主题：【征集】新冠长期后遗症，到底有没有宣传的那么多人？ -- 不远攸高

你既然不是这行的，又不愿意查资料，那我出于对你

💓9774 🌟5442 💧7万+

从二品:光禄大夫|镇军大将军

注册：2009-12-26

这三行个人资质的尊重，帮你查了查相关资料，并贴心的帮所有看到此贴的人送上我的渣翻

。

。

。

一、俺先说结论：你的说法是完全错误的。引述资料1：

usa facts上，专门针对你的以上言论有过详细的介绍，

地址如下：

https://usafacts.org/articles/how-does-the-government-count-covid-19-deaths/?msclkid=e9f6df92bbad11ecaf9f2b8dd0322d47

。

For example, if an individual dies in a car crash and is confirmed to have COVID-19 at the time, their death certificate would not include the virus as a cause of death unless the medical examiner determined it as the underlying cause of the crash.In many cases, the virus can lead to life-threatening conditions like pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome, according to the CDC. As a result, coronavirus is expected to be listed as the underlying cause of death in those cases.

大致意思是，一个人感染了新冠的人如果在车祸中身亡，那他的死亡原因将会是车祸而不是新冠，除非检验人员认为新冠是导致车祸的原因。

。

。

。

。

二、侧面资料1：

CDC下属机构美国国家健康统计中心（NCHS）的访谈也可以佐证，地址如下：

www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/2021/20210319/20210319.htm

。

内容同样比较长，还是我渣翻一下：

A positive COVID-19 test is not by itself a sufficient criteria to warrant reporting on the death certificate – the certifier has to indicate the role of COVID-19 as a cause or contributor. So to the extent instructions are followed we should only be counting deaths from COVID-19.

死亡证明上报告不一定必须标注（死者为）新冠检测阳性，除非检验人员有意愿（或者说，必须——比如家属保险理赔需要——121GDI加注）证明新冠是死亡的原因。 因此，美国人应该（只要不是闲着没事干）只计算单纯因新冠造成的死亡（deaths from COVID-19）。

。

。

。

三、权威资料1：

CDC自己公布的标准，地址如下：

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf

。

报告结尾列举了一个真实发生而令人倍感遗憾的例子：

An 86-year-old female passed away at home. Her husband

reported that she was nonambulatory after suffering an ischemic

stroke 3 years ago. He stated that 5 days prior, she developed a

high fever and severe cough after being exposed to an ill family

member who subsequently was diagnosed with COVID–19.

Despite his urging, she refused to go to the hospital, even when

her breathing became more labored and temperature escalated.

She was unresponsive that morning and her husband phoned

emergency medical services (EMS). Upon EMS arrival, the

patient was pulseless and apneic. Her husband stated that he

and his wife had advanced directives and that she was not to be

resuscitated. After consulting with medical command, she was

pronounced dead and the coroner was notified.

一名中风三年的86岁女性，在5天前出现高烧和严重咳嗽的症状且拒绝就医。并在（5天内）不幸离世。

。

那么，面对这样的例子（在此，对每一位不幸因病去世的患者家属送上我最诚挚的慰问，因为全世界99%因新冠死亡的人，都是由于其所在政府的不作为、懒做为——121GDI加注）CDC是怎么写死亡原因的呢：

Comment: Although no testing was done, the coroner

determined that the likely UCOD was COVID–19 given the

patient’s symptoms and exposure to an infected individual.

Therefore, COVID–19 was reported on the lowest line used

in Part I. Her ischemic stroke was considered a factor that

contributed to her death but was not a part of the direct causal

sequence in Part I, so it was reported in Part II。

评论：虽然没有进行测试，但验尸官确定这位老人是感染了新冠。

COVID-19被报告为致死的次级因素（影响最小的因素——121GDI渣翻加注）。

（on the lowest line used）。

在死亡报告中，

缺血性中风被认为是导致她死亡的直接因素。

。

。

。