• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Puerto Rico Death tolls was a lie

DamnYankee said:
Leftist propaganda strikes again, huh? Figures. I mean the only people dumb enough to believe the leftist propaganda machine are the hate filled left.
Click to expand...


Trump used to cite unemployment numbers as left wing propaganda, and said actual count was more like 15 -25% or some ridiculously high number ( he made up ) until he became president, now the unemployment numbers put out by the gov are suddenly very reliable.

Don't lecture us on propaganda.

I should think that Trump's actions, deeds, and words are sufficient to inspire contempt in anyone with a reasonable amount of intellect.
 
LewisTT said:
When George Washington University now admits that they never visited Puerto Rico, and used computer modeling to get the result, I'd say it's pretty well made up. PR has U.S. spec record keeping. Show me the death certificates. Otherwise, it's suspect.
Click to expand...
By "admits", you mean "said all along"?

They also "admit" that they used the actual death certificates to get a count of the dead.
GWU further admitted that they took the death count and compared that rate to PR's death rate up until the hurricane.
GWU admitted to using math to discover the difference between the pre-hurricane and post hurricane death rates.
 
Crystal said:
Why? Because he asks pertinent questions? I call that intelligent!
Click to expand...

Because none of you really read this, nor did most other Trump supporters because it would mean being intelligent about it.

The study listed the methods deployed in trying to determine the best death toll number to go with, going so far as to detail why they had to deploy those methods. And that included social and economic factors about Puerto Rico, especially some of the areas hardest hit, that escapes those like the OP. There is even a section of the study talking about why Death Certificates was one issue (not the only issue, one issue) in determining total loss of life because of Hurricane Maria.

Much work went into this study, empirical and analytics, that Trump and his love affair with Twitter rarely if ever care about.

Visiting Puerto Rico as part of the study was not covered, and no one else but George Washington University went through any sort of effort to calculate this. Especially no one right leaning with any credibility other than trying to combat what Trump called "a Democratic effort to make me look bad."

It speaks volumes about Trump turning this disaster into nothing more than his own image, proving himself to be the narcissist we all suspect him to be. The OP taking the bait and creating a thread on this speaks volumes about his total lack of interest in talking about the one study we do have to give us something other than from the hip estimates.

Even if the study is off by as much as 20%, it still gives us a far better picture based on how the math was done than anyone else stepping up to the mic.

So... tell us again about the OP's intelligence here?

The actual study the OP is trying to dismiss...
https://publichealth.gwu.edu/sites/...ality from Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico.pdf
 
Even after Trump is gone from the presidency his awful, vile, heartless supporters will, unfortunately, still be with us. Thump's supporters ARE what the conservatives have turned into. And this thread, and many, many other threads speak volumes about conservatives and the current GOP.
 
Grokmaster said:
You need to read it, before YOU make moronic posts.


The study DID NTO CITE VERIFIED DEATHS, but used their own MADEUP "CRITERIA", with ZERO VERIFICATION to make their claims.
Click to expand...

I guaranteed you didn't read it, right wingers never do, they just spout idiot talking points they get from fox news, don't have the intelligence to actually read and understand science
 
HowardBThiname said:
Virtually every catastrophe has published the names of the deceased within a month's time. Where are the names of PR's deceased? CNN recently asked the very same thing.

The names are known, obviously, because the deceased were buried by funeral homes and CNN was able to talk to funeral home owners to get a moderated number of the deceased back in October of last year. PR is not a third-world nation where they bundle up their dead and toss them in a bog -- they are a territory of the US and they keep track of their dead citizens. Every year, they report the number for publication in the CIA World Factbook.

Puerto Rico has published 64 names. Where are the rest?

PR has an impetus now to put up more names -- but not identify the victims. Why? Because FEMA will pay $6000 in funeral expenses for each of the storm-related deceased. But, if the names are unknown, the Puerto Rican government takes the money and then disperses it. Or, they'll do what many have accused them of doing for years -- keep the money for themselves.

