Chinese virus drives a startling increase in Europe’s excess mortality #coronavirus

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The scale of the Chinese-virus pandemic is now beginning to become visible. Yesterday, the death toll of 59,000 in the United States exceeded the 58,000 in the Vietnam war.

In Europe, 488,764 people died of all causes in the six weeks to mid-April, according to an analysis of data from the European mortality monitoring agency carried out by Sky News. That is 117,641, or 32%, above the 371,302 deaths that would be expected over those six weeks in an average year. Sky comments that while these excess deaths are not necessarily all caused by the pandemic, the majority are likely to have been caused by it.

Across Europe, weeks 14 and 15 were the worst for excess deaths, with 64% above the average in both weeks. In normal times, even a 15% excess-death figure is regarded as exceptionally severe.


Fig. 1. All-cause excess mortality and Chinese-virus mortality to early/mid April 2020.

In most European countries, excess mortality (gray in Fig. 1) has greatly outstripped reported deaths from the Chinese virus (blue). It is likely that most of the additional excess deaths are also attributable to the virus but have not been reported as such.

As Fig. 2 shows, the four countries with the greatest peaks in excess deaths are England, Spain, Belgium and Italy. England recorded the highest number of excess deaths anywhere in Europe for three consecutive weeks (14 to 16). For the past two weeks, England is alone in having scored more than 40% above the average: it did so in two successive weeks.

Sky News also reports that England has had more excess deaths per head of population than Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. The most likely reason for this high mortality is England’s high population density, which increases the transmission rate of the virus, aggravated by the Government’s month of dithering before locking down the country, which allowed unchecked exponential growth every day.


Fig. 2. Mortality z-scores (%) for various European countries, weeks 1-16 of 2020.

Lack of sunshine contributing to widespread Vitamin-D3 deficiency among the large elderly population is another possible factor: of all the various nostrums for reducing the probability of infection and severity of symptoms, the one that has been demonstrated by a meta-analysis of clinical trials involving at least 10,000 patients to be efficacious against respiratory viruses is daily supplementation with 10,000 units (25 micrograms) of Vitamin D3.

The darker the skin, the more likely is Vitamin D3 deficiency in sunless, northern climes. The large immigrant population in Britain has proven more susceptible to the Chinese virus than the Caucasian population – another reason why the UK figures are so bad. Finally, the Government failed to provide clear, timely instructions to care-homes for the elderly, where there have been thousands of hitherto-unreported Chinese-virus deaths.

The Netherlands, France and Switzerland also saw a steep rise in excess deaths. In Scandinavia, not so much. In Denmark and Norway, the deaths so far are what would be expected in a normal year. However, no-lockdown Sweden shows a small but significant excess already, and, based on the date of the tenth Chinese-virus death, which in Sweden was March 18, against March 7 in Spain, March 12 in the UK and February 25 in Italy, the next few weeks will reveal whether the no-lockdown strategy has been a success. Even then, the greater severity of the pandemic in territories where population densities are a lot higher than in Sweden would not have allowed those territories safely to avoid lockdowns altogether.

England will be the worst-affected country in Europe. In one recent week, 22,351 deaths were recorded: more than in any other week since modern records began (Fig. 3).


Fig. 3. Weekly all-cause mortality, England & Wales, 1970-2000.

In England, as in the other worst-affected countries, the discrepancy between Chinese-virus deaths and total excess deaths is substantial (Fig. 4), suggesting that thousands more may have died of the virus than official death-counts show. Notoriously, HM Government has until now excluded deaths outside hospitals from the daily counts it announces. From today, however, under pressure from the news media, it will count the deaths properly.


Fig. 4. Chinese-virus and “other” deaths against mean all-cause mortality, England & Wales.

Sky News has commented that were it not for the lockdown in the UK the death count might well have ended up in the hundreds of thousands.

Sir David Spiegelhalter, the Professor of the Public Understanding of Statistics at Cambridge, said on All Fools’ Day that, since the Chinese virus chiefly strikes the aged and infirm, many of them would soon have died in any event – a viewpoint that has hitherto been echoed, regrettably, by some commenters here.

Now, just four weeks later, the very sharp increase in excess deaths not only in Britain but also in other European countries shows that the victims of the Chinese virus are dying significantly sooner with the virus than without it.

Our daily graphs show that the daily compound growth rate in estimated active cases remains positive in some of the countries we are tracking – notably the United States, England and Sweden. In Britain, at any rate, the lockdown will not be ended until the rate is well below zero. The Prime Minister has been quoting Cicero: salus populi suprema lex.

As today’s graphs (Figs. 5-6) show, the global daily compound growth rate in estimated active cases – the key indicator of how bad the pandemic will eventually prove to be, and of whether ending lockdowns will be a prudent step – is zero in the world excluding China and occupied Tibet, where the numbers are fictitious.

Tomorrow I shall provide a simple mathematical wrinkle that will allow anyone to convert any compound active-case growth rate below 0% into an estimate of the total cases that would eventually arise if that negative growth rate were to persist.


Fig. 5. Mean compound daily growth rates in estimated active cases of COVID-19 for the world excluding China (red) and for several individual nations averaged over the successive seven-day periods ending on all dates from April 1 to April 28, 2020.


Fig. 6. Mean compound daily growth rates in cumulative COVID-19 deaths for the world excluding China (red) and for several individual nations averaged over the successive seven-day periods ending on all dates from April 8 to April 28, 2020.

427 thoughts on “Chinese virus drives a startling increase in Europe’s excess mortality #coronavirus

  1. The UK’s Covid-19 latest (Wednesday) and possibly last update:
    The UK’s government has changed the method the data is compiled, extracting the hospitalised cases from the amalgamated total with required accuracy may not be possible, hence these daily graphs most likely will not be updated in the future.

    • while there has been a lot of pressure to announce the total number of deaths, and quite rightly so, making incompatible changes to the statistics and not providing a continuous backwards compatible dataset somewhere is convenient way of masking what is really happening.

      Now since this article chooses to talk about Euro Momo data , let’s start with a link to what we are talking about.

      One feature of the COVID spike which is frequently commented on it that is higher than even the severe flu years. What most people seem to miss is that it is also much narrower.

      These are weekly death rates so to get the total deaths you need to look at the integral or “area under the graph”. When you do that you find it is not much more than the 2016/17 flu season and about equal to the lower but much longer 2017/18 flu season. That year actually looks like two overlapping outbreaks.

      15-65 is now back to the annual mean for time of year. LET’S GET THEM BACK TO WORK.

      If we look at the cumulative graphs of excess mortality in lower part of that page ( click on + to visualise 2017 as well ) we see that for 15-65 COVID is roughly equal to 2017 and notably less than 2018 totals. Since this group is now average that cumulative that is likely to reflect the end result unless there is another flare up.

      The way this data is displayed is not the most useful since it splits each flu season between two years. The strong 17/18 flu season does not show up in the cumulative graphs since half of its deaths were counted in 2017, the other half in 2018. If this was shown June-June that flu season would be considerably stronger than COVID.

      65+ group is not quite back down to average, so totals will still rise a bit, though not a lot.

      If we similarly add the end of 2017 ( red line ) rise onto the flat end of 2018 , we see that, even for 65+ COVID is about the same as the 17/18 flu season .

      So bottom line is COVID-19 now the Momo data is getting back to annual average has only been as bad as a bad flu year. To be realistic it should be noted that this is with EU+UK wide restrictions but on the other hand we do have a fair degree of herd immunity to flu plus annual jabs.

      The dangerous factor with COVID was the short sharp spike and the lack of preparedness of most major countries health systems to cope with a surge. In the UK that is a result of decades of cuts which started in the Thatcher years and continued into the neo-Thatcherite Blair and Brown govts through to the current Conservative decade.

      Germany clearly has a much more robust system and scandinavian countries could all have avoided the destruction of shutdowns.


      Tomorrow I shall provide a simple mathematical wrinkle that will allow anyone to convert any compound active-case growth rate below 0% into an estimate of the total cases that would eventually arise if that negative growth rate were to persist.

      Don’t bother , whatever that rate is one thing is certain. It will not persist. So the whole exercise is pointless.

      Your continual ” if that rate were to persist” comments are meaningless and oddly similar to the stupid and misleading projections of the IPCC, famous for assuming “pathways” where all else remains constant until 2100 AD. As everyone must realise by now the chance of that ever happening is infinitesimal.

        • Once again you are incapable of addressing any technical criticism of what you write, so you hide your incompetence behind a trite and irrelevant reply.

          Well done.

          • Good analysis Greg. It would be good to get more stats over the next few months on how Covid-19 compares with other epidemics.

        • CMoB writes;

          ‘Don’t whine.’

          Christopher, are you in a position to expand on that comment?

          Your choice of words suggests to me that Greg Goodman’s arguments were not as such incorrect, but more irritating because they related to things none of us had any control over.

          Is Greg offering valid discussion, or is his reasoning flawed, or his reasoning sound but based on poorly constructed data?

          • “Don’t whine”, is MoB standard boilerplate, indicating that he has at least read the comment, but thinks it has no substance. That’s an improvement on the ad hominem of dubbing such commenters as a “bed-wetter” at least? More appropriate and less antagonistic would be to use a modern style Caesarean emoticon to express approval or the contrary, such as ….. 👍, 👎, or in extremis even 🖕.
            …….. 🤔

        • There is no “Excess Mortality” in the 2020 USA numbers.

          The USA death total has declined in the first 15 weeks of 2020 when compared to 2019 and 2018.

          2020 – Week 1-15 – “All Deaths” – 848,042

          2019 – Week 1-15 – “All Deaths” – 865,238

          2018 – Week 1-15 – “All Deaths” – 892,029

          This data opens from a CDC web page into the Excel app on my computer – so, linking to it is complicated!

          “Weekly U.S. Influenza Surveillance Report”


          (2) Scroll down to “Pneumonia and Influenza (P&I) Mortality” chart.

          (3) Click on “View Chart Data” below the chart.

          (4) Spread sheet opens on your spread sheet app.

          (5) “All Deaths” is Column “F”

          • Influenza Like Illness, ILI

            From the CDC website:

            Mild COVID-19 illness presents with symptoms similar to ILI, so ILINet is being used to track trends of mild to moderate COVID-19 illness and allows for comparison with prior influenza seasons.

            Nationwide during week 16, 2.2% of patient visits reported through ILINet were due to ILI. This percentage is below the national baseline of 2.4% [snip] Nationally, laboratory-confirmed influenza activity as reported by clinical laboratories has decreased to levels usually seen in summer months which, along with changes in healthcare seeking behavior and the impact of social distancing, is likely contributing to the decrease in ILI activity.

      • “Germany clearly has a much more robust system and scandinavian countries could all have avoided the destruction of shutdowns.”

        Not seeing any evidence for your counterfactual.
        It’s not supported by the data.
        It’s not supported by any understanding of how the disease transmits.

      • Greg he never mentioned lock down and if you are going to complain about him over the use of the term “if that rate were to persist”. Well okay can we complain about you with the “there should be no lockdown” replys to posts that aren’t about lockdown. We can’t change that and it isn’t going to happen just like rates persisting ….. so it’s the same thing and it is by definition a whine.

      • “Don’t bother , whatever that rate is one thing is certain. It will not persist. So the whole exercise is pointless.”

        Read your quote once again and this time try to understand it. An epidemic regularly consists of an exponential growth phase followed by an exponential decay phase once R0 has sunk below 1.0. The latter is usually much longer and most cases and deaths actually occur during it, though at a lower rate.

        If the decay is due to herd immunity a new surge is unlikely unless the infective agent mutates. If it was due to a lockdown and this is raised too soon a new surge is very likely.

      • “scandinavian countries could all have avoided the destruction of shutdowns.”

        Sweden did. Currently we have about three times as many deaths as the other three countries put together and a mortality considerably higher than the US, and no end in sight.

        The official line is that mortality is peaking in Stockholm (they’ve claimed that for nearly a month now), but the rest of the country is still in the exponential rise phase. Officialdom seems to be getting a bit shaky, they’ve cancelled the daily press conferences, starting today.

        • The contrast in Covid-related deaths between Sweden and Norway, which share a 1,000 mile border, is stark. As of 30th April, the Our World in Data site puts the death-toll in Sweden at 2,462, which is ~244 per million population. In Norway it’s 202 deaths in total, which equates to ~37 per million population.

        • Point taken.
          However, what is completely missing from these, at times, puerile exchanges is the other side of the coin – the socio-economic fallout.

          Locking down a country’s economy comes with unfathomable multiple costs – we haven’t got even the first reasonable understanding of the dimensions of that.

