According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on August 23, 2020, “For 6 percent of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19 , on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death.” For a nation tormented by restrictive public health policies mandated for healthy individuals and small businesses, this is the most important statistical revelation of this crisis.
This revelation significantly impacts the published fatalities count due to COVID-19. More importantly, it exposes major problems with the process by which the CDC was able to generate inaccurate data during a crisis. The CDC has advocated for social isolation, social distancing, and personal protective equipment use as primary mitigation strategies in response to the COVID-19 crisis, while simultaneously refusing to acknowledge the promise of inexpensive pharmaceutical and natural treatments.
These mitigation strategies were promoted largely in response to projection model fatality forecasts that have proven to be substantially inaccurate. Further investigation into the legality of the methods used to create these strategies raised additional concerns and questions. Why would the CDC decide against using a system of data collection & reporting they authored, and which has been in use nationwide for 17 years without incident, in favor of an untested & unproven system exclusively for COVID-19 without discussion and peer-review?
Did the CDC’s decision to abandon a known and proven effective system also breach several federal laws that ensure data accuracy and integrity? Did the CDC knowingly alter rules for reporting cause of death in the presence of comorbidity exclusively for COVID-19? If so, why?
This historical retrospective will provide a timeline summary of events to help the reader orient themselves to many aspects of the cri- sis previously unknown and will discuss the significance of the March 24, 2020 COVID- 19 Alert No. 2 that had a dramatic impact upon cause of death reporting numbers.
Supportive data comparisons suggest the existing COVID-19 fatality data, which has been so influential upon public policy, may be substantially compromised regarding ac- curacy and integrity, and illegal under existing federal laws. If the fatality data being presented by the CDC is illegally inflated, then all public health policies based upon them would be immediately null and void.