That's like claiming Snopes and Wikipedia are the gold standard on the net for accuracy. Worldmeter's numbers can be proven to be false. If even one instance proves that then the whole data set is wrong as it is posted, and the way he is presenting it. Again, no (proper) context.
I read and appreciate your post
But the real problem here is the data are corrupted. Usually in a debate at some point people can settle on the facts of the question. Thus far, we have people advocating a case fatality rate of 3% and vaccines take 10 years to develop on one end of the spectrum all the way to there are only 2000 deaths due to Covid (all the rest don’t count as those people died with CoVId born of it) and the vaccines have chips in them and are the mark of the beast.
In an environment where not only are there such divergent opinions about the data coupled with the desperate need to be right about whatever data you believe in, there is no hope for progressing to reasonable discussion.
And as usual the truth is somewhere in the middle. I don’t think worldodometer is correct. Too many reports of death but not well vetted. Far under total cases as ir reports only positive tests.
I think cases are underreported by a factor of 6
I think total true deaths are probably around 350,000
I think given the data we are approaching herd immunity
I think we should use targeted and scientifically soundly proven therapies and preventive meds (vaccines for prevention, bamlanivimab and regeneron monoclonal antibidies). Merck had an oral antiviral that looks extremely promising in phase 3 trial. Israel demonstrates the power of population vaccination. India is currently demonstrating that despite ivermectin being broadly available there is a second wave developing.
Until such a time we have agreement on the data we cannot ever agree on what to do.