We’ve all seen these frightening headlines, (and god only knows how many times I’ve had these thrown in my face the past five months):
-Covid-19 infections leave an impact on the heart, raising concerns about lasting damage
-Even mild coronavirus cases can cause lasting cardiovascular damage, study shows
-From ‘brain fog’ to heart damage, COVID-19’s lingering problems alarm scientists
-Doctors say some patients with COVID-19 can have heart damage
Unlike 80% of those who now get their news by scrolling down their Facebook and Twitter feeds — reading only the headlines and the copy/pasted first paragraphs — I have the obsessive habit of actually clicking on those links to read the stories. Even more annoying, (to some), I also click on the hyperlinks in those articles, (if they are included), to the research and studies referenced in those headlines.
I’m going to walk you through a couple of these deceptive headlines and related studies, step by step, proving to you the means of the fear mongering manipulations of even the most tame, non-threatening scientific data. I’m going to avoid the hard math, but provide the links for those who wish to go there. I’m going to keep this as simple, yet as thorough as possible. First, let’s take a brief sidebar journey into Journalism 101:
We all know that when it comes to choosing a story or a front page headline, the axiom of “if it bleeds, it leads” has always guided what comes first in traditional newspapers, the 11 o’clock news, and now . . . internet publishing. Why? Simple. There’s also the secondary axiom: “follow the money.” Sensationalism sells. Newspapers don’t exist unless you buy a copy. Also, unless a sufficiently large enough number of others are seduced into spending their money on print editions, advertisers don’t buy ad space. The 11 o’clock news must have enough eyeballs glued to the screen to sell their own commercial time. Internet publishers must generate clicks, and in so doing can then surround articles with those annoying pop-up ads. Their headlines must be of sufficient impact, even if the underlying information is a snoozefest.
“Click-bait,” we call it.
A 2016 study by computer scientists at Columbia University and the French National Institute revealed that 59% of social media users will share a story based on the headline only, before or even without having ever clicked on the link themselves.
Share-bait!
How about this headline from Upworthy: “I wrote a news headline that didn’t even link to a story. Over 2,000 people commented on it anyway.”
Comment-bait!
According to a 2013 Slate story, among the remaining small percentage who even click on the story, 10% never scroll . . . at all. They only read the first paragraph or look at the accompanying photo. They “bounced” without engaging at all. Most never finish any article, even the ones they click on.
Are YOU still here?
Newspapers, broadcast journalists, and internet publishers all know this: the vast majority of people get their news from the headline, the accompanying photo, and not much more than the opening paragraph. Therefore, when some of us finally begin making headway in presenting the the FACT that COVID-19 is survivable by 99.76% of the total population, and 99.99% of the rest with no comorbidities, we get this headline thrown in our faces:
“Even mild coronavirus cases can cause lasting cardiovascular damage, study shows”
Ergo . . . if most of us are going to eventually be infected by this “novel” coronavirus, we can expect widespread damage to all of our hearts. Right? So important is that information, 58% shared those stories without even clicking on the link. 10% of those who clicked never scrolled past the first paragraph. The vast majority of the remainder never finished the article, so how many do you think actually bothered to click on the links to the referenced studies?
Almost no one. But . . . I did.
I’ve scrolled down and read a few dozen articles with some headline variation on that particular story about cardiovascular damage caused by coronavirus infections. Many provide no links at all, but here’s one that did offer links to the studies referenced by those chilling headlines:
“Covid-19 infections leave an impact on the heart, raising concerns about lasting damage”
Go ahead. Click on the link. I’ll wait . . .
Okay? Now, let’s begin with the linked study that is found well down the article, past the point most people will even bother reading. It’s title:
“Association of Cardiac Infection With SARS-CoV-2 in Confirmed COVID-19 Autopsy Cases”
That link takes you to a recent study published by JAMA Cardiology in the journal of the American Medical Association. Please feel free to read the entire study, but for the purposes of this blog, please note the four most salient points taken from the abstract:
1 – The size of the study: only 39 patients.
2 – This research was based on the autopsies of those 39 patients who died from complications related to COVID-19.
3 – The average age of those patients was 85. (All were 78 to 89 years of age.)
4 – “Comorbidities such as hypertension, coronary artery disease, and diabetes were frequent and diagnosed in 17 (43.6%), 32 (82.0%), and 7 patients (17.9%), respectively.”
Did you catch that? 82% of those 39 victims already had coronary artery disease, before contacting COVID-19.
Do I really need to explain — now that you know this information — why so many 27 year olds are scared to death of COVID-19? Why they are willing to submit to lockdowns, loss of livelihoods, and accuse non-mask wearing neighbors of being “selfish murderers” when they themselves have a statistical 99.9997% likelihood of surviving this disease?