          Contrary to say Canada, Sweden kept a good portion of its economy intact, deciding to payi the Covid Piper up front.
          To compare approaches we’ll have to do a cost benefit analysis of lives lost now vs. lives lost as collateral damage both now and later and crucially the damage to people’s lives from a wrecked economy. Apples to apples.

          Meanwhile, Canada’s Parliamentary Budget Office now estimates the 2021 deficit at $250 billion – up from $180 billion a couple of weeks ago.
          Keep this up, and before you know it we’re taking serious money.

          • Unemployment is exploding in Sweden too. Sweden is a very export- and import-dependent country so the no-shutdown policy really makes little difference. The economy is shutting itself down. And since we have let green regulations strangle much of our farming sector there is already talk about food rationing.

            How is that for “keeping the conomy intact”

          • @tty – Hmm, some IKEA stores closing permanently, as they “rationalise” their furnishings empire. I wonder if that’s another consequence of what you remark? 🤔

      • “What most people seem to miss is that it is also much narrower.” What is your basis for this statement given we are in the middle of it now? Any narrowing of the bump can almost certainly be attributed to the lock-down orders and not some magical quality of the virus that makes it weaker as it spreads. Please explain how the transmission rate and/or mortality rate decline for this virus when such a small percentage of people have been infected.

      • Greg,
        I’ve just done an approximate analysis and the conclusion is much the same as yours.
        I’m using the top graph in your link, which is the total deaths for all ages.
        The spike certainly looks pretty dramatic. But if you redraw the graph so that the x axis is at zero rather than 40,000 then it looks much less dramatic. But it still looks scary.

        I decided to compare the virus spike to a bad flu season, 2016/2017.
        By hovering the mouse on the graph I got the weekly figures.
        For 2016/2017 I used the values between weeks 48 and 8. The total deaths was 811,881.
        I did the same for the virus spike, starting at the point where it started to spike upwards (weeks 10 to 14). This gives the numbers up to the peak of the spike. The spike is now falling at a similar rate, so a reasonable assumption is that the total number of deaths will be twice that from the start to the peak.
        The number of deaths up to the peak was 338,155.
        Doubling it gives a grand total of 676,310.

        A bad flu season: 811,881 deaths
        The total predicted covid-19 spike: 676,310 deaths

        Some doctors (e.g. Dr Erickson) have specifically stated that the covid-19 death rate is similar to ordinary flu. These figures certainly seem to support that. However, there is one obvious difference: the covid-19 spike has grown and is now falling much faster than a normal flu season, so initially would create a larger burden than normal on health services. This could be because covid-19 is entirely new and we have zero initial immunity. This could also explain some extreme cases such as New York and some Italian hospitals: because it’s new we fear it far more than something we’re familiar with, such as flu. And of course the fear is quickly stoked up by fantasy computer models of doom. Sound familiar?

          • I agree, assuming the rise and fall will be symmetrical is just that, an assumption.
            So, supposing the final number of deaths was 3 times higher than my assumption, then it would mean the virus deaths were a bit less than 3 times worse than a bad flu season. Hardly worth destroying the world economy.

            Worldometer seems only to give graphs of accumulated cases, which tends to smooth out the data. I’m looking at the WHO data:

            “Deaths over time” gives a current figure of 221,823, which is very slightly less than Worldometer.
            The “Deaths over time” graph defaults to cases per day, which gives a much better indication. If you switch the option to “Cumulative” then it looks the same as Worldometer, with no sign of a peak being reached. “Daily” clearly shows that global deaths peaked around April 17th, and have been falling since. And it does look quite symmetrical.
            You really need to look at the cases per day rather than the accumulated total to see when the peak occurred.

            The WHO daily graph shows a striking weekly cycle, probably a reporting artifact. And, for April 30th, a huge spike, about double the previous day and a rise of about 4000. The country graphs show this spike is from the UK. This is because the UK has just started to include deaths in care homes (previously it was just deaths in hospitals). It looks like all the deaths from care homes were lumped into one single day, which is ridiculous.

            As I said, I agree that the euromomo graph’s apparent symmetrical spike may be an artifact as it’s at the end of the data. As the weeks pass the true trajectory of deaths in Europe will become a lot clearer. But there’s little doubt that the global death rate peaked in mid April and it’s now falling.

          • “Worldometer seems only to give graphs of accumulated cases”

            No. Look a bit lower down for each country to see daily data (which are the interesting part).

            “The WHO daily graph shows a striking weekly cycle, probably a reporting artifact.”

            Indeed. This is extreme in the case of Sweden where data are therefore very difficult to interpret. Some deaths are not reported until two weeks later.

            “But there’s little doubt that the global death rate peaked in mid April and it’s now falling.”

            Possibly true if you consider the World to consist solely of Western Europe and North America, not otherwise. Most countries are still early in the exponential rise phase.

      • “What most people seem to miss is that it is also much narrower. ”
        The latest report is more up to date than figure 4 above, albeit with some estimates.

        What you miss is that this wave isn’t over and will see some more weeks well above ‘normal’ death numbers, including the report above which brings to figures up to last Friday. It was a figure only slightly down on the peak in the graph above. The current week, ending tomorrow, will drop to about midway I’m guessing. Looking at EU countries ahead of us on lockdown, the drops in cases are slower than the rises. These weeks with substantial extra deaths were with an unprecedented shut down of our society, meaning that the unmitigated total would have been higher.

        Another thing you don’t seem to consider is that normal winter excess deaths include lots of other cold related deaths than flu. Strokes and heart attacks, all caused by the time of year and the low temperatures. You mention excess deaths for 2017/18. That winter was near or below ‘normal’ for the CET, in other words much colder than most modern years. During this pandemic we’ve been in very mild weather, even for the time of year, so deaths from temperature related reasons were very low. There have been excess stroke and heart attack deaths because people have been fearful of covid19 in hospital but that would have happened anyway without lock down. We;ve seen falls in road accident deaths and gang attacks but a rise in domestic violence.

        Without knowing how many people have been infected and hopefully have some immunity, we don’t know how fast a second wave would fire up again or how high it might rise. Small studies have varied widely on the numbers of infected and may only relate to the places those studies were taken. Even the most optomistic figures still indicate that we’re nowhere near herd immunity. There’s no evidence to suggest another wave wouldn’t develop, would be less rapid or kill a smaller percentage. The more seed cases in the community, the harder it would be to keep in under control like South Korea.

        So if we’d let the wave peak naturally the area under the graph would have been huge, simply because of the height it would have reached. There would have been many additional deaths caused by the chaos. If we relax too much and too soon we have multiple peaks, each with a severe winter death size total. Only a vaccine or a very good cure (and there is no study I’ve seen that demonstrates excellent results yet), would change that situation.

        • In reply to tty:
          Hi tty….
          “No. Look a bit lower down for each country to see daily data (which are the interesting part).”
          I’ve looked at the data tables quite a few times. But I was specifically referring to graphs showing the historical data. That’s essential to see the overlying trends. As far as I can see Worldometer doesn’t have an option to display graphs as daily or cumulative. They really should do that – the WHO does. The cumulative graphs are effectively highly smoothed so it’s very difficult to see exactly where the peak occurs, particularly if the graph itself isn’t very large.

          Looking at the WHO daily global death numbers, it really does look like it peaked around April 17, even when taking into account the weekly cycle. The huge spike at the end is an artifact caused by the change in UK counting (it now includes data from care homes).

          Not hugely scientific, but here are the figures for the four weekly peaks:
          6716 7231 8473 6675

          Are the WHO figures reliable?
          The figures from China are obviously a sick joke, but overall I’ve no reason to doubt the global figures from the WHO within reason. The current global figure of accumulated deaths are similar, though the Worldometer figure is slightly larger. Probably not surprising as they use different methods to get the data. At the end of the day the WHO relies on all world governments to submit their best estimates of daily deaths.

          “Possibly true if you consider the World to consist solely of Western Europe and North America, not otherwise. Most countries are still early in the exponential rise phase.”

          WHO has a set of daily graphs for countries with the highest accumulated deaths. Nearly all of these show the death rate peaked around mid April. Two main exceptions: Brazil and the US. However, it was looking as if the US peaked around April 23, but the last two days have spiked up. Either the US hasn’t peaked yet or those two days are a reporting artifact, as with the UK.

          The WHO data strongly indicates the world death rate peaked in mid April. But it is certainly possible that the rates will rise again as the rest of the world catches up. Time will tell….

      • There is a relationship to the Covid-19 defensive protocols and many other deaths, most particularly flu deaths. Therefore the defensive protocols have also greatly lowered other deaths besides Covid-19 deaths. Thus, with defensive protocols on place, those bad flu years would never have occurred.

      • You may be correct, but you reference to health care spending in the UK is misleading. Firstly, there have been no cuts. Healthcare spending has increased year on year in real terms and per capita since records began, even during the ‘austerity’ years. As of Feb this year, it was at a record high. UK health spending is above the OECD average as a percent of GDP. Secondly, the UK was one of the few countries were the health system comfortably absorbed the pandemic cases. Indeed hospital and ICU capacity has remained below average levels during the pandemic and is currently running at a record low of about 60%. The cause of UK COVID deaths is not due to hosptial or ICU capactiy.

      • figures lie and liars figure Greg. There is absolutely no way to believe numbers put out by the bureaucracy as evidenced by the Climate Alarmists.

        As we come to the end of this particular flu season the liars will figure with a CYA methodolgy so the politicians, bureaucrats and Monckton’s; who have been whining since February about the end of the world and the absolute need to shelter in place, can point to the magic numbers and say “see it worked. Aren’t we wonderful for saving your life”

      • I’ve read that the last two flu seasons were milder than average, and the above comment says that 2018 excess deaths were low. If 2019 deaths also were low, then I might expect some of the high risk patients who survived those two years might be more ready to go this year, making excess deaths this year appear higher.

  2. Do you think you could “Chinese-virus” one more time please? If all you care about is race and naming the virus I for one would have no interest in whatever other point you are trying to make (if there is one).

      • If Monckton keeps referring to Chinese-virus, it is an attack on the one party state govt. of China not the “race” of chinese people.

        That you manage to interpret this as “racist” says more about your prejudices than his.

        This looks like proxy TDS more than a reasoned criticism.

        • This response is meant for ALEX HARVEY April 29, 2020 at 10:07 am

          “Do you think you could “Chinese-virus” one more time please? If all you care about is race and naming the virus I for one would have no interest in whatever other point you are trying to make (if there is one).”

          Alex people are too quick to pull put the racist card! Just like the crappy decisions that our own governments make it’s the CCP that is the intended target of our wrath. The general Chinese population have no say in party policy, just as they are not personally responsible for the corruption of the party. Most of them are just trying to live their lives like ‘ordinary’ folk the world over.

          The CCP however is doing everything they can to cover up the details in regard to the virus and want to transact business as usual on a global level. The ‘nothing to see here’ approach doesn’t cut it. They have caused death within the global community and major economic damage. They have done irreparable damage to millions of small businesses that will never recover.

          It may well come down to the carelessness of a single individual but that implies a breakdown of laboratory bio security, obviously a serious issue. It is likely is wasn’t intentional but we’re not talking about a minor incident here and the Chinese government must take responsibility.

          We give this virus a Chinese prefix because they are trying to worm their way out of any responsibility. It has nothing to do with racism.

          • Megs – well stated. WuFlu, Wuhan virus, Chinese virus are all better names and more memorable than the official name (thought up by China’s WHO?). The Chinese people are not responsible for their leadership, who took control of the country originally at gun-point and have not relinquished it. There are many good people in China, as in every country, but their own government gives them a hard time. The CCP has caused the deaths of millions of its own citizens, but it is also becoming an increasing threat to the rest of the world. The situation looks like it will get a whole lot worse before it gets better – and I hope that I am proved wrong on that!

          • Megs,

            You are so right and stated it beautifully.
            People who pull out the race card don’t realize that they are supporting the Chinese Communist Dictatorship (or, do and that is their intention), not the Chinese people who are the greatest victims of their rotten, evil lying Government.

    • It beats naming it the Spanish Flu.

      In that older case, the name came from the fact that Spain was reporting on the pandemic as a neutral country in WW1. The other countries had a news blackout on it because of the war effort and war fundraising drives. Spain was neither the source of the flu or the hardest hit place, yet the name stuck.

      • And Spain isn’t “blamed” for the Spanish flu. But China is blamed, and rightly so, for the “Chinese Virus”. Personally, I like the “WuWHOFlu”.

