coronavirus”.
But if the official data on the “infected” provide at least an approximate idea of the scale of the “pandemic” and the dynamics of the spread of the virus, then when it comes to dead citizens, we enter the realm of perfect puzzles. The same site, Stopkoronavirus.rf, tells us how many "people died" in Russia. And this killer wording, or, as they said at party meetings, the wording — the variations “died from the coronavirus” or “due to the coronavirus” - is repeated thousands of times by parrots from the television box and other (second-rate) sources.
Media that thoughtlessly replicates everything that comes from the WHO or the Koch Institute, but try to maintain a reputation for quality, are expressed slightly differently. Here is a typical headline for a federal news agency: "Three more patients with a positive coronavirus test died in Moscow." By the way, for reference: in the capital, on average, more than 300 residents die on a daily basis.
The information seems to be presented very correctly: in a day in Moscow, three people really died and they actually passed the test for COVID-19, which gave a positive result. However, with all the correctness, this message is completely empty.
Firstly, as we already know, a positive test is not an official confirmation of infection. And secondly, nothing is said about the causes of deaths, which may be completely unrelated to the notorious “pandemic”. Moreover, almost all the dead had a whole bunch of diseases.
Mortality is normal?
So, it’s not the fact that the death of these Muscovites was caused by a virus, and not even the fact that they really had a virus, and in the end it turns out that the respected media is doing what? Is it not the spread of fakes?
In this regard, the specificity of COVID-19, such as its increased danger for the elderly, is noteworthy, which is usually explained by a weakened immune system. However, any virus uses "holes" in the immune system, and it is not clear why this particular one should be the exception.
In addition, the decrease in the body's immune defense is “all ages submissive,” and this condition can be caused by a variety of factors. Is there a simpler explanation for the selectivity of the virus and the high proportion of pensioners among its victims? It consists in the fact that the elderly die more often than the young ...
Meanwhile, all perplexities of this kind associated with the lethality of COVID-19 are quite easily removed. After each death, a so-called post-mortem epicrisis is made, where the cause and circumstances of the lethal outcome are indicated and a detailed clinical post-mortem diagnosis is given.
However, information on such diagnoses is not available. Suppose doctors are reinsured and do not disclose these data, because they are 100% not sure of the correctness of their conclusions. Indeed, only the pathoanatomical study can determine the final cause of death. And what's the problem?
According to the instructions of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, pathoanatomical studies in relation to the dead with a diagnosis of coronavirus are carried out without fail. So, there are already several dozen of such conclusions, why, then, do not want to make them public? Most likely, if the results of the autopsies indicated a direct relationship of deaths with COVID-19, this would have been trumpeted into all the pipes.
And here another interesting question arises: are there really objectively confirmed cases of “death from a coronavirus”, or even those insignificant mortality rates (1% - 3%) that are mentioned in our press, are just a product of the information bubble?
And in the end the main question is: do the Russian authorities, who are planning emergency measures to combat the pandemic, come from distorted (to put it mildly) data, or do they still have objective information that they for some reason do not want to share with the public?
I don’t know which answer is “better” ...