Let’s go to the other link in that article, which presents data on a larger sampling of younger infected patients. This is also published by JAMA Cardiology, entitled:
The primary takeaways of this “larger” sampling:
1 – Only 100 patients were studied.
2 – All 100 had recovered from “acute” or “severe” cases of COVID-19. 78% of those demonstrated “cardiac involvement,” and only 60% had “ongoing myocardial inflammation.”
3 – The median age of those studied was 49. (All were 45 to 53 years old.)
4 – Of those studied, “preexisting cardiovascular conditions included hypertension, diabetes, and known coronary artery disease but no previously known heart failure or cardiomyopathy.”
One must download the accompanying PDF link of the study, to discover those patients’ pre-existing conditions:
-22 had hypertension
-18 had diabetes
-22 had hypercholesterolemia (high cholesterol)
-13 had known coronary artery disease
-21 had COPD or asthma
-22 were smokers
5 – “Our study has limitations. They do not represent patients who are completely asymptomatic with COVID-19.” (As is the case with most in that age range.)
The worldwide study by the University of Stockholm, (published earlier on this page), revealed that those in the 45 to 53 age group had an overall survivability rate of 99.98% on the lower age range with no preexisting conditions, and 99.2135% on the higher age range with one or more preexisting conditions.
As is clearly demonstrated, those living in a state of manufactured, unwarranted fear of this disease — and therefore submitting to the draconian shutdown mandates of our governors, mayors, and their paid bureaucratic “experts” — are whipped into that panic by the deliberately misleading headlines being shared by millions (billions?) living in wanton, lazy ignorance. Those who not only fail to read past those headlines, but also choose to mindlessly accept the manipulations of those who seek to sell ad space by means of hyperbolic pronunciations, click-bait, and share-bait. Not to mention the more sinister intentions of the powers behind the MSM and tech giants, who by their very knowledge of the reading/scrolling/clicking habits of their average followers choose to manipulate and sensationalize even the most innocuous and non-threatening of scientific studies.
Two studies. One of only 39 patients; average age of 85; all with comorbidities; 82% of whom already had coronary artery disease. The other of only 100 patients; all who recovered from severe cases; none of whom were asymptomatic; most with at least one pre-existing condition. Both studies generating dozens of articles with headlines specifically designed to be shared by millions who will not even read the accompanying studies, for the purpose of cowering the remainder of the healthy population into quarantine and the masks of subservience.
Did you make it this far? If so, please share this article. You are worthy of so doing.
#CommieVirus2020 #UnMaskTheAgenda
—————
Thanks for keeping on this, it gives me some hope that eventually enough people will awaken to all the ways, and maybe whys, this “crisis” is a fabrication.
I wish people were not stupid sheep. If even HALF the population thought about things or cared to research the world would be a better place. Thank you for Thais article.
Thanks for the information. Too many don’t read the facts!
Very interesting. I for one am guilty of doing this very thing. I guess this will teach me to slow down and read.
I am guilty of not always reading an entire article, but I don’t share or comment unless I do. And isn’t it sad that people won’t/don’t/can’t do their own research ? I’m thankful that you do/did.
Thank you
Unfortunately too many people believe this rubbish and do not do any research. I have been working, facing the general public everyday in the UK since lockdown, I am 56 years old, no previous notable medical history and I have remained healthy and I believe will continue to do so. But now I have to wear a mask to go shopping, absolutely ridiculous. People need to wake up to this rubbish. How many people dies of Covid19 in June this year compared with those that dies from non related Covid19? Read the figures, oh you can’t the government have stopped publishing them, i wonder why????
The thing that bothers me the most- never a mask during flu season and the numbers are higher. The misinformation on deaths and cases are rampant among the hospitals and states. I want the dammed truth, it’s not that difficult.
You can’t or won’t get any facts until after the election. (and not likely afterwards, as they will continue to use this ploy to garner attention to their cause) If our economy is booming, joblessness near all-time lows, with record levels of black, Asian and women employed, that isn’t good for their Presidential election aspirations. You can say all that you want about that… even AOC said it in a now deleted tweet… “high unemployment, business closing and social chaos is a small price to pay to get Trump out of office.” They say that Corona isn’t political?? I call bullshit!
Ok, fair enough you cherry picked 2 studies. You may end up being right in the end. The problem I have is this. This bbn is a new virus that our bodies have never been exposed to it before so we don’t really know what it will do. Since we don’t know what it will do, shouldnt we remain cautious? Since we don’t know the long term effects of this virus, shouldn’t we make sure we know what we are dealing with? As far as wearing a mask, here is the way I think aboutt it. Wearing a mask does absolutely nothing to me. A slight inconvenience. If wearing a mask i . Ot needed, then you really don’t lose anytbing but wearing it. But what if wearing a mask is the right thing to do. Then you have stopped the spread. What is the down side?and as far as wearing a mask during flu season, many countries do wear a mask, and we should as well.