The bigger the death toll -- the more money PR makes.

Who are the deceased?

If you have any respect at all for them -- you'll ask until that question is answered.
Click to expand...

If you bothered to read the study you would have the answers.

You guys really think only 64 people died as a result of this hurricane?
 
LewisTT said:
When George Washington University now admits that they never visited Puerto Rico, and used computer modeling to get the result, I'd say it's pretty well made up. PR has U.S. spec record keeping. Show me the death certificates. Otherwise, it's suspect.
Click to expand...

You mis-characterize GWU, as they never claimed to visit Puerto Rico or disputed that they used a computer model.

If you want to point the finger at the press for misrepresenting the information, go to it, but please recall that this started with Trump crying foul, but he didn't explain it any better. He just started call people liars.

No one knows exactly how many people died as a result of this storm. It's not knowable, because during the same time some people died from unrelated causes, and others died quite a while later from infections, heat exhaustion, privation, etc.

Rather than pointing fingers about who is making up the worst numbers, we need to accept that the death toll is likely MUCH higher that the ~60 deaths Trump has latched onto, and that the statistical modelling is simply that.

We don't need an exact count of the deaths, as long as we have done our level best to assist these U.S. citizens when they needed it. I'm not confident we have. We certainly haven't treated this like the clarion call it should be that Puerto Ricos infrastructure problems are the U.S.'s problems to fix.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
I guaranteed you didn't read it, right wingers never do, they just spout idiot talking points they get from fox news, don't have the intelligence to actually read and understand science
Click to expand...

No, you just proved that you are who has not read it.




Please QUOTE the "methodology" that you delude refutes THIS: (It's SECTION 4, btw.)

The study DID NTO CITE VERIFIED DEATHS, but used their own MADEUP "CRITERIA", with ZERO VERIFICATION to make their claims.
 
Acadia said:
Hurricane Irma caused 8 official deaths in PR. 1 Million people were without power and hospitals had to operate on generator power. That's about 1/3 of the population.
Based on this study, we can extrapolate that the actual death toll is around 600 people.

Right??


That's a helluva lot higher than the official death toll, and yet, no "scientific study" was commissioned. I wonder why?

Which makes me wonder; who funded this GW study?
Click to expand...

HowardBThiname said:
Virtually every catastrophe has published the names of the deceased within a month's time. Where are the names of PR's deceased? CNN recently asked the very same thing.

The names are known, obviously, because the deceased were buried by funeral homes and CNN was able to talk to funeral home owners to get a moderated number of the deceased back in October of last year. PR is not a third-world nation where they bundle up their dead and toss them in a bog -- they are a territory of the US and they keep track of their dead citizens. Every year, they report the number for publication in the CIA World Factbook.

Puerto Rico has published 64 names. Where are the rest?

PR has an impetus now to put up more names -- but not identify the victims. Why? Because FEMA will pay $6000 in funeral expenses for each of the storm-related deceased. But, if the names are unknown, the Puerto Rican government takes the money and then disperses it. Or, they'll do what many have accused them of doing for years -- keep the money for themselves.

The bigger the death toll -- the more money PR makes.

Who are the deceased?

If you have any respect at all for them -- you'll ask until that question is answered.
Click to expand...

Two things whenever something smells.
#1 Who benefits?
#2 Follow the money
 
OrphanSlug said:
If you bothered to read the study you would have the answers.

You guys really think only 64 people died as a result of this hurricane?
Click to expand...

You haven't read it, obviously.


Please read Section 4 of it, and explain how that equals citing PROVEN DEATHS.
 
Grokmaster said:
You need to read it, before YOU make moronic posts.
The study DID NTO CITE VERIFIED DEATHS, but used their own MADEUP "CRITERIA", with ZERO VERIFICATION to make their claims.
Click to expand...
They cited

"...PRVSS data from September 2017 to December 2017 with the same
period in 2015 and 2016. In addition, we compared the period from September 20 to
September 30 in each of the 3 years."

