Why did you say “naturally” as the other choice? No one is saying that. Just you.
If you are taken to a hospital with lots of gashes and broken bones but die of an infection, the medical records will NOT say that you died of a car accident. They will say you died of a condition that was not present on admission… and the hospital will get a “demerit” for your death.
You show your work. I’ll spend my time posting facts. And the fact is all those who were killed by the hurricane were dead within a few days after it hit. Everyone else was killed by something else.
When the report came out, did you remain indifferent until you gathered your facts? Or did you instantly doubt the report and start gathering your facts to support your doubt?
No buddy. I met my burden… to show that your well researched report did NOT say the hurricane directly killed thousands. I read the report… the methods, the terminology, etc. They invented a method never before used to measure the number of people directly killed by hurricanes. They are estimating excess mortality … not even measuring but guessing from secondary circumstantial evidence.
I read it, I believe it. I see no issues with the way they measure the deaths resulting from the hurricane.
If you disagree then you need to provide a better method of reporting and present your data to the. government. Simply saying “they’ve never used this method before” isn’t proving they are wrong.
None of the studies did anything other than count dead bodies, they made no effort whatsoever to determine cause of death or what lead to those deaths.
I did my research first. I researched known hurricanes, population levels, storm strength, cause of death, and concluded that this “thousands” number was contrived, was inconsistent with every other report of every other hurricane in the history of America, and was likely a political ruse to assign deaths to a hurricane when they should have been assigned to failures primarily in the island and local governments before and after the hurricane.