Wearing a mask a great deal of the time has it’s own risks though it may reduce exposure to other risks. Legionnaires disease. I wear one myself though it’s depressing and makes me want to weep every time I go out. It is the law and I obey the law even if I know it hurts me. (This may actually help.) By keeping it clean you reduce exposure to lung diseases caused by inhaling particles caught in the paper or fabric of course. If people have breathing problems like asthma they can ask for permission not to wear since it does restrict air by an acceptably low amount for normals.
Your comment is false. There’s not much novel about covid-19. It behaves very much like other coronavirus’ as well as the common flu. The sun kills it. Boiling water kills it. It’s just NOT different enough to change how we do everything.
Exaclty, someone is listening to CNN and MSNBC, (BS) CBS, pretty much all 98% of them, same talking points, go figure. Many, too many, sheep!
I’m so sick of hearing this argument. I want you to strap a mask on and work 8 hours every day in the heat carrying a load of 50 pounds or more for the next 3 months then come back and make the we argument. It’s the stupid selfish cowards like you that have no regard for the people that are actually keeping the supply chain going, thereby keeping you from starving to death that make me wish this overblown cold was really the killer they claim it to be. Then either you would die and I wouldn’t have to hear your stupid worthless rantings anymore, or I would die and I wouldn’t have to hear your stupid worthless rantings anymore. You’re a complete waste of the divine spark of life, and your genetic code is a curse upon mankind.
new virus based on what diagnostic test????? you people are crazy…what test proves there’s a novel killer virus out there?? The PCR test??? hahahahahahahaha fools…
You may catch 5,000 vira, bacteria and fungi every day.
Remember:
“Hypocondria” is also a desease – a bad one
– and so is: “American Paranoia”
Enjoy your day – 😀
“YOU ONLY LIVE ONCE”
– Carsten Christiansen/EU 🎓
Its already been proven and even Fauci said it himself, later to flip-flop but the mask are useless and cause MORE damage!
Thank you Steve.
Yes, I read the whole article. Thanks for doing the in-depth research. I plan to share this.
I make it a point: if I click on it… I read it. It’s amazing how misleading some of these headlines are. I appreciate your insight… and, yes, I read it all 🙂
Half the people are below average, and most of the other half are badly misinformed.
Sigh…
In this article, you seem to be doing the very thing you’re accusing the media of doing. You made a sensationalist headline: “They’re lying to us. Here’s exactly how they do it,” and then your article tells a different and biased story.
After reading your article I had these questions and thoughts:
1.) Are you paid for writing this article in any way? Do you get monetary value from this article being shared, clicked on or growing?If the answer is yes and you’re against spreading fear and distrust through the use of misleading headlines in particular – why are you using the same tactics?
2.) What exactly is “frightening” or “Deceptive” about the headlines you cite above? They may not be the most complete headlines I’ve ever seen – but they don’t seem to be fear-inducing or deceitful to me. This one: “From ‘brain fog’ to heart damage, COVID-19’s lingering problems alarm scientists” is the only one I find particularly sensationalist. On the other hand, “Doctors say some patients with COVID-19 can have heart damage” is just plain factual.
3.) Did you actually read the statnews article that you based the bulk of this article on? What were your actual complaints/concerns/critiques of how this article was written specifically? Do you just not think outlets should cover medical studies, period? It’s not the best article I’ve ever seen, but overall it’s pretty accurate. The article mentiones the basics of the studies and their sample sizes and they even interviewed the scientists to let them explain what the results mean. The researchers behind the study of 100 people didn’t say this is reason to panic or be afraid or anything of the sort. She said the results, “provide an opportunity to take proactive action and to look for heart involvement early.” She’s basically saying that her research shows the need for more focused research on this topic to see if there’s anything substantial here. That’s how science works.
4.) Couldn’t the data you shared about news consumption and how much of an article people read be a really great argument about how this is not the media’s fault and that people need to do a much better job of actually doing more than just passively consuming headlines? That’s not a real sinister sounding intention on behalf of the media when it could simply be defeated by people wanting to stop doing it.
5.) Have you actually talked to any 27 year-olds who are scared to death of COVID for themselves? I haven’t and this seems like an incredibly bad-faith argument. Most younger and less at-risk people are wearing masks and following guidelines because they don’t want to be responsible for giving the virus to someone else. I’m 30 myself. The odds of getting sick are incredibly, incredibly low and it’s likely that IF I do get the virus I’ll be asymptomatic. I’m not scared for myself – I’m scared that I may unwittingly pass COVID to someone who it could potentially kill because I may not even know I have it at the time. I’m more than willing to have slightly fogged up glasses at the grocery store to lower that risk.
So to recap:
-You used a sensationalized headline to draw people in.
-You had a clear motive and stance you wanted to convey.
