Democracy Has Prevailed.

December 6, 2020

Wendy Bell STILL Has A Problem With The Truth...

...or reality or something. 

Goddamit this is tiring. Debunking the P-G's Jack Kelly was at least fun. Debunking the climate change denials of the Trib braintrust was at least fun. This is a constant mindnumb, an ice cream brain freeze without the pleasures of a good chocolate chocolate chip with sprinkles.

So be it. Let's do this thing.

If you were to stumble across Wendy Bell's facebook page, and scroll down a day or so, you'll find this:

Yep, she got snagged by the fact-checkers at Facebook. Yet again.

If you were to click on that "See Why" button, you'd see this:

Fact Check: Video From Georgia Does NOT Show Suitcases
Filled With Ballots Suspiciously Pulled From Under A Table;
Poll Watchers Were NOT Told To Leave
Which is what Wendy was asserting. If you don't feel inclined to believe Facebook, other's have fact-checked this false assertion as well:

The story's just not true, Wendy. When will you be correcting the record? (Y'know, to protect your journalistic credibility?)

But that's the false claim Facebook caught. They have yet to snag her on this bit of false from last Tuesday. Wendy described it thusly:

When a researcher’s study of COVID deaths (conducted at a respected institution) goes against the narrative pushed by big government, big tech and big media, then gets RETRACTED, common sense Americans have their greatest fears realized. Everyone is corrupt.

And she opens with this little bit of projection at a little under one minute in. She asserts that she has "very basic values" but, alas, there's a pushback:

...against those values - about basic integrity, about honesty, about morals, about being able to go to bed at night knowing that you did the best job you could, that you didn't cheat or lie or steal or deceive for your own benefit to the detriment of others. 

And yet every single day in this country, that's all we see. We see people corrupted by greed and thirsty beyond thirsty for power who are willing to sell out their morality and put other people in danger and at risk for their own benefit.

Does the Angel of Death not possess even a soupçon of introspection? Can she not see that she's describing herself here? 

I suppose not.

Anyway, she brings to you the story after dutifully telling you about the good folks giving her money for so she can do her DIY broadcasts. She says:

(05:29): What triggered this whole conversation for me today was a friend of mine had forwarded me an article that was published November 22nd [by the Johns Hopkins school newspaper].

Ah...this'll be good. Wendy continues that if it's from Johns Hopkins, it's gotta be true, right? Right??

She adds a little familiar COVID virus denial for good measure:

(06:42): [It's] a virus that, if you talk to almost any doctor will tell you, operates just like other viruses -  it impacts those who are the weakest and the most at risk first and does have some outlier effects on healthy people but very rarely. A 99% survival rate with this virus ladies and gentlemen.

Misinformation like this (99% survival rate, it's just like other viruses) is going to get people sick and some of them will die, Wendy.

Any statement that downplays the deaths of 270,000+ of our fellow citizens is morally reprehensible and marks the person making the statement as complicit in those deaths. I say that because basic integrity, honesty and morality demand it. I say this because it's simply immoral to put other people in danger for their own benefit. 

Note: This edition of Wendy Bell Radio is sponsored by Attorney John D'Onofrio and Dr. Richard Rafferty of the Disc Institute of Pittsburgh and Tom Yakopin of West Penn Life & Health. Give them a call and let them know how you feel about Wendy Bell's take on the deaths of so many of our fellow citizens.

But back to Wendy. She spends a few minutes breathlessly summarizing the November 22 article, which contained this:

[Genevieve] Briand also noted that 50,000 to 70,000 deaths are seen both before and after COVID-19, indicating that this number of deaths was normal long before COVID-19 emerged. Therefore, according to Briand, not only has COVID-19 had no effect on the percentage of deaths of older people, but it has also not increased the total number of deaths.

These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people js assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.

Mmm Wendy like but then Wendy sad:

(24:04) Wouldn't you know somebody found out about that article because just five days later they retracted the article about this Johns Hopkins researchers' research. They retracted it. Somebody got to them ladies and gentlemen.