PRVSS – Puerto Rico Vital Statistics System


You have some better way of counting the dead than the death certificates filed?
 
WillyPete said:
You mis-characterize GWU, as they never claimed to visit Puerto Rico or disputed that they used a computer model.

If you want to point the finger at the press for misrepresenting the information, go to it, but please recall that this started with Trump crying foul, but he didn't explain it any better. He just started call people liars.

No one knows exactly how many people died as a result of this storm. It's not knowable, because during the same time some people died from unrelated causes, and others died quite a while later from infections, heat exhaustion, privation, etc.

Rather than pointing fingers about who is making up the worst numbers, we need to accept that the death toll is likely MUCH higher that the ~60 deaths Trump has latched onto, and that the statistical modelling is simply that.

We don't need an exact count of the deaths, as long as we have done our level best to assist these U.S. citizens when they needed it. I'm not confident we have. We certainly haven't treated this like the clarion call it should be that Puerto Ricos infrastructure problems are the U.S.'s problems to fix.
Click to expand...

Puerto Rico has NO RECORDS of its residents, and did not identify the dead there?


Citaiton, please.
 
Grokmaster said:
You need to read it, before YOU make moronic posts.
Click to expand...

Telling you or anyone to read it is not moronic, that's all I said. The OP assertions of "...made up" is moronic, and rich, given that Trump used to claim unemployment was around 15=25%, stating gov data was left wing, but when he become president, suddenly gov data is reliable.

Your reply, jumping to a conclusion on assumptions, before you have the facts, is also moronic. In fact, much of your postings on this forum are moronic.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...niversity-death-toll-donald-trump/1288908002/
A team of researchers spent six months poring over death certificates, speaking to funeral home directors and interviewing doctors to arrive at a death toll of nearly 3,000 people as result of Hurricane Maria's devastation to Puerto Rico, according to the lead author of the study.

“This was a scientific research project commissioned by the government of Puerto Rico and independently done,” said Carlos Santos-Burgoa, who led the study from George Washington University's Milken Institute of School of Public Health.

Santos-Burgoa pushed back on President Donald Trump's tweets Thursday questioning the study’s estimate of the death toll. Without offering evidence, Trump said Democrats were involved in an effort to overstate the results in order to discredit him.

“We stand by what we did,” Santos-Burgoa told USA TODAY in a telephone interview, adding that the study that found 2,975 deaths underwent rigorous peer review.
Click to expand...
 
Simon W. Moon said:
They cited

"...PRVSS data from September 2017 to December 2017 with the same
period in 2015 and 2016. In addition, we compared the period from September 20 to
September 30 in each of the 3 years."

PRVSS – Puerto Rico Vital Statistics System


You have some better way of counting the dead than the death certificates filed?
Click to expand...

They didn't quote the DEATH CERTIFICATES.

Can't read?


They subtracted the number of people currently in Puerto Rico, from the number before the storm, MADEUP THEIR OWN, COMPLETELY UNVERIFIED, BULL**** METRIC as to who emigrated, etc. and then "DECIDED" the rest, for whom NO DEATH CERTIFICATES WERE FILED, had died from the storms.

IOW..UTTER NONSENSE.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
]

Click on the first link, it is a PDF of the study. Go look for yourself if you want to know their methodology. Or people can just believe some hack who makes unsubstantiated claims on a message board
Click to expand...


What's really interesting about their methodology is that they claim that the doctors didn't know how to fill out the death certificates. They're actually insinuating that physicians who were bright enough to pass med school and the exams are too stupid to know if a death was hurricane-related.

Talk about a racist bit of BS. LOL Those brown doctors are stoopid. Yeah, right.

Maybe the little whippersnappers at GWU are the stoopid ones. Ya think?
 