-You used cherry-picked data to make bad-faith arguments about media while somehow removing yourself from that group.
– You demonized the group that you established as an “other” and labelled them as mindless and manipulated while making a bad-faith representation of their motives or beliefs.
I actually do have to give you credit. You summed up your article better than I ever could have.
“those living in a state of manufactured, unwarranted fear .. are whipped into that panic by the deliberately misleading headlines being shared by millions (billions?) living in wanton, lazy ignorance. Those who not only fail to read past those headlines, but also choose to mindlessly accept the manipulations of those who seek to sell ad space by means of hyperbolic pronunciations, click-bait, and share-bait.”
Seems like you check all your own boxes minus the government elements.
Well she got you to read the whole article, so you kind of played right into it. Read some more and you might rise from the level of total fucking moron to booger eating moron in a few short months.
Reading articles was never really a problem for me – but I’ll take the personal attack under consideration. On your scale is total fucking moron just below booger eating moron or are there other stages of moron inbetween?
But you don’t give a fuck about the people working in the grocery store for hours on end with those wetywet nasty masks and no fresh air toting the heavy shit that you shovel into your big fat stupid fucking ass all day, do you you fucking ignorant piece of dog shit? You’re a fucking coward and I hope you die in a car wreck and I hope it fucking hurts you pussy piece of shit. Goddammned idiot! “It’s a small sacrifice for me.” Fuck you! If you dropped dead today it wouldn’t make any difference, but just a few of those people you don’t think about and the all the morons like you would fucking starve. You’re TRASH!
Hey other John W….Do you…do you need a hug? I absolutely care about grocery store workers and hope they’ve got enough masks to be able to change them out regularly.
As for the rest – man IDK what has you so emotional about all this – but I’m telling you that the world isn’t out to get you and if you need it we’re actually here to help if we can.
No you don’t. Your a self righteous virtue signalling fuck whose never for a second in your life thought about anyone but yourself. You wear a mask so you can feel good about your pathetic existence and lack of any meaningful contribution to mankind. You haven’t thought about the people that have gotten you through this sweating their asses off in those masks once while you sit at home and likely make more than you did to work. You can fuck right off with that nonsense. Virtue signalling dickhole.
Alright you triggered liberal fuck – I see through your bullshit commentary here. No one actually talks like that much of a dumbshit conservative fuckwad.
You’re trying to make it seem like conservatives can’t care about others or question others by acting like some roided up anger monster – but I’m not buying it.
People who actually care about this stuff don’t fall for your emotion-baiting fake-hate shit.
I’m a conservative exactly BECAUSE I care about people but can also question people’s claims without just believe them. This article has some flaws and they shouldn’t be just absorbed by sheeple either.
But get outta here with your damn faux-outrage. You’re trying to make people think you’re a conservative and judge conservatives because of it. }
Not working shitstick – I caught your socialist talking point that you tried to cover in fake conservative outrage. I’m paid what I’m worth and that’s an opportunity everyone has in capitalism you commie-fuck. Get outta here.
Nice response
do you see any ads on this site? you’re initial assumption is flawed, which kind of takes care of the rest, as well.
No – that’s why I asked rather than just assuming. Sites/blogs/etc…also make money in more ways than just direct ads on a page.
John W. has a good point. John W has little point.
In the UK total deaths from all causes are lower than average which means this is not a serious epidemic – Obvious we should go back to normal immediately – Our masters everywhere seem to be seduced by their new ‘Health’ powers – So looks like the unintended consequences of their Lockdown panic will kill more than this CCP virus through social and economic destruction – See the Sweden model to see how lockdown was never needed – Lockdown politicos so hated Sweden for not joining in the panic they knew a Sweden success would haunt them throughout the coming depression – Do our authorities really want to string out the achievement of herd immunity to still have a reason to enforce a vaccine regime and build on that for permanent ‘Health’ powers to Lockdown, Mask, Passport, App, Implant, Track, Trace and Isolate for forever?
2 – All 100 had recovered from “acute” or “severe” cases of COVID-19. 78% of those demonstrated “cardiac involvement,” and only 60% had “ongoing myocardial inflammation.”
This isn’t correct at all. There were asymptomatic patients included in the study as well. “Most patients recovered at home (n = 67), with severity of the acute COVID-19 illness ranging from asymptomatic (n = 18) to minor to moderate symptoms (n = 49).”
Moreover, there were two comparison groups, one with matched comborbidities and one without. I agree they’re lying to us. But let’s not lie the other way.
I would like to get a cardiologist’s take on the German study that did the MRIs, because although the headlines were sensationalized, those findings were a bit concerning.
Thanks for that, I was wondering if someone else would point out the symptom level error in this blog post.
‘Joe Bloggs recovered from C19 in a few days with no lasting effects. His family also experienced mild to moderate symptoms and returned to normal life without incident’ is a boring headline!!