        • Actually they were at the time and Spanish people were ostracised and subject to abuse by ignoramuses much like many people of East Asian appearance today, regardless of whether they have Chinese ancestry. Labelling it the “Chinese” virus is just asking to incite racist behaviour and it’s no excuse to claim you’re only referring to the CCP. Let’s rename the Spanish Influenza the Yankee Influenza and see how they like it. After all the earliest case we know about was at a US Army Camp in Kansas in 1917, not in Spain.

    • So many people getting triggered by a simple label.
      It’s almost as if they are being paid to be offended.

      • The left plays the race card whenever they can, although complaining about China-virus is pretty silly considering there are actual racist terms that could be used instead. If it originated Canada, would there be an issue calling it the Canada virus?

        • Yes same issue when Australia put flight bans on China, WHO and all the good little lefties called it racist. The breeding ground of the lefties, Australian Universities had protests that the policy was racist and you can guess what country funded all those protests.

          The bans were there for good reasons, but a lefty never lets the truth get in the way of an agenda.

      • Nope. Not paid to be a sceptic or a supporter of public health.
        The Big Oil, Evil Bankers with Hook Noses, Reds Under the Beds argument is a way of avoiding thinking.
        The reason the world’s healthcare experts have not named the flu after its point of origin is to keep us safe. Killing people out of prejudice is stupid. Killing yourself as well is very stupid.

        Urgent action is required at the start of a pandemic. That action includes publicising the fact it’s happening. Stigmatising being the source of an outbreak discourages the required publicity. That makes us all more vulnerable.

        Now you might say “That totalitarian dictatorship with no free press didn’t publicise it quick enough”. You would probably be right. But that is no reason to push for them to be even later next time.

        The only correct responses to people too stupid to listen to the experts on this one are:
        A) Ignore them
        B) Ridicule them.

        • What experts? Madame Mao and the Gang of Four?

          Your post makes no sense, except to understand you are pushing ChiCom propaganda and making silly claims that using another name will “keep us safe.” The horses already left the barn and are scattering to the four winds.

          Are you paid to post this or afraid or what will happen if you don’t?

        • It has nothing to do with experts thinking they’re keeping us safe. It’s all about political correctness run amok and they’re keeping themselves safe from criticism. Every time Trump calls it the China virus, the media goes nuts projecting all sorts of nonsense which is probably why he does it. It generates the required attention, otherwise, the MSM wouldn’t even mention China’s role.

          What China did to infect the world must be made very well known and naming the virus after them is a way to reinforce the connection. Calling it anything else is to deny the truth and whether it was out of incompetence or malice doesn’t matter. We will pay a price for reducing our dependence on cheap Chinese products and the consumer will need to understand why, and to be sure, it’s about more than just how the virus was let loose on an unsuspecting world.

          • But why should we conflate a scientific issue–a pandemic–with a political one?
            The Chinese government is totalitarian, not really Communist, but we can call it that if we want to. So are half the governments on Earth. So they lied and covered up the origins and spread of the virus. That’s politics, and when the real truth comes out, if it ever does, history.
            The situation in the world right now, and the world’s response to it, relies on scientific data, testing, medical response, and governmental action, which, unfortunately and unavoidably leads back into politics. But where the virus originated is not important at the moment, unless you want to petition the Chinese government to release the suppressed data.

          • Peter Pandemic – re “where the virus originated is not important at the moment” – you are correct, or rather you would be if the Chinese government hadn’t made it important by their aggressively thin-skinned bullying and offensive actions. As it is, it is very important for the west to hold China to account, otherwise they will be encouraged to pursue even more aggressive bullying and offensive actions. NOT calling the Chinese virus by that name, or WuFlu or Wuhan virus or WuWHOFlu or whatever, will just be seen as appeasement by the west and therefore a weakness to be exploited. This isn’t a time for political correctness, this is a time for thoroughly understanding game theory. Make no mistake, game theory is the game being played by Xi Jinping’s China.

          • “The Chinese government is totalitarian, not really Communist, but we can call it that if we want to.”

            Six of one, half a dozen of another. These are just names for the same thing: A group of Elites rule over all the rest with a heavy hand.

          • Peter,

            Yes, I agree that politics shouldn’t be an issue here, but unfortunately, the political left doesn’t agree and has been continuously trying to use this pandemic to push their retrogressive agendas, whether its immigration, climate change, expanding the welfare state, bailing out mismanaged red states, international appeasement and the rest of their self destructive agendas. Labeling themselves progressives is a ploy to hide their true intent.

            Political correctness is the lever they use to suppress dissent and it’s important to fight back against this kind of bullying. We see how much they use this against Trump in their lame attempt to undermine his presidency and he properly fights back. He was elected because he doesn’t care about being politically correct and the political left just can’t wrap their disfunctional brains around this so they double down which has led to the TDS pandemic which unfortunately is intransigently commingled with the China virus pandemic.

          • Well said Mike J. My favourite is CCP virus or Chinese Communist Party Virus depending on target audience.

        • Experts are specialists. Lately, my view of specialists has aligned with Robert Heinlein’s:

          “A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”

          • you penning comment threw me for a minute till I read the rest, I agree with you on that, the problem is the difficulty on getting through the static on this, this column is one of biggest amount of static, the death numbers are meaning less with out context, the average number is even worse, why not use the mean number instead of average,then how do you take in the increase in population etc, there is more but that’s as far as I willing to go now.

          • Most climate scientists have a couple of these down (changing their diapers, and pitching manure). Hopefully they will start working on the others soon.

          • “Never liked the die gallantly. Rather the other bugger did that.”

            I’m with you, chas!

            In the words of General George Patton: No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other poor bastard die for his country.

            We want to live gallantly. 🙂

          • The phrase “jack of all trades, master of none” comes to mind. It takes practice and a lot of in-depth knowledge to do anything well – the day of the talented amateur is long gone. I read a lot of Heinlein’s books as a teenager. Rereading them as an adult I realise how simplistic a lot of his ideas are.

      • @MarkW – Oh, cynic ye!
        Follow this rezoning ….. CoViD19 might cause diarrhoea ….. Diarrhoea might cause a sore ass ….. Sore ass sounds a bit like Soros ….. Soros is a sinophile ….. So there you have it, Soros funding agitprop comments. 🤒😷🤑😄

    • I agree with Alex Harvey
      The virus has a scientific name that is concise, memorable and widely understood by the general public. Anyone using a different name for the virus is trying to make some kind of point. They should be prepared to explain what that point is.

        • Even though the Chinese lied, plenty of people round the world were fully aware of the impact of the virus in January.

          The Chinese implemented strict lock-downs that offered us two months of precious time to get ourselves prepared. If governments in the West did nothing until March, they have only themselves to blame.

          • AndyL: Well, what if “West” did nothing because China and WHO 1) made false reassuring statements through Jan and Feb; 2) would not let “West” scientists into Wuhan, making it difficult for western doctors to provide accurate analysis to “West” or advise whether lockdown was necessary, contradicting your casual “people round the world were fully aware in January” palaver; and 3) Chicom’s “lockdown” kept international travel going out of Wuhan even as locals were locked down. No, not on the “West”, the blame is all properly laid at China’s door.

          • Chain shutdown local flights and vehicle traffic from hubai province. It sid not shutdown international flights. Many countries knew? It was downplayed. We should be more worried about the flu was the most common rider with reports on coronavirus.

          • I am with Paul Courtney China reacted bitterly towards countries that did place international bans on them. They also obviously pressured WHO to give out the most stupid advice and who actively campaigned against travel bans.

            So we are going to call Western Governments stupid then we should also state the fact China and WHO are corrupt, liars and culpable.

          • Wrong

            The Chinese Communist Party stopped domestic flights from Wuhan to the rest of China well before they stopped flights leaving China. They knowingly spread the virus to the rest of the world via thousands of travelers. During this time they gave no warning to the world. They are culpable for hundreds of thousands of deaths.

        • That’s irrelevant to the name of the virus. It is also inaccurate.

          Germany, S Korea, Japan all had the same information as USA Italy, Spain and UK.
          The difference in outcome isn’t that China told the WHO to say different things to different Governments. Everybody were told the same facts.

          It was the competence of the leaderships that led to very different outcomes.

          The real political victim here is Shinzo Abe who has taken far more flak than he deserves.

          • You forgot to mention Taiwan somehow. They warned WHO that the new virus spread from human to human on Dec. 31.

            WHO suppressed that for three weeks until Beijing said the the same.

        • Obama funded research into the virus in Wuhan to the tune of 3.5 million back in 2015. What ever happened, happened. Lets move on from the blame game and accept it is around the level of a bad flu.

      • I agree that China Virus isn’t precise because almost all animal-human viruses seem to come from China. Ebola is from central Africa, of course, and it should be to China’s undying shame that poorer nations seem less likely to generate pandemics. With Ebola African countries reported as per international rules in a timely manner.

        China did not come clean and they even disappeared medical people who tried to report its danger. This is the world model gov for people like Chinese apologists Alex Harvey AndyL and the many other “Progressive” PC folk who comment here.

        So, lets be more precise: Wuhan Virus M’Lord.

        • [a]lmost all animal-human viruses seem to come from China. Asia has the largest landmass on the planet so I would expect the highest rate of animal-human disease to come from there. But: Ebola- Africa, H1N1- USA, MERS- Middle East, Bird Flu- Worldwide, Spanish Flu- USA.
          I am open to hearing the list of animal-human diseases that are coming from China.

      • Using the “scientific” name you mention is also trying to make some kind of point… is trying to hide its origin….which is very important to remember because the world can never be caught with its pants down like this again….and it is all due to China and its puppet W.H.O. THAT’S THE POINT.

      • AndyL fell on his keyboard and said:
        “The virus has a scientific name that is concise, memorable and widely understood by the general public. Anyone using a different name for the virus is trying to make some kind of point.”

        “Chinese Virus” is concise, memorable and widely understood by the general public. If you insist on using a different name then what is YOUR point?

        • But nobody, outside of a few threads is using that name. Almost everybody I’ve spoken to calls it the coronavirus, and that is probably how it will be. Coronavirus rolls off the tongue much easier that Chinese virus. And that’s just the way it is.

      • Blog threads get a limited amount of attention, and so one who posts only three or four times a week must make every word count including the headline. And yeah, it started in China. The 1918 flu likely started in some hog farms in Kansas, so: the “The Great U.S. Influenza Epidemic of 1918”, if you like. It killed 50 million.

        WRT to the widely mimed Coronavirus mortality figure alleging the U.S. now surpasses the Vietnam War death toll… has anyone ever managed to disaggregated flu deaths from these? Some death certificates specify “non-flu” respiratory virus, indicating somebody actually tested for it. My understanding is no one has made that distinction with CV-19 since Department of Health issued “guidance” to not make the effort. Maybe too costly or time-consuming to test for “every little thing” when there’s a bright shiny novel thing.

      • Actually, pal, in a free society, we can call it what we want. I personally call it Coronavirus or WuFlu because those were the names I heard first of all. This madness has brought out enough little Hitlers without you chipping in.

      • I say “Chinese virus” simply to trigger knee- jerk PC objections from snowflakes like you. Unless you are Chinese, butt out. If you are Chinese: Them’s the breaks, mate!

      • Andy how about The Chinese Communist Party Virus or even better the CCP Virus. Short, not so sweet, but the political point it make is self-explanatory. As for whether the political point needs to be made, think about all the wonderful buying opportunities China will find with it’s Nazi Germany style command economy where the Chinese state owns, directly or indirectly, the entire business sector, out in the US, UK, Australia etc. etc. once the economic effects of this epidemic starts to hit home. No doubt we’ll also see more ‘Confucius’ Centres (Karl Marx Centres) popping up like mushrooms all over the place.

    • That naming “China Virus” is entirely in conformity to all other pandemics. The author has explained it before so please pay attention.

      • “That naming “China Virus” is entirely in conformity to all other pandemics. The author has explained it before so please pay attention.”

        Indeed. LIke the bubonic plague that originated in Bubonia. And cholera, that originated in North Choleria. Influenza (Influenzania), typhus (Typhustina), smallpox (Smallpoxia), measles (Measland), tuberculosis (the asteroid Tuberculan 5), leprosy (Leprostan), malaria (Malaria), and yellow fever (China).

    • “Chinese” refers to something from China. It does not necessarily refer to any specific race. It could refer to Chinese people, but that that also points to nationality and not necessarily race.

      Wuhan virus is better because it more precisely names the location of the first major outbreak of the disease that we are discussing. There are already many viral diseases that originated in China and it gets quite confusing to remember all of them. Of course, the ‘Han” of “Wuhan” refers to the major ethnic group in China. A rose is a rose, they say, but Wuhan is no rose and neither is the Wuhan virus.

