It seems like maybe a year or two ago this guy was fairly reasonable, and gave what seemed to be genuine opinions on the benefits and drawbacks of lockdown strategies. Sad to see him succumb to audience capture and make what seem to be willful misinterpretations of data (outlined well in jiggawatts' comment). If I as a second year undergrad who has never taken a stats course can see these statistical problems, then a PhD with multiple bachelors definitely can.
Where is the statistical problem if I may ask?
You can twist it however you want but we do have excess death that the very same "authorities" who provides the statistics do not know what causes it.
What is your explanation for why they publish data all over the world that indicates that people die at higher rates than expected but not due to COVID? Because that is what the data shows. Is the data just bad? Then its not willful misinterpretation but just bad data interpreted correctly.
