Anybody heard from Herald Erjen?

Again you're still being quite vague. What fear/propaganda is being spread? What specific information shouldn't be taken as gospel? What makes you think such information isn't "proven to be solid absolute evidence?" OK, you offer one example with: "Is a CV death really from CV?" That's for medical professional to decide. Dr. Mike did a good video on this subject where he talked about how it's often the case (not just with CV) that a person dies from a multitude of comorbidities and all of them are listed on the death certificate. It is, indeed, a known fact that CV makes people with other health issues more likely to die from those issues, so a heart attack would be MORE deadly for someone with CV; so if someone DOES die from those other things it's very reasonable to list CV as a cause of death. And what reason would healthcare professionals have for spreading misinformation on death certificates? They get no benefit from it. 

However, even if you think this is inflating the number of "supposed" deaths from CV, there's an alternative way to see how deadly CV has been, and that's by looking at excess deaths. Excess deaths takes into account the average number of deaths from all causes (while excluding some we know would have nothing to do with CV like murders and suicides) and compares them to the deaths from last year. There was a huge, unprecedented spike in excess deaths. So it's also entirely reasonable to attribute those excess deaths to CV, because there was no other variable from last year that could've caused such a spike compared with previous years. 

Wow... I almost can't believe I'm reading this right now. So, yeah, if we were all completely ignorant about a deadly disease, nobody would know about the deadly disease? Are you for real right now? Have you stepped foot in any of the hospitals that were nearly overrun with CV patients? Talked to anyone who works in the medical profession? Had any family members contract CV? I have, on all accounts, so, yes, I would absolutely know that SOMETHING was going on even if I only got my "news" from friends/family and completely ignored the internet and TV.

Plus, a worldwide pandemic hits for the first time in over a century, and you somehow think this is NOT newsworthy? That it shouldn't affect our lives in any way? That we should just live in a little ignorant bubble free from any information that might frighten us? Don't take any precautions at all? I seriously can't imagine where you're coming from here. It's one thing to be against fear-mongering and living in fear, and then it's another thing to be in the midst of the worst pandemic in a century and just shrug as if it were nothing at all. There's a middle, rational ground between those extremes of being alert and taking basic precautions. 

Now I'd say YOU'RE risking being banned by starting on the whole "CV is just like the flu!" nonsense. Again, shut the fuck up and go look at the excess death statistics. They're easily found for anyone with a basic Google search. CV isn't the fucking flu. The deathrate is many times worse. Yes, people die from all sorts of things everyday, but CV has made this much worse as well. Of course, if you're choosing to live in an information-free bubble, I can understand why you wouldn't realize any of this. 

Nobody is saying be scared of anything. When you get into a car and put on a seatbelt, are you SCARED of getting into a car crash? Taking safety precautions isn't a sign of fear, it's a sign of common sense. I have no idea what you think it's being used as a "distortion and distraction" from: WHAT "established underpinnings?" I don't trust the government about a lot of things, but I have no reason to distrust them (at least organizations like the CDC and WHO) about this because they have no reason to lie. This economic shutdown is not helping them in anyway, nor is getting their voting constituents killed. I still don't know what specific reference you're making to last century and what that has to do with our current situation. 

I already addressed this last post, but there's a cost/benefit analysis that needs to be done about lockdowns saving people VS harming the economy. I also know many people who are economically struggling because of the lockdown, so it's not like I don't see the harm that can come from it too; but it's far from immoral to try to prevent people from dying. Most would take economic struggle over death. Again, the virus is still rampant, especially in the US, because people AREN'T following measures. Despite the lockdown there are still people that get together, don't socially distance, and don't wear masks. We saw them all the time at Trump's rallies. I see such people almost every day. If people DID follow such measures then opening up would be a more viable option. They don't, so the debate will continue to persist. Hopefully now that the vaccine is available this will all be a moot point within several months. 

I understand that some nations have advantages because of location and population, but even when you look at how the US has done per capita compared to similar countries we've been terrible. Again we're back to the MSM "fear-mongering" (how?) and government "riding off its coat-tails for their own glorified limelight;" like WTF does the latter even mean? What politicians are getting glory and fame from CV? It may have been the thing that killed Trump's chances at getting a second term.