    • It is the norm to name infections after their place of origin, except, it seems, when a nation with many powerful people’s hands in their pockets objects because it interferes with their determined cover-up of their evil and callous behavior.

      12 Diseases and the Lucky Places They’re Named For

      1. Guinea Worm
      2. West Nile Virus
      3. German Measles
      4. Ross River Fever
      5. Omsk Hemorrhagic Fever
      6. Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever
      7. Marburg Virus Disease
      8. Lassa Fever
      9. La Crosse Encephalitis
      10. St. Louis Encephalitis
      11. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever
      12. Ohio Valley Fever
      13.San Joaquin Valley Fever

    • chinese is not a race….

      …there are tons of different ethnicities in china

      saying it’s racist is just showing your ignorance

    • Alex,

      Are cars made in Japan called Japanese cars?

      What of shoes made in Italy?

      How about steel made in Korea?

      What of the language spoken in France?

      In each case, we can see the origin of each thing provides a unique and logical naming convention.

      I personally prefer Chinese Communist Party Virus, as the pandemic is a product of complacency and government cover up.

      As to the claim of racism, please provide dispassionate proof. Such proof requires a reasoned response, as opposed to what someone has told you to believe.

      • BoM pointed out that more Americans so far have died of COVID-19 than had died in the entire Vietnam war (~58,000). The Chinese Communist Party had their hand in Vietnam also, and as you point out, are culpable for all deaths from this virus.

        Chinese racism (not our racism against Chinese but their racism against non-Chinese) may have played a role in their unleashing of the virus, but ideology is really what is driving their ongoing deception.

    • Alex Harvey,
      It sorta originated in China, hence Chinese Flu. Mind you I prefer Wuhan Flu which is more accurate.
      Maybe you have heard of other epidemics/pandemics named for their place of origin – like Spanish Flu for instance.

    • If all he cared about was naming the Chinese virus “The Chinese Virus”, why would he bother including any other points?

    • “If all you care about is race”

      chinese is not a race Alex….and saying so just shows your ignorance and all you care about

    • If you care more about political correctness and being accused of racism than you do about facts, that’s your issue. Good luck with that. The virus came from China and it is therefore a Chinese virus and that has nothing whatsoever to do with race.

    • In reply to:

      “If all you care about is race and naming the virus’

      I do not understand this ‘race’ card that is used to try to stop an investigation into covid-19 virus.

      Race has zero to do with the questions about the virus’ origin and ‘history’. Those are scientific questions.

      Race has zero to do with investigating why China is hiding information concerning this virus.

      If China did not have something to hide, the communist party would not have threatened Australia with economic war as Australia to try to intimidate Australia.

      Why is China trying to intimidate Australia? China has also kidnapped a number of Canadian citizens on trumped up charges to pressure the Canadian government. What is next? Torture?

      China’s response is Australia request for a corona virus investigation, is that Australia is like gum on your shoe.

      • “Why is China trying to intimidate Australia?”

        That’s the way the Chinese dictatorship works. Their arrogance leads them to believe they can push everyone around.

        Dictators are basically schoolyard bullies on an international scale. That’s their psychology.

      • “It is widely believed that HIV originated in Kinshasa, in the Democratic Republic of Congo around 1920 when HIV crossed species from chimpanzees to humans.”

        So I guess it would be called the Kinshasa virus, no?

    • Whether from Chinese ghouls eating fetid flesh from a wet market or from a Chinese weapons lab, it was all made in China. Have the CCP opened their labs for inspection? No. Have they closed the wet markets? No. Their intentions are clear. This is not the last virus they will spread to the world. COVID-19 is the euphomism that the WHO slapped on it at the direction of the CCP. Stuff it! It is the Chinese Wuhan Virus. Live with it!

    • It’s not racist to state the fact that the virus came from China, therefore it’s Chinese.

    • Saying “Chinese” is like saying “American” there is nothing racial about it. Both countries have many ethnic people groups.

  3. Stop racist comments… This virus is as «Chinese», as the «Influenza» virus was Spanish… Characteristically, this last one, it seems, first started in the USA…

    • The ChiCom-19 virus came from China. Evidence also points to the Spanish Flu originating in China as well, but the actual origins are debatable.

      The ChiCom-19 pandemic is entirely due to the CHINESE COMMUNIST government. Blaming the corrupt, totalitarian government and the CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY is not blame the people of China, much less blaming any Asian person you see on the street. An intelligent person knows this.

      Go peddle your propaganda elsewhere.

      • Jeffery P: “The ChiCom-19 pandemic is entirely due to the CHINESE COMMUNIST government”.

        Well well, Mr “P”; nothing like a bit of unexpected pressure to bring out the atavism lurking shallowly beneath even the most sophisticated and “educated” of skins. Don’t worry though, you find yourself in excellent and most-august company judging by how many of our Intellectual Sentinels – including the Laird and Mr. Middleton (the list is long) – have salivated on cue the moment their till-very-recently maligned political overlords rang the Great Nationalist Bell.

        Try this for a thought experiment: are you familiar with the concept of randomness and the innate drive for the human brain to rationalise post hoc? Fine, so let us also assume, then, that the virus did originate in China, one way or another. No, hell, let’s go all the way and accept that it originated in the BLS4 facility in Wuhan. Now let’s leave aside for a moment the trenchant evidence that the US funded a lot of that particular research – which makes them complicit co-conspirators, not so? Next – pray tell, are you familiar with what transpired at Fort Detrick, why, just this last August? Allow me to refresh your memory courtesY of the NYT:

        So as anyone with eyes can see, what we are really discussing here is how lucky the US was that something nasty didn’t slip out of Fort Detrick, not so? (or did it? Answer: we’ll never know). So let me ask you, the Laird and Middleton a chance-based question: IF anything had slipped out of Detrick, would you and the rest of the world have named it the US-Cap(italist) Virus? Or the Uncle Sam virus? Or as Nassim Taleb might phrase it: can your minds perceive or even conceive oF, the “Alternate Barrel of Reality?”

        Gentlemen, with the greatest respect, constrain your rising jingiosim lest it proceed to gnaw away at your ability to contribute to this fine blog on climate related issues in the future. We need your minds healthy, intact and clear!

        • what a word salad….

          probably would have called it the Detrick virus…and no one would have blinked

          Why the big China coverup?….global warming, plastic in the ocean, environmental toxins and devastation to many to list, poisons in baby formula and milk, poisons in animal food, toxins in baby toys…..war against christians and any and all religions….human rights are a joke

          What’s the deal here?….China is the worst country on this planet…and yet, all the little over educated peons in this country either ignore/deny…or rush to their defense

          • “what a word salad”

            If you can’t dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bull schist.

        • “not so?” 1: No.

          Help with funding a research lab confers no culpability for inept safety administrators.

          “not so?” 2: No.

          It wasn’t luck. It was control following expert evaluation. The NYT article serves to disprove your polemic.

          3: It might be called the Fort Detrick virus. If the US gov’t covered up a Ft. Detrick release, thereby inducing a global pandemic, maybe and justifiably it would be called the American virus. That seems as justifiable as “Chinese virus,” as Chinese refers to something from China (Chinese art, e.g.), as well as referring to a group of east Asian people.

          Or, following your fastidiousness about labeling, would ‘American virus’ be a racist slur against Americans? Running to white, black, brown, burnt umber, and yellow-tan as Americans do, would you achieve an efficient racism by including so many skin-tone variants under the single term, American virus?

          “Racism” once had some standing as an intellectual construct. It then referred to an ideology forwarding one race as superior or inferior to some other. One could actually identify racism by reference to an objective external standard.

          In recent times, “racism” has descended into a vulgar catch-all indictment. It is emptied of any specific meaning, allowing “racism/racist” to be used by progressives to impose silence. Silence everywhere except on their own self-serving exegetical inventions.

          • Pat Frank,

            Racism pops up every time anyone calls out this sudden jingoism about China and COVID. I am very familiar with China, the Chinese and all their foibles and deep contradictions. I also have precisely zero tolerance for either PC culture or its opposite, which is on daily display here. My criticism points solely at the sudden inability of some here to maintain ideological balance, and both logical and moral equivalence.

            Regarding Ft Detrick – do you seriously suggest that there is no equivalence purely because there happens to be no evidence that anything potentially serious resulted from those lax controls? It’s amusing to note how WUWT is suddenly filled with people with a lot to say about – apparently inherent – Chinese fallibility and moral decrepitude, yet the all seeing U.S. government co-funded high risk experimental work with them, at ground zero!…but have pristinely clean hands. Sure Pat, one can reason that way but, come on man, at least have the courage to call things by their proper name!

            I see the US now àlso wants to hold China “financially accountable”. Should the rest of the world send the USA and UK a bill for the criminally corrupt 2009 Wall Street and City of London-triggered global financial collapse and all its after shocks? Or how about Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya? Where’s the line Pat? Ever heard of Hanlon’s Razor?

            I closely followed your work on probabilities. Much respect. When smart, respectable minds like yours trade Logos for one-eyed flag-waving you do WUWT no favours

          • I am most grateful to my good friend Pat Frank for having pointed out that the charge of “racism” is a catch-all insult designed to silence the opponents of Communism. Well, it won’t work. In due course I shall set out the timeline of China’s guilt, without which the world would not now be facing hundreds of thousands of excess deaths, with who knows how many more to come.

          • Mr Buchan, like many of the apologists for Chinese Communist failings here, tries to divert attention away from the Communist Party’s responsibility for having failed to notify the world community of the infection within 24 hours of its first detection, in terms of Article 6 of the International Health Regulations; for having repeatedly lied to the effect that the virus did not transmit from person to person; and for having demanded that flights to and from China should remain open until the virus had been thoroughly transmitted worldwide; and for having disappeared at least seven doctors who had wanted to warn the world in time.

          • Peter Buchan, you wrote in support of Alex Harvey’s racism thesis.

            Your “Racism pops up every time, etc., …” exactly exemplifies my point about vulgar racism. Rhetorically: why is blaming China for covid-19 racist? Well, because peter buchan says so.

            There may be racist people who spit, “*Chinese!* virus” as a racist pejorative. But to know that’s an example of racism, we must diagnose the speaker first as a racist. The “Chinese virus” then becomes a racist insult by association with the racist prior.

            Chinese virus is an identifier. So is Wuhan virus.

            Neither descriptor is ever a racist insult in isolation, without any diagnostic prior.

            Far too many folks have set aside their capacity for rational appraisal — jumping to one diagnosis with no inclusion of source or context. It’s more often an indication of their own moral feebleness, than of any one else’s racial outlook.

            Maybe some people here are racists. Maybe others are tired of hypocritical progressive embrace of Chinese racism, colonialism, mercantilism and imperialism, and so take some pleasure in hyperbole.

            I don’t know, though. There’s been no poll. You’ve not conducted one. Neither have Alex Harvey, AndyL, or Fonesca-Statter. None of you have asked any of the posters here whether they despise Chinese people as a race. Or for their possible alternative motives.

            You’ve all just concluded racism when confronted with statements of motivational ambiguity. Given that, it’s you folks on display here as biased, not the others.

            You asked, “do you seriously suggest that there is no equivalence purely because there happens to be no evidence that anything potentially serious resulted from those lax controls?

            Yes, I do aver, not suggest, that; on the grounds of the NYT story that said the US shut down a lab that was not meeting safety standards. Had the Chinese done that — and they were warned the Wuhan standards were lax — the covid outbreak may not have happened.

            Given the fundamental difference — expert shut-down at Detrick vs. inept continuance at Wuhan — there is no apparent reason for your insistence on their equivalence.

            The US has all sorts of high-end scientific and technological cooperative projects with China. I worked with Chinese scientists at SLAC helping them do advanced x-ray spectroscopy. There were undoubtedly Chinese students at Stanford doing advanced BSL work. Likewise elsewhere around the US. Why, then, shouldn’t the US help Chinese in China with that same work? The fact that there were American inspectors shows evidence of oversight. The funding was not just blind hands-off carte blanche.

            The proper name for a Wuhan release is ineptitude. Ineptitude of the Chinese administrators and laboratory officers. Calling Covid-19 the Chinese virus is a valid shorthand identifier specifying origin. Doing so is not racism. It takes courage to be neutrally rational in a moralizing time, Peter.

            Regarding accountability, the US is a democratic republic, as opposed to China’s fascist thugocracy. The prior US leadership is gone. If anyone should be held accountable for past criminality, bring charges against those individuals. They’re civilians now.

            You won’t get any national traction from the accusatory shibboleths of Iraq, Libya or Afghanistan. Libya can be laid at Hillary Clinton’s feet. And Barack Obama’s. Prosecute them. I agree that some recompense is owed Libya for Gaddafi’s murder, and the chaos that followed. But criminal and moral guilt left with the Obama administration.

            In China’s thugocracy, guilt is permanently retained by the president-for-life thugocrat and associated hench-people.

            A very good argument can be made that Afghanistan and Iraq called war down upon themselves. The mistake in Afghanistan was nation-building. Likewise Iraq. The local cultures don’t seem to provide the soil for a successful polity.

            Thank-you for your kind words about my paper on the reliability of climate model projections.

            However, I do not admit to showing one-eyed flag-waving. I have objected to closed-eyed racism-baiting. Doing so isn’t jingoism, atavistic, or even nationalism. It’s ethical rationalism.

          • “my good friend Pat Frank ”

            Thank-you for that, Christopher. I’m very honored. Truly so.

        • Speaking of salivating on cue, here comes yet another apologist for the Chi Coms who insists that anyone who doesn’t ignore the crimes of his masters is just another unthinking racist.

          And of course he has to claim that since the US played a very small part in funding the facility that released the virus, that the US must bear most of the blame, while those in charge of that facility were just helpless dupes. And of course the often repeated but never proven claim that the virus really came from the US. Who cares about evidence, we have paymasters to defend.

        • Why is it the left can never answer a simple question in a sentence or two but just launch into a great multiparagraph, multisyllabic word salad designed to show how clever they are rather than communicate clearly. Let’s get a few things straight for the record. 1) The virus came from a bat from China. 2) The USA had nothing whatsoever to do with releasing said virus on the world. That’s Chicom CYA propaganda unworthy of consideration. 3) Just because the USA responsibly shut down a lab where there were problems doesn’t give the Chinese a licence to not shut down a lab where there are apparently similar problems. (That’s assuming one accepts the NYT as reliable source which I do not.) Whataboutism and straw man arguments just don’t cut it. This from the same folks that wanted to call it the Trump virus, no doubt.

        • “Now let’s leave aside for a moment the trenchant evidence that the US funded a lot of that particular research – which makes them complicit co-conspirators, not so?”

          No, not so. The U.S. was involved in the lab at one time, but it doesn’t follow that the U.S. conspired with the Chinese to release this virus into the population after the U.S. had withdrawn its support for the lab some years ago.

          And it doesn’t really matter where the virus first appeared, what matters is that after the Chinese leadership knew they had a very infectious, lethal disease spreading in their country, they concealed the fact from the rest of the world, and then stopped internal traffic out of Wuhan to contain the virus, while at the same time encouraging and even bullying nations into continuing international flights in and out of China, knowing full well that infected people were on those flights.

          The Chinese leadership foisted this disease on the whole world deliberately. Xi should accept responsiblity and resign, and China should offer to repay all affected nations. That might take a lot of heat off the Chinese. If that doesn’t happen, then we may be entering a new cold war, or even a hot one. Bullies will back off with enough pressure, but sometimes you have to give them a bloody nose before they understand their situation. Once you give them a bloody nose, they will run like hell.

      • China is one of the most racist nations on the face of the earth. They don’t give a wit about racism or being racist. They are using the Western Left’s notion that racism is everywhere and everyone’s a racist to deflect the justifiable blame from themselves, not because they care about racism.
        You are either a fool or, a Chinese stooge.

        Want an example? Here you go.

        ‘Arguably the most racist ad I’ve ever seen’: Chinese ad for laundry detergent jaw-DROPPINGLY racist (watch)

        This is what they are doing to religious people. China is despicable and no nation who claims to be moral should be now or, ever have done business with such a truly evil Government.

        China Accused of Harvesting Organs of Uighurs, Falun Gong Religious Group
        September 26, 2019

        • Yeah but that’s just their culture. Anyone that calls themselves an American citizen doesn’t have culture because they stole it. /SARC

    • The knee jerk reaction and virtue signalling to the naming of the virus is the sort of thing that stopped us barring flights from China early enough to make a difference.

      • What are you talking about? Trump was the first Leader outside of Taiwan and So. Korea who, based on long experience with the despicable CCP, both knew that China was lying, to ban travel. He did it against the advice of the W.H.O. and the CDC.
        For doing the right thing, the Left/Dems called him racist and xenophobic.
        Trump banned travel despite knowing the usual suspects would accuse him of both and they did.
        You have it completely backwards.

        • “What are you talking about? Trump was the first Leader outside of Taiwan and So. Korea who, based on long experience with the despicable CCP, both knew that China was lying, to ban travel. He did it against the advice of the W.H.O. and the CDC.”

          Not only that, but Trump went against all his advisors when he placed a travel ban on China.

          Trump said when they were discussing whether to impose the China ban, there were 21 people in the room with Trump, and Trump said every one of them opposed the travel ban. So the travel ban was Trump’s idea alone and he went against everyone including his own people, in order to put it in place.

          That’s what I call a decisive man. A prescient man.

        • KcTaz April 29, 2020 at 11:21 am
          What are you talking about? Trump was the first Leader outside of Taiwan and So. Korea who, based on long experience with the despicable CCP, both knew that China was lying, to ban travel.

          Not true, for example Italy banned flights from China on Jan 30th, a couple of days later Trump restricted entry to the US from China (“Any foreign national who has traveled within China in the last 14 days will not be allowed to enter the United States”).

    • Exactly, we should call it the Bat-cold!

      You know, it would be like the Bird-flu or the Swine-flu.

      That wouldn’t be racist but it could be construed as Species-ist, or something.

      We can’t have that.

      • Very true. Bat Soup Flu?

        No matter how hard leftists try to control language, it will never change reality about what they are.

        “Political correctness is Fascism pretending to have manners.”

        Those ‘manners’ had politicians in the US telling people to go out and party in crowds, Italian Mayors telling people to hug their Chinese visitors and that anyone who objected was a racist…or something

        • I don’t care if people call it the China flu, kung flu, chinese virus, or anything else, but the misinformation about them eating bats is just ignorance on full display. Bats have a lot to do with the bio lab in Wuhan, but have nothing to do with their seafood markets.

          • Mr Turner is not quite correct. Bats can pass their viruses to animals such as the pangolins, a protected species that was on sale at the Huanan “seafood” market.

          • That’s true, viruses might even play a role in evolution.

            But what is also unequivocally true is that the SARS virus has been studied and mutated in labs around the world since it first jumped to humans from bats in 2003. The jump occurred in tropical Guangdong where there are actually a lot of bats in the winter. SARSCOV2 first appeared in Wuhan, a continental climate where I assume there aren’t too many fruit bats hanging around the sea food, but it does have China’s only bio lab that does research on these viruses.

            It’s actually sort of funny, if you look up ‘bats wuhan china’ and limit the results to before 2019, you get a lot of research on these viruses from the Wuhan Institute of Virology which all state that the bats are from Guangdong. The lab is actually close to the seafood market too, I wonder where the nearest bat cave is.

            And of course the pangolin is a protected species and it is illegal to take them, so of course the black market makes a convenient scapegoat.

    • It really is amazing how desperate the usual suspects are to find some way to blame everything bad on the US. Even when there is no actual data to support their fantastical desires.

    • Where did it originate from ? China, its a virus that originated in China. Got it, its not rocket science is it. It is not racist, its a matter of fact.

      • Of course “West Nile Virus” is racist. Everything is racist. Except leftists. They’re virtuous, upstanding haters of everything American, especially the President. That’s not racism. Racism is disagreeing with a Leftist stooge. Racism is not being a Leftist stooge. All is racism.

    • “Stop racist comments… This virus is as «Chinese», as the «Influenza» virus was Spanish… Characteristically, this last one, it seems, first started in the USA…”

      And not one American feels a sense of shame because of it. Why? Because not one American deliberately foisted the Spanish flu on anyone, so they have nothing to be ashamed of.

      The only people in China who should be ashamed of the Wuhan virus are those who deliberately foisted the Wuhan virus plague on the planet. That would be the Chinese leadership, although I think it is safe to say they have no shame. Can’t see much humanity there, either. Not when you deliberately destroy millions of innocent lives (the dead are not the only victims)..

  4. Some excess deaths could be caused by sick people not getting treatment for fear of going to GPs or hospital

      • Perhaps but it might unintentionally expose the decades old practice of combining cold and flu deaths together and simply calling it seasonal flu.

        That wouldn’t be good, might spoil the narrative.

      • You’d think so.

        One of the recurrent themes is that the coronavirus is just hastening the demise of those who would soon have died anyway. In that respect you would expect that, once the coronavirus settles down, we will have negative excess deaths. In other words, because people died earlier, they won’t be around to die in August or whenever. Yeah, well we’ll see about that.

        The one thing I can confidently predict is that statisticians will be busy for decades.

        • I suspect this is very true. And the excess deaths also include people not getting regular hospital care due to the obsessive focus on COVID.

        • A few weeks ago Willis had an article in which he showed that the number of deaths had at temporarily dropped below normal levels.

        • In other words, because people died earlier, they won’t be around to die in August or whenever. Yeah, well we’ll see about that.

          Actually, this is a normal feature of “flu” deaths. If there’s a bad season the next one is usually much less bad. The UK 2019/2020 flu season was light and it was a very mild winter. Many people were left who might have seen another summer. There was lots of low hanging fruit for COVID-19 to harvest.

          Obviously we’ll have to wait and see, but it might be that the virus has a tougher job this coming autumn/winter.

          • That also compounds itself into the future, perhaps generations. There were not so well known flu pandemics in the 1950s, but you know what researchers attribute to them not being so bad? Immunity, even in those that weren’t even old enough to be around when that strain last spread, because mothers pass theirs to their children through breast milk. But now Chicken Little tells us the only thing to do is crawl inside a bubble and spend the rest of your days in fear of the flu and cold.

    • Yes, I know a doctor who predicted this on the very first day of government hostage taking. There is already a large number of diseases that go unchecked and cause mortality, like diabetes, and this fear mongering is likely having a big impact on such diseases. That’s besides the unequivocal impact, like Chicken Little buying out the entire rubbing alcohol supply so diabetics don’t have it for injections. Meh, what’s a little staph infection compared to a disease with a 0.03% mortality rate anyhow?

    • That’s one of many confounding problems. In a ‘normal’ year, about 100 people per day in the US die from auto accidents. I would have to believe that that number has plummeted, as well as the number of job related deaths. Deaths from domestic abuse, suicide, alcohol, and drugs, otoh, have likely gone up.

    • Isn’t there a big problem with their “test” – they conclude that they show mandated lockdowns suppress the disease. That’s completely untrue because that is not what was tested. They tested whether you can suppress the disease by testing 80% of the population to first find out whether they had it or not while also mandating a lockdown. With that conveniently done, how many carriers do you think didn’t quarantine among their own family and roommates? How many carriers do you think went out to do the family’s shopping, or went to their “essential” jobs? And even knowing who carried it, 8 new cases managed to still pop up during the lockdown. Did they not tell the test subjects whether they had it or not after the first swab? That would be a proper test, but I doubt they had that option for ethical reasons.

      Do you see what I’m saying? By knowing whether they were carriers or not, there was an effectiveness in suppressing the spread, and that could happen whether there was a mandatory lockdown or not. We needs tests, not quarantine of the healthy.

    • In Vo’, Italy, the prevalence of the infection was 2.5% when the first case was identified and the town locked down, and 1.2% some weeks after the lockdown. O si sic omnes.

      • It’s been said here before that daily death rates taper off over time. So is the presumed causal effect real or only apparent. If real, how many livelihoods were destroyed for the benefit, and what are the ultimate consequences of doing that?

  5. To protect the elderly and critical condition people, we should aim for herd immunity ASAP. Stretching it out means by sheltering creates a longer and greater chance for the virus to get to this group, which should always be protected, largely by their own measures, during the flu season.

    It is not wrong to expect the elderly and compromised to aim to protect themselves, with the aid, in some cases, of their care-workers. However, it is egregiously wrong to expect and demand that the rest of the population who are at low risk to completely cease their lives for this group. It’s plainly stupid and ignorant and does much more damage than good.

    • I agree with you Charles.

      Early data (Diamond Princess cruise ship, etc.) clearly showed that Covid-19 was overwhelmingly dangerous to the high-risk elderly and infirm, not the majority young-and-healthy population.

      If we wanted to truly protect seniors in long-term care from Covid-19, their care-givers would have to be locked-down on-site for the duration – failing to do that was a guarantee of high mortality in these homes. We could have done that for nickels and dimes, instead of locking down the entire low-risk population and trashing the economy.

      The reason for England’s atypical continued increase in Covid-19 deaths is explained below by Dr. Malcolm Kendrick – incompetent health care policies that increase mortality of the elderly and the poor – similar to BoJo’s (BloJo’s?) imbecilic green energy policies (see “Heat or Eat”).

      The very low Excess Winter Mortality (1Dec2019-31Mar2020) across Europe probably reflects a very good guess in the formulation of this year’s flu vaccine, as compared to the major failure of 2017-2018. This good fortune left many elderly and infirm people alive through 31Mar2020, only to be struck down in April by Covid-19.

      We could have done so much better, by thinking more and panicking less.

      Regards, Allan

      In Europe, Total Deaths from All Causes peaked in week 14, the week of 30Mar2020-5Apr2020.

      Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, a Scottish physician, wrote:
      “Unfortunately, it seems that COVID-19 has infected everyone involved in healthcare management and turned their brains into useless mush.

      [In my view, if we had any sense, we would lockdown/protect the elderly, and let everyone else get on with their lives].

      However, the hospitals themselves have another policy. Which is to discharge the elderly unwell patients with COVID directly back into the community, and care homes. Where they can spread the virus widely amongst the most vulnerable.

      This, believe it or not, is NHS policy. Still.”

      Dr. Kendrick is obviously brilliant, in that he agrees with me. 🙂
      As I wrote in March:
      [excerpt- posted 21Mar2020]

      “This full-lockdown scenario is especially hurting service sector businesses and their minimum-wage employees – young people are telling me they are “financially under the bus”. The young are being destroyed to protect us over-65’s. A far better solution is to get them back to work and let us oldies keep our distance, and get “herd immunity” established ASAP – in months not years. Then we will all be safe again.”

      Have we wasted many trillions, harmed billions of young people and trashed our economies for nothing? Seems so. We should end this unnecessary lockdown now!

      Here in Alberta, many/most of our Covid-19 deaths are among the elderly in nursing homes – if we had a deliberate strategy to kill them off, we could not do much better.

      The global Covid-19 lock-down strategy appears to be overprotect the healthy majority, who will get little or no symptoms of the virus, kill the economy and do ruinous harm to young people and small businesses, and fail to protect the elderly and the unwell, and kill them off as expeditiously as possible. Attaboys all around.

      • Herd immunity without a vaccine as a viable strategy is wishful thinking.

        As more and more reliable data comes in the CFR manifests to be ~1% of the whole population at least.

        Herd immunity 70%.

        So for the US:

        328 M x 0.7 x 0.01 = 2,296,000 deaths

        For UK:

        66.65 M x 0.7 x 0.01 = 466,550 deaths

        In the US 5.6% of deaths are people <50y, in the UK 8.8%.

        So even if you manage to completely protect the people over 50y you still end up with

        2,296,000 x 0.056 = 128,576 deaths for US

        466,550 x 0.088 = 41,056 deaths for UK

        But that is not all. You would still overload your health care system. People <50y make up 25.5% of hospitalized cases in the US. Too much to let the virus go wild.

        As I said going for herd immunity just like that is not feasible but also in general because of the CFR of ~1%. 1st. for the health care system you need additional measures to not crush it and 2nd. it will be political suicide too go for a death toll of people <50y that exceeds double the numbers of Vietnam.

        • Ron wrote:
          “Herd immunity without a vaccine as a viable strategy is wishful thinking.”

          I think that statement is false – an effective vaccine usually takes many months or even years to be widely implemented, and may not even be possible.

          Herd immunity of seasonal flu’s usually happens in a few months.

          Until otherwise convincing disproved, Covid-19 should be treated just another severe seasonal flu, which arrived a bit later than most.

          • “Herd immunity of seasonal flu’s usually happens in a few months.”

            That is a total misconception how the immunity against influenza works in the population.

          • Mr Macrae should be aware that with the Chinese virus herd immunity cannot be guaranteed. In South Korea and other places, the period of immunity in some patients has been shown to be very short indeed, and coronaviridae tend at best to have immunity periods of only 3-6 months.

          • Lord Monckton wrote:
            “Mr Macrae should be aware that with the Chinese virus herd immunity cannot be guaranteed. In South Korea and other places, the period of immunity in some patients has been shown to be very short indeed, and coronaviridae tend at best to have immunity periods of only 3-6 months.”

            Thank you Sir.

            Yes I am aware of that notion, which at this point appears to be an unproven hypothesis that is of little value. Until that specific concept is guaranteed to be widely correct, the most prudent path is to proceed as I have stated – end the full lock-down asap AND start actually protecting the elderly and infirm, rather than ~pretending to do so.

            To be clear, I suggest that the utterly shabby treatment of the elderly and infirm in the UK is why you have the continuing deaths that you do.

            Specifically, see:


            Experts in South Korea said that recovered coronavirus patients who tested positive again were not reinfected and that their virus was not reactivated, as was previously feared.

            More than 260 people who recovered and tested negative subsequently tested positive again. The Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention worried that the virus had reactivated after going dormant.

            But the country’s infectious-disease experts said on Thursday that the tests were detecting dead fragments of the virus left in patients’ bodies.

        • Forgot to include age distribution into the calculation:

          308 x 0.4 x 0.7 x 0.00055 makes 47,432 deaths for 20-50y old in the US still.

          Hospitalization rate doesn’t change.

        • You’re numbers are rubbish.

          1. You are assuming 70% of the entire population instantly gets the disease at once.
          2. You assume that if 70% of the entire population got the disease at once, that the number of deaths and people hospitalized can be scaled up based on the current number of people in those situations, when the people currently in those situations are the ones already compromised by the disease due to complicating illnesses or autoimmune deficiencies – the low hanging fruit.
          3. You treat all people under the age of 50 as if they are in the same population group when in fact SARS-Cov2 clearly has trouble even infecting the young.
          4. You assume the winter season statistics, when northern hemisphere denizens have weakened immune systems, will carry on through the summer months.
          5. You pull a CFR of 1% out of … but the actual numbers are closer to 0.03% when you factor the prevalence now being revealed by actual testing – at least according to a long time practicing doctor in CA that is being desperately being censored by the MSM.

          • @Robert W. Turner
            to 1. No. It doesn’t matter when the people will get the disease if they die or not. One point people argue often with when it comes to herd immunity and that we should just get it over with.

            to 2. No. Same here as point 1. Also people are not getting in line according to their predisposition and the most likely to get hospitalized are at the front. They catch the virus by chance so the hospitalized numbers are reflecting an average of the population. At least when the numbers are big enough – what they are by now.

            to 3. Your claim is completely not backed up by any data. Epidemiologic data indicates that the attack rate in households is the same if a child brings in the disease as if an adult does. So under the same circumstances for infections children are not at all more protected.

            to 4. And you argue for a seasonal effect where there is no data that there will be one. The excess mortality from Ecuador strongly argues against a seasonal effect on the virus ability for infection except for maybe a change in people’s behavior (less gatherings in crowded rooms).

            to 5. I didn’t pull the ~1% CFR out of nowhere:


            Overall CFR is estimated to be 1.38%.

            The ridiculous low estimate of 0.03% (only one third of a bad flu year’s 0.1%… really?!) comes from completely untrustworthy charlatanry masking as science. But I understand why people want to believe it.

        • First fundamental error: you’re using CFR as if it’s IFR (infection fatality rate, which we will have no clue about until governments become honest enough to do antibody testing).

          Second of all, your calculation/model don’t hold up to reality. Quick test of predicative power, apply historic data. Let’s use worldwide influenza A & B between 2011-2018 (Fu & Zhou study, IM&D, 2019):

          Average CFR per 100: 0.0021
          Herd immunity required: 70% (not sure where you’re getting that # from, but let’s go with it…)

          Population 2011-2018: 7.0-7.6 billion
          7 billion x 70% x 0.0021 = 10.3 MILLION DEATHS PER YEAR FROM INFLUENZA???

          Population 2011-2018: 311-327 million
          311 million x 70% x 0.0021 = 457 THOUSAND DEATHS PER YEAR FROM INFLUENZA???

          Good news, you’re only off by a full order of magnitude (minimum), which apparently could still land you a cushy job at Imperial College.

          It astounds me that people actually think established fields of study like biostatistics only require wild guesses for inputs and simple algebra to understand.

          Do you think the thesis defense for a PhD in epidemiology comes down to: “Multiply these 3 random numbers together”?

          • @ SteveB
            If it makes you happier I can call it estimated IFR in the future even if it is called CFR in scientific literature:


            Which is estimated to be 1.38% according to the paper.

            60-70% immunity is considered to be required for herd immunity. I didn’t make up those numbers. It’s just what will put your R0 automatically below 1 and ends the outbreak. As simple as that.

            And now to your biggest misconception:

            We have a lot of immunity against the flu in the population – even against new strains because they are still related enough that people can have by chance generated immunity triggered by similar enough sequences.

            That is completely lacking for SARS-CoV-2. All the super spreading events are pointing to no immunity in the population at all. It’s hard to get R0 of 2-3 without that prerequisite.

          • @ Ron

            So to recap:

            1. You’ve invented a new metric called “estimated IFR” that only you understand the meaning of.
            2. You don’t realize that serology testing (not PCR) is necessary to even crudely estimate IFRs.
            3. You reject the idea that using CFR as you have doesn’t make even basic logical sense (you’re multiplying the PCR-based CASE rate against the ENTIRE population).
            4. You think that herd immunity metric somehow affects the virus’s R0 (when, in fact, it’s the other way around).

            and lastly…

            5. You still haven’t explained even attempted to explain why the simple math you’re using to make these extravagant claims today don’t apply to the past.

            Just wanted to make sure I understood who I was sparring with on this… thanks for clarifying.

          • You completely failed to account for those getting the flu vaccine. Last year it was 47% of the population.

            That impacts the numbers in two, very big ways. First, the 47% who were vaccinated were at very low risk of dying from the flu. Secondly, only 23% of the population needed to recover from the flu for herd immunity to kick in; 70% of the population would no longer be at risk of catching and spreading the flu.

            Your numbers are wildly high.

          • @jtom

            Don’t blame me. They’re not “my” numbers. They’re Ron’s incoherent mathematical ramblings reflected back to him through the reality-check of plugging in actual historical Influenza data to test his “model.”

            Even if I play along with what you’re saying and change the parameters I used to crudely test his calculations it only reduces the results by 2/3 and leaves numbers still preposterously high — proving his approach is nonsense.

            But you seem keen to defend him, so if you’re up for the task of showing how Ron’s approach actually generates numbers in the ballpark of reality for historic Influenza data, be my guest.

          • @SteveB
            IFR equals CFR if all cases are detected. The best estimate for IFR are therefore the CFRs from countries that successfully contain the virus by testing&tracking. Their strategy would not work if the undetected cases where anywhere a significant number.

            “You don’t realize that serology testing (not PCR) is necessary to even crudely estimate IFRs.”
            Practically most likely, in principle not at all if you catch all cases via testing&tracking.

            “You reject the idea that using CFR as you have doesn’t make even basic logical sense (you’re multiplying the PCR-based CASE rate against the ENTIRE population).”
            It’s case FATALITY rate and not case rate. The whole Lancet paper I linked to addresses the issue of undertesting. That you make best use of PCR-based data as possible.

            And the numbers are not “my” numbers as well how to calculate the death count is not “my” way”. At least not exclusively:

            “If we combine infection fatality data with an estimate of the number of individuals that need to develop immunity to reach the herd immunity threshold, we can project the expected number of deaths as a consequence of meeting this threshold. Because of the uncertainty in the COVID-19 IFR, we use three different point estimates in our analysis: 1) an IFR of 0.2%, 2) IFR of 0.6% that is in line with the IFR determined by Verity et al., and 3) an IFR of 1% (Figure 2C). Assuming a uniform herd immunity threshold of 67% (R0 = 3) and an IFR of 0.6%, the absolute number of expected deaths across the globe would exceed 30 million people (Figure 2C).”


            Would make 50 million for 1%.

            The difference between influenza and SARS-CoV-2 is that influenza had and still has a huge background immunity in the population for centuries where SARS-CoV-2 has none.

        • Ron,

          Reality undercuts your argument.

          1) WuWhoFlu almost certainly kills less than 0.6% and may kill fewer than 0.2% of the infected. source: The higher figure is based on NY state deaths as of 29 Apr and testing results indicating 15+% of the state’s population has already been exposed to / infected by the virus. The lower figure is based on US deaths as of 29 Apr and testing results indicating 8+% of the US population has C19 antibodies.

          2) Lockdowns are intended to stretch over a longer time period C19’s death toll, not to reduce the death toll. In contrast, reducing the death toll is a key function of developing herd immunity.

          • @DM

            Read this article:


            If the mortality was 0.2% as you suggest 11,890,000 in New York state would already had the virus. 3,963,333 if 0.6%. I really doubt that.

            All antibody tests so far are unreliable in terms of false positives (their specificity is not sufficient). The Stanford one definitively had this issue and its findings could have been ZERO real infected people by a probability of 90%. About the New York one I couldn’t find any specifications yet.

            I’m really waiting for a test that meets specifications that the data can be interpreted in a decision advising way.

            2) No, that is not how that works.

      • Exactly.

        A strict lockdown is the best way to put at maximum risk our ederly and vulnerable. because we are just delaying the suppression of the infection and the contained zones will all soon or later be contaminated.

        The lockdown was supposed to limit the peak of the infection spread:
        – it failed everywhere in Europe simply because it has been applied almost everywhere 1 to 2 weeks after the peak of the infection spread.

        With respect to this epidemy, this is paradoxically a good news because at least, we will unlikely have to face a noticeable second wave during the lockdown exit.

        Thus, ironically, the only good news about the lockdown now that we have to get out of it, is that it will have been almost completely useless with respect to its primary objective which was to lower the peak infection spread.

      • What if, as seems possible, herd-immunity is not conferred upon SARS-CoV-2 victims…..or is only a short-term effect?
        And if long term immunity is not gained after infection and recovery, then what use a vaccine?
        It looks like we may end-up with a quite lethal recurrent disease, like an extremely bad common cold, for which no immunity is gained.

    • 100%. The irony is that the majority of those in that at-risk group are those that are most adamantly for individual rights and people having the right to choose quarantine without being sick.

      Most of these social justice idiots would have given you a strange look if you asked them about the 1918-19 pandemic last year, but every single one could could have told you something they know about the Great Depression. If we can’t shock the economy back to life after this is all said and done, the ramifications could last for generations.

    • Mr Higley has been told time and again that it is not yet possible to rely upon “herd immunity” with this particular pandemic, since a) the period of immunity for coronaviridae in general is 3065 months, which is too short to be useful, and b) the Chinese virus has been shown to return within days of an infection clearing in several South Korean patients.

      Until it is known that herd immunity is a viable option with this virus, and now that it is known that it may not be an option responsible governments cannot take the risk of simply assuming that it will work.

      • I have seen no discussion of false positive tests. With PCR, contamination can also produce a false positive. Without this information, a few case reports are just supposition.

      • So what is the option? Humans will not remain locked down. You are going to get it and survive or get it and die. Nothing we are doing is going to change that. If the IFR was 5% (and it’s not) the world still has to go on for the other 95%.

      • Those that tested positive again I have my doubts.

        The simplest explanation is they were never really negative. The nasal swab was obviously RNA negative by RT-PCR, but the virus likely can replicate at lower levels than the lung epithelial cells in other tissues such a striated muscle and the liver, spleen and small intestinal endotheial cells. We also know from SARS-CoV-1 that it could replicate as an enteric infection in the small intestine. SARS-2 likely can replicate at low levels in the intestine as well since receptor useage is similar. Furthermore, the clinical symptom of reported loss of taste and smell by some patients is strongly suggestive some replication occurs in the neurons of olfaction innervation paths, providing another possible sorce of occult infection. Thus the SARS-CoV-1/2 viruses are likely replicating in other tissues not gaining clearance yet by IgM and T cell responses, and then re-infects the upper airway to give a positive PCR nasal swab in a final surge before the immune system finally fully responds.

  6. Chinese Virus it certainly is . Why all the PC panic about not naming it correctly ?
    Monckton has edited out ‘ occupied Tibet ‘ which is very polite of him .

  7. Hi Christopher…thank you again for an interesting and, above all, useful post.

    Excess deaths and actual infection penetration into the various populations are critical data needed to add coherence to the complex decision making going on as we speak. Good data can be used to improve the path forward. Unfortunately we are mostly in a mode of using various data as weapons to defend whatever theory we might harbor. The ### virus is doing enough damage on its own..let’s not add to it by bludgeoning each other with crap data.

    Ethan Brand

    • It is not clear whether Mr Brand is saying that the data we reproduce here are useless. They are certainly incomplete, but they are nevertheless useful. Excess mortality is a good way to discern whether, as some have tried to suggest here, there are far fewer people dying of the virus than with it, or whether the death counts published by governments are underestimates. The evidence from the head posting is that they are underestimates.

      For some time we have been pointing out here that in Britain, for instance, the published death toll was for hospital cases only, and that there must be a very large number of extranosocomial deaths in the general population because the excess-death statistics have risen so sharply. Today HM Government has at last admitted what those who follow this series of data-driven pieces were the first to know: namely, that the official government death-toll figures in the UK were a considerable understatement.

      • MoB

        you are arguing with a group of people whose mindset and tactics are drawn from
        the playbook of people who want to see the death certificates of people who died
        in nazi death camps.

        They decided long ago that this disease could not be a threat, therefore no data will convince them that it is in fact a threat.
        Every little oddity in data will signal to them that it is all worthless or made up.
        Nothing will convince them because they decided long ago.

        One thing may convince them. catching a case.

        • Maybe we could examine the correlation between major objectors to “the lockdown” and their investment portfolios’ ?
          That would probably be more revealing than an examination of leakage from a bio-research lab, partially financed by the USA !

      • I seem to have missed any discussion of the effect (or not) of the quality of Her Majesties medical/hospital system regarding this issue. Do ALL those requiring hospitalization get it in a timely manner regardless of class? Does everyone who needs to simply see a Dr get to see one to confirm/deny the existence of the virus as appropriate? Is the medical system so strained that “minor” things like appendicitis are shunted aside so Coronavirus patients can be seen?
        The ability of the medical system to PROPERLY handle the load could obviously have a great effect on the excess death rate which is the subject of discussion here.

        • Locally, patients presenting with sars-cov-2 symptoms are admitted to a separate section of the hospital, deliberately separated, and treated within an area expanded to accommodate those patients. The ICU area has been expanded and now encompasses several recovery areas and attached operating theatres. Since several new modular operating theatres/recovery areas were added within the last few years, this has not stressed the hospital enough to halt other treatments, although some clinics have been moved to separate areas more. More ECMOs’ would be useful, but their use in patients is a skilled operation, with skills being at a premium (now more than ever). Since the NHS modelled a pandemic 4 years age, much of this response was planned then. Sadly, while the hospitals had planning in place, the lack of any urgency from central govt has curtailed its effectiveness, particularly in provision of ventilation and oxygenation equipment and PPE for staff.

          • “Since several new modular operating theatres/recovery areas were added within the last few years, this has not stressed the hospital enough to halt other treatments, although some clinics have been moved to separate areas more.”
            Sorry that is not what the UK news says, it is certainly not the case for brother awaiting a crucial Heart vlave operation.
            Quarantine demands that highly contagious patients with dangerous deseases not be in the same hospital as general patients, it is what “Isolation Hospitals” were for.

            If it worked as you suggest why have so many patients caught COVID-19 in hospital?

  8. Merchants of Panic.

    Frankly, anyone that repeats the risible MSM Vietnam line loses all credibility. For a rational perspective, the virus deaths in NY State are still only a small fraction of the normal number of annual deaths.

    UK weekly mortality has barely exceeded the worst weeks in 2005 and 2015 of 16-17,000+.

    The numbers are big because the population is big. The extra risk of dying is very very very very very very tiny.

    • There are some 5 million more people in the UK since the start of the century and numbers of the over 80’s has increased by 50 percent for men and 25 percent for women since 1985 so there an awful lot more vulnerable people very susceptible to any virus.

      • In response to Tonyb, it is necessary not to look the other way in the face of the excess-mortality statistics, which have risen with unprecedented sharpness in the UK and in many other European countries. It is no longer possible for the apologist for the Chinese Communist Party here to go on trying to maintain that the Chinese virus is no worse than the flu. It is worse – about ten times more infectious and ten times more deadly, according to Jerome Kim, the director-general of the International VIrological Institute.

        Underplaying the seriousness of the threat is of assistance to Communist China, of course, but it is irresponsible, and the data simply no longer allow avoidance of the issue.

        • Rather, extending the lockdown to increase the damage to our economies is what is in the Chinese Communist Party’s interests.

    • Since ChiCom19 has only been killing people for a couple of months, comparing those deaths to an entire year’s worth of deaths in a normal year is quite deceptive.

      • MarkW is correct. Apologists for the failed Chinese Communist regime in these columns have done their level worst to go on and on and on attempting to compare an entire year’s average flu deaths with deaths from the Chinese virus over recent weeks. That tactic smacks of the same desperation that has led the official propagandists for the regime to declare that the virus originated not in Wuhan but in Maryland, and to try to pressure even hard-headed Republican legislators into congratulating the regime for its “transparency” – a “transparency” so inspissate that China failed to notify the world community of the existence of this new pathogen for six weeks after it was first identified, when the International Health Regulations – for good reason – require notification within 24 hours.

          • Carlo
            My definition of failed is- no more, doesn’t work, ex-parrot.
            To say ‘failed regime’, is to be dismissive of a clear and current threat. It ain’t de*d Jim.

          • A failed test, experiment or device still exists it sits there as a stubborn reminder of the failure …. so something still existing doesn’t mean it hasn’t failed

            Pretty much like that argument 🙂

          • LdB
            It’s a matter of semantics and perspective. Of course, there are different interpretations of the word.

    • MrGrimNasty
      You should have read the post before comenting. Monkton points out that the latest weekly death rates for for England and Wales was 22,351 – and that data was for three weeks ago.

    • “Frankly, anyone that repeats the risible MSM Vietnam line loses all credibility. ” MrGrimNasty.

      I agree completely. Monckton has now adopted the tactics of Global Warming Alarmists… it is distasteful and doesn’t reflect well on him or his position on this subject.

      • Mr Miller says I have adopted a tactic of the climate Communists. No, I have merely reported the fact – and it is just that, a fact – that in just weeks the Chinese virus has killed more Americans than the years of the Vietnam war.

        I know not whether Mr Miller is an apologist for the Chinese Communist regime, or a hard-Right redneck prone to jump to the asinine conclusion that governments have brought in lockdowns (in Britain’s case with the overwhelming support of the nation’s legislators) as a means of asserting Socialist control.

        But this column will continue to report the facts, whether Mr Miller or anyone else likes those facts or not, until the mean daily compound growth rate in active cases has fallen significantly below zero.

        • A different age-cohort of Americans than died in Vietnam, surely. 🙂

          A distinction that seems worth making.

    • MrGrimNasty appears to be trolling pseudonymously for the Chinese Communist regime. It is a fact that deaths from the Chinese virus in the U.S. have, in a couple of months, exceeded the U.S. deaths in years of war in Vietnam. That fact, being a fact, may legitimately be stated. No point in whining about it: it is an indication that this virus is slaughering a lot of people very quickly. Let us hope it will cease to do so. That is why we are tracking the daily compound growth rate in active cases.

  9. Yesterday, the death toll of 59,000 in the United States exceeded the 58,000 in the Vietnam war.

    But may still be less than:

    2014-2015 flu which killed an estimated 44,000 to 64,000
    2016-2017 flu which killed an estimated 29,000 to 61,000
    2017-2018 flu which killed an estimated 46,000 to 95,000

    Which is…wait for it…in the range of the number killed in the Vietnam war. See, I can make scary, meaningless comparisons too.

    • Entire flu seasons compared against a couple of months worth of data.
      Many strains of flu compared against a single new strain.

      • The flu numbers include vaccines and known therapies including Tamiflu, while this virus is NEW with none of that. Yet somehow we live with 10’s of thousands dying every year from a treatable communicable virus without shutting down the economy…

        • Mr Flake has failed to follow the logic of his own argument. It is precisely because there is no vaccine yet proven against the Chinese virus, and because it is ten times more infectious than flu, and because it is ten times deadlier than flu, and because excess deaths in the past couple of months are way above normal, and because the daily growth rates in active cases continue to be high enough to keep the excess deaths high for some time to come, that responsible governments rather than petulant armchair epidemiologists are taking sensible and commensurate precautions.

          Several governments, having brought their case-growth rates close to zero or even below it, are now cautiously bringing the lockdowns to an end. One of the reasons why we have shown the relentless decline in case-growth rates is to assist governments in realizing that they can now safely begin to bring the lockdowns to an end.

          Attempting to minimize the threat that this pandemic poses will not help. One must be realistic. Just look at the excess-death curves in the head posting, and think a little.