See that?? Somebody got to them! Maybe it was the cigarette smoking man! Maybe it was Ted Cruz' father! Maybe it was Professor Moriarty! In either case, it must've been someone connected to George Soros, right?? I'm sure Q will tell us once Trump finishes his divine quest of clearing the swamp and imprisoning all the pedophiles in the Demonrat party.

Wendy seems to think that because the article was published it effectively debunked the CDC/WHO/mainstream narrative that the virus kills lots of people. Furthermore she seems to think that it's being quashed simply because it contradicts that narrative. Reacting to the paper's retraction, Wendy says: 

From the retraction:

(24:41): Editor's note: We decided on November 26 to retract this article to stop the spread of misinformation.

Wendy reacts: 

How is using CDC data and analyzing how many people in what age groups died from what causes this year and going back and comparing that same data to two years prior misinformation?  It's misinformation if the information you get contradicts the narrative. Bingo!

Except that the article wasn't retracted because it conflicted with the accepted narrative. It was retraced because it was factually incorrect. 

There is a difference, you know. It's as clear as the difference between fact and opinion. A journalist would know the difference, Wendy. Do you?

From the retraction:

Briand was quoted in the article as saying, “All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers.” This claim is incorrect and does not take into account the spike in raw death count from all causes compared to previous years. According to the CDC, there have been almost 300,000 excess deaths due to COVID-19. 

Additionally, Briand presented data of total U.S. deaths in comparison to COVID-19-related deaths as a proportion percentage, which trivializes the repercussions of the pandemic. This evidence does not disprove the severity of COVID-19; an increase in excess deaths is not represented in these proportionalities because they are offered as percentages, not raw numbers.

But they're not alone. Newsweek has looked into this story:

In late November, the student-run Johns Hopkins News-Letter published a story, since retracted, about a study claiming that there have been no extra deaths, known as "excess deaths," in the U.S. this year from COVID-19 compared to deaths expected in an otherwise normal year.

This year, there have been nearly 300,000 excess deaths attributed to COVID-19, as of early October, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data.

The story was published on November 22, then taken down, with a retraction published on November 27. The retraction said the study cited in the story "has been used to support dangerous inaccuracies that minimize the impact of the pandemic."

[Bob Anderson, chief of the Mortality Statistics Branch at the National Center for Health Statistics at the CDC] said taking down the story was warranted.

"The study was retracted by the newsletter for a reason," Anderson said. "It's because it wasn't very good at all."

The student-run publication said its decision was made "to stop the spread of misinformation," and it acknowledged that it had inaccurately claimed that there was "no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths" and that number of total deaths were "not above normal death numbers."

The facts:

"Overall, an estimated 299,028 excess deaths occurred from late January through October 3, 2020, with 198,081 (66%) excess deaths attributed to COVID-19," according to a report on the CDC's website. "Excess deaths are defined as the number of persons who have died from all causes, in excess of the expected number of deaths for a given place and time."

Then there's this from Factcheck:

An economics professor’s flawed interpretation of U.S. mortality data has prompted a viral, false claim that COVID-19 hasn’t led to more deaths than normal this year. In fact, multiple analyses have found there to be a higher-than-normal number of deaths during the pandemic — as much as 20%, according to some studies.

And this from Health Feedback:

Firstly, the study the claim refers to was not a scientific study, but instead an article published in a student newsletter at Johns Hopkins University. Secondly, the claim that no excess deaths have occurred in 2020 is false. Data from the U.S. CDC clearly shows that the number of deaths in 2020 is higher than that of previous years, most likely as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.  


The U.S. has recorded more than 200,000 excess deaths (about 300,000 according to the latest CDC data) from all causes in 2020 compared to the average number of deaths in previous years. Excess deaths in 2020 have also been observed in all age groups, ranging from young adults to the elderly.

When will you be correcting the record, Wendy? You're still downplaying the severity of the virus and as such you're morally complicit with all the extra suffering you're causing.

How do you sleep at night?