Grokmaster said:
They didn't quote the DEATH CERTIFICATES.
Can't read?
They subtracted the number of people currently in Puerto Rico, from the number before the storm, MADEUP THEIR OWN, COMPLETELY UNVERIFIED, BULL**** METRIC as to who emigrated, etc. and then "DECIDED" the rest, for whom NO DEATH CERTIFICATES WERE FILED, had died from the storms.
IOW..UTTER NONSENSE.
Click to expand...

fyi — You description bears no resemblance to what is written in the report.
 
OrphanSlug said:
If you bothered to read the study you would have the answers.

You guys really think only 64 people died as a result of this hurricane?
Click to expand...

I did read it. I downloaded it and read it.

Did you miss my post about how the GWU students insinuated that the PR doctors didn't know how to record a death?

LOL -- seriously?
 
Grokmaster said:
You haven't read it, obviously.


Please read Section 4 of it, and explain how that equals citing PROVEN DEATHS.
Click to expand...

Because they had no choice, and the Study even makes recommendations as to how to improve. They went with several collection methods just to get to their numbers telling us why each method was used.

Why is this such a problem? The only Study we have to give us some sort of number being dismissed for the 64 only number?
 
HowardBThiname said:
I did read it. I downloaded it and read it.

Did you miss my post about how the GWU students insinuated that the PR doctors didn't know how to record a death?

LOL -- seriously?
Click to expand...

They clearly caused enough of a problem where alternate means we needed to find out more.
 
HowardBThiname said:
What's really interesting about their methodology is that they claim that the doctors didn't know how to fill out the death certificates. They're actually insinuating that physicians who were bright enough to pass med school and the exams are too stupid to know if a death was hurricane-related.
Talk about a racist bit of BS. LOL Those brown doctors are stoopid. Yeah, right.
Maybe the little whippersnappers at GWU are the stoopid ones. Ya think?
Click to expand...

It doesn''t seem to say anything about the Drs being stupid.
It reports that there was little guidance about how to fill out death certificates. It also cites communication issues between the folks filling out death certificates and the govt about the guidelines.

You may have made up the stupid bit on your own it seems. ymmv


"Most physicians have no formal training in completing a death certificate
and thus are not aware of appropriate death certification practices, especially in a
disaster setting. When the special CDC guideline was disseminated after the disaster,
some of those who had access to it found that it conflicted with what they had previously
learned. Those interviewed said they did not receive information about how to certify
deaths during, or in conditions created by, a disaster. Several interviewed physicians
were asked about the CDC guidelines the PRVSR circulated after the hurricane that
recommended they fill out a section in the death certificate with information or other
conditions that contributed to the death. Several said— as did a spokesman for the
physician community in hearings—that they understood this section as seeking more
information about health conditions."
 
Grokmaster said:
Puerto Rico has NO RECORDS of its residents, and did not identify the dead there?


Citaiton, please.
Click to expand...

Is that what I said?

How do you distinguish between a guy who dies from an infection they caught before the storm, and one who dies from an infection as a direct result of the storm?

Many of these "excess deaths" are being blamed on high heat with no electricity for AC. Doesn't mean every poor grandmother that succumbed to that is storm related, because maybe her AC broke, or maybe she can't afford electricity to begin with.

There's no way they will ever have an exact number that we know is correct. Also, it's a distraction from the actual issue, which was the part of my post you didn't respond to.
 
Acadia said:
Hurricane Irma caused 8 official deaths in PR. 1 Million people were without power and hospitals had to operate on generator power. That's about 1/3 of the population.
Based on this study, we can extrapolate that the actual death toll is around 600 people.

Right??


That's a helluva lot higher than the official death toll, and yet, no "scientific study" was commissioned. I wonder why?

Which makes me wonder; who funded this GW study?
Click to expand...

Puerto Rico funded it - the same Puerto Rico that's known for it's corruption. Actually, American taxpayers funded it as well to some extent, seeing as a good number of GWU students are likely on Pell Grants.

At any rate -- the higher the death toll, the more money PR stands to get from FEMA ($6000 per dead), so it behoove PR to make the number high.

Yet, they can't seem to come up with the names of the dead.

How odd is that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom