When assessing the validity of data, one should always consider both the motivations and the ability of the entity issuing that data. That said, at least in China the outright falsification of numbers assembled by huge bureaucracies is probably not the preferred method of manipulating them. More subtle approaches - e.g. fudging - are the norm. The definition of 90% of Omicron cases as 'asymptomatic' prior to December 2022 was a good example of this. This was accomplished by only accepting CERTAIN symptoms as qualifying - a silly trick which backfired on them when the tsunami hit. In this particular case, since testing has almost completely ceased, China's national health authorities probably honestly had very limited hard data regarding cases and deaths to go on. So the numbers they released in December may not have been technically false. In fact, given the obvious huge discrepancy between the numbers released and reality, the numbers were probably not even fudged. Since then they stopped releasing numbers completely.
That said, of course they COULD alternatively publish data on excess deaths, but given their complicity in the course of events, their instinct as usual is to hide their head in the sand and delay any discussion of such matters until many months down the road. In other words, their sin is probably more one of omission than of outright lying. This is par for the course and not surprising to any of us in China. Such behavior is expected and as such does not have much impact on reality.
When assessing the validity of data, one should always consider both the motivations and the ability of the entity issuing that data. That said, at least in China the outright falsification of numbers assembled by huge bureaucracies is probably not the preferred method of manipulating them. More subtle approaches - e.g. fudging - are the norm. The definition of 90% of Omicron cases as 'asymptomatic' prior to December 2022 was a good example of this. This was accomplished by only accepting CERTAIN symptoms as qualifying - a silly trick which backfired on them when the tsunami hit. In this particular case, since testing has almost completely ceased, China's national health authorities probably honestly had very limited hard data regarding cases and deaths to go on. So the numbers they released in December may not have been technically false. In fact, given the obvious huge discrepancy between the numbers released and reality, the numbers were probably not even fudged. Since then they stopped releasing numbers completely.
That said, of course they COULD alternatively publish data on excess deaths, but given their complicity in the course of events, their instinct as usual is to hide their head in the sand and delay any discussion of such matters until many months down the road. In other words, their sin is probably more one of omission than of outright lying. This is par for the course and not surprising to any of us in China. Such behavior is expected and as such does not have much impact on reality.
We estimated a total mortality rate of around 0.42% of the total population, or around 6 million people:
https://austrianchina.substack.com/p/estimating-chinas-omicron-death-toll