    • Comparing WuWHOFlu deaths to the Vietnam War is racist. I think it would be more PC to compare them to the Peloponnesian War, which would offend fewer people.

      In caeli mutatione belli suprema lex est.–Cicero, updated

    • Flu numbers are modeled calculated deaths from excess death mortality. Not reported numbers from really testing. These are only hundreds to few thousands.

      But surprisingly it does only matter for COVID-19 that every death needs to be proofed to come only from the disease to count. At least for some people.

    • In response to Jozzie, the statistics from the European Mortality Monitoring Agency are featured regularly in this series.

  10. There seems to be an increasing number of questions regarding the attribution of Covid-19 as a cause of mortality. In the USA, at least, there are numerous reports of medical personnel being directed to list the virus as a cause of death regardless of other factors. Additionally, at least in New York state, there has been an unusual decrease in influenza deaths as Covid deaths have grown. This is not some grand conspiracy, but seems to emerge from the fact that Medicare is providing hospitals greater reimbursement for Covid-19 related deaths than other causes. Additionally, hospitals are being provided reimbursement for Covid-19 related deaths among the uninsured. Given that hospitals are woefully low on business, laying off medical staff, and closing entire sections of their facilities, it is understandable that hospital administrators would want to pad their Covid numbers to offset their financial losses.

    • Deaths from regular flu would be expected to decrease thanks to social distancing and the wearing of masks in the general population.

      I’ve seen lots of people making the claim about doctors being instructed to call everything a ChiCom19 death many times. Yet I have yet to be able to find a single authoritative source making this claim. It’s always, somebody talked to someone who talked to an un-named doctor.

      • Are ER and other doctors not authoritative sources, MarkW?
        The CEO of Google justified their taking down of this video because these doctors’ opinions differed from that of the W.H.O. She said Google would take down anything that contradicts the W.H.O. Given the appalling handling of the C-19 virus as well as their long record of mistakes, this is a CEO with an agenda that has no relationship with facts. It’s truly an appalling case of censorship worthy of the CCP.

        CA doctor lockdown is about control, doctors pressured to put COV-19 on death certificates

        They must have hit a nerve as YouTube took their video down as they have with other doctors making the same claim.
        Tucker Blasts YouTube Taking Down Doctors CoronaVirus …
        Search domain

        Preston Tucker blasted Google owned YouTube who earlier removed California Doctors Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi popular coronavirus research video. Skip to content. Wednesday, April 29, 2020. Recent posts . Tucker Blasts YouTube Taking Down Doctors CoronaVirus Research Video … In Tuckers video interview CEO Susan Wojcicki accused Erickson …

        • In response to KcTaz, the two doctors whose video YouTube took down seemed to me to have very little experience of the public-policy aspects of handling a highly infectious and deadly pandemic. Some of the points they made were half-witted.

          Nevertheless, YouTube should not have censored them. It would have been far better to allow their idiocies to circulate, so that people looking at what they said would realize how weak the case against taking proportionate precautions truly is.

          The increasing propensity of YouTube and Google to exercise censorship is no longer acceptable and will have to be legislated against.

        • In response to Dwayne, one can argue endlessly about how to count the Chinese-virus deaths: but the plain fact is that as the infection reached Europe and North America the excess deaths in both territories rose sharply. The correlation does not necessarily imply causation, but it is implausible to deny the probability that the virus is actually killing more, not fewer, than the official government statistics maintain.

  11. How much of the excess is a result of the lockdown itself? Increased suicides, overdoses, domestic violence, starvation — all of this could be a result of artificially trapping people inside their homes.

    This is a question, not a claim, although I did already hear that suicides have been increasing.

    • In response to Mr Butler, there has been a very small increase in reported suicides, and there are other stress-related causes of death that one can imagine, as well as deaths arising from the temporary abandonment of normal treatments for other conditions to make space for Chinese-virus intensive-care patients. On the figures, though, the most likely proximate cause of the sudden sharp increase in excess mortality to which the graphs in the head posting bear witness is the Chinese virus itself.

      • For every completed suicide, there are hundreds with depressive illness. Depression in midlife takes many actual and qualy years off life expectancy. Even doubled mortality rates for a few months pales next to the long term effects of lockdown.

        ‘The overall mortality rate ratio was 2.09 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 2.07–2.10) in people with a previous unipolar depression diagnosis compared to the general Danish population.

        This translate into a 14.0 (men) and 10.1 (women) years shorter life expectancy assuming onset at age 15. At age 60 the remaining life expectancy was 6.1 (men) and 5.8 (women) years shorter

        Mortality rates were twice as large the first year after onset of the depression compared to later.’

      • Can you quantify “very small?”

        And I certainly didn’t discount the notion that COVID is likely responsible for the majority of the excess; but the point of the question is to assume that COVID isn’t the ENTIRETY of the excess.

    • In the US, approximately 100 people a day die in car accidents during normal times. What would you say the figure is during the lockdown? How about the number of job related deaths? I would guess that a strict lockdown would reduce the number of homicides as well.

      If you are going to start counting all the ancillary effects of the lockdown, you must include everything.

  12. Another questionable data base with political forcings. Sound familiar? Undeniable that #19 is nasty but how much so we may never know.

  13. Allan MacRae has calculated that in Britain we suffer 35,000 excess winter deaths a year vis-a-vis the US due to our high energy costs from renewables having pushed heating prices beyond affordable level for many households.
    Of course these estimates may be challenged but if they are anywhere near correct our energy policies are killing a comparable number to the coronavirus. Where are the politicians who will address this needless loss of life?

    • Mr Wilson raises an excellent point. The sheer insanity of the attack on carbon dioxide, and the consequent multiplication of fuel and power prices by about six, must be brought to an end, for the economy is now in so sad a state that we can no longer afford it.

  14. The excretion into the bloodstream of renin from the renal juxtaglomerular cells initiates the activation of the enzyme-hormonal cascade known as the RAA system (renin-angiotensin-aldosterone). As a result of several related mechanisms, there is an increase in blood pressure. Due to the huge range of action of angiotensin II (Ang-2), the main effector of the RAA system, irregularities in its functioning cause numerous consequences. Excessive activation of the system is accompanied by chronic inflammation, because Ang-2 stimulates pro-inflammatory mediators. Degenerative and atherosclerotic processes are started. Imbalance of the RAA system is associated with the most common civilization diseases, such as cardiovascular diseases or diabetes, as well as kidney diseases, preeclampsia, osteoporosis and even neurodegenerative diseases. The quantitative determination of angiotensin II in the blood is useful in the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. These are the exact symptoms in Covid-19. It is perfectly logical when we realize that the virus neutralizes the action of the ACE2 enzyme, which inhibits the activity of angiotensin 2, by stimulating the antagonist of this hormone, i.e. angiotensin (1-7), which has the opposite effect. This regulation of the body is visibly disturbed in Covid-19 disease. Drugs should go towards reducing the effect of angiotensin 2, which wreaks havoc on the patient’s body.
    Angiotensin II
    Angiotensin II is a vasoconstricting peptide hormone generated via proteolytic cleavage of angiotensin I by the angiotensin-converting enzyme in endothelial cells. The renin-angiotensin system is implicated in pathologic fibrosis in the heart, liver, lung, and kidneys.

    • I know that you can get angiotensin (1-7) as a medicine. In this way, you can bypass ACE2 to which the virus attaches.

      • They really do need to address RAS destabilization. I’m convinced that’s at the heart of this illness.

        AngII is elevated in symptomatic patients. AngII causes aldosterone to increase, which causes AngII to increase. So it becomes a vicious inflammatory cycle without a robust ACE2/Ang(1-7)/MasR axis to promote anti-inflammatory factors.

    • “Drugs should go towards reducing the effect of angiotensin 2, which wreaks havoc on the patient’s body.”

      How fast does this damage occur, once the virus enters the body?

  15. So…since this is hitting the oldest and weakest the hardest, does it follow that when this passes, the mortality rate should be dropping below average for a few years?

    • Noticeably for a year I would think. After that it may be hard to tell, especially if the WuWHOFlu comes back in the fall. (Chinese Virus)

      • Dear John, WuWHOFlu? In my book you get the two birdies with one brick prize! I love it! (One needs a good laugh in these times.)

    • Would be at least something positive but I doubt it because strong flu years are also not working that way. Between two waves there is enough time for other people to become sensitive to an infection.

  16. Fig. 4 is quite revealing as evidence that ChiCom-19 is not anything like the “average” seasonal influenza.

    • It is excellent that Monte Carlo has seen so clearly that the evidence in the head posting demonstrates that the Chinese virus is not at all as harmless as the typical seasonal flu. It is a shame that certain other commenters here, for whatever motives, are not willing to draw the blindingly obvious conclusion from the data.

  17. Corona, Chicom-19, Chinese Flu, WuFlu, I love those names.
    I don’t like political correctness, it is a blight on the English language.
    And whether a term like China-Virus is precise is not important, it is clear enough for the purpose of communication.

    • I call the bug “coronavirus”, the illness “Wu Flu”, and the response to it “COVID-1984”.

  18. Whatever what one thinks if its merits, the lockdown in the U.S. is unenforceable. Lots of us already know it, and many more are now realizing it. There’s simply not enough law enforcement able (or willing) to prevent the growing civil disobedience. It will soon be massive. Many, many people are tired of this, and they will do what they want.

    • In response to Mr Cranch, people are not stupid. If population-dense cities such as New York had not locked down, there would have been many times more deaths than the shocking number that have already occurred and are, alas, still likely to occur. If lockdowns are brought to an end too soon, as the lockdown on Hokkaido island in Japan was, then there will be a recrudescence of the infection, and the people will wish for the lockdown to be reimposed.

      In states with low population densities, lockdowns can be brought to an end at once, without much risk of a sudden growth in infections.

      • Mr Monckton,

        Fine. But my original point was- you can advocate all you want for continued lockdown in high-risk areas, but it’s academic. It’s not going to hold much longer, rules or no rules.

        And I happen to agree that people are not stupid. The vast majority of us make informed calculations of personal risk and act accordingly. Ergo, government force in response to the China virus in the U.S. has been far too heavy-handed, and in many (most?) locations, unnecessary.

  19. I think a more appropriate name is the Wuhan virus. This is consistent with how most diseases are named. While all diseases have scientific names, the location for where they originated is typically used. Examples are Ebola, West Nile, Lyme’s, etc. There is nothing racist about a location. On the other hand, given the culpability that the CCP has in the spread of the virus, maybe the CCP virus is more appropriate.


  20. Calling it the “Chinese virus” makes it very personal to ethnically Chinese and many asians in general. In my community we’ve had cases of people verbally attacking ethnically Chinese people because they think the virus is somehow related to a particular race. Calling it the “Wuhan virus” would be less hurtfully divisive while still making the same political point.

    • From a more strategic point of view, totalitarian governments survive their own people by redirecting frustration towards external enemies. Calling it the “Chinese virus” is just making it easier.

      I wonder if the communist leadership deliberately spread the myth that the virus came from an American lab to trick the US into retaliating with “Chinese virus”. That’s a good way to distract their people from blaming their own government.

      • In response to Mr Hare, I call the Chinese virus the Chinese virus for the same reason that I call a spade a spade. Like it or lump it. The virus originated in China, and was knowingly spread worldwide by the calculated negligence of the Chinese Communist Party.

        • Yes, but if one were visiting the United States one might call a spade a shovel to avoid confusion.

          I originally referred to it as the Chinese virus, but it was obviously hurtful to my Korean wife. Then we had a case where someone screamed at an asian woman because “her people created the virus”.

          Using terminology that causes unconscious resentment among Chinese is more likely to give cover to the communist party rather than hurt it.

          Perhaps calling it the “China virus” would be a good compromise.

      • I guess calling Chinese an “ethnicity” is imprecise, but that shouldn’t change my underlying point.

  21. I don’t think calling SARS-Cov-2, “the Chinese virus” is any more racist than calling a soup “New England clam chowder” or a chicken dish, “Southern-fried chicken”. Now if there is an insinuation of sole blame for the existence and spread of the virus, then that’s not racist either, but maybe a bit shallow.

    Who would blame New England for that blasted clam chowder an allergic reaction. Who would blame all southern states of the USA for that blasted fried chicken that caused me obesity in some who ate it. See? — depending on the intent of the regional association, the label can be either informative or debasing. That being said, I DO get the feeling that CMonck has a hint of debasing in mind.

    Maybe “Wuhan virus” would be more regionally specific and less debasing to a whole race.

    Yours truly,

    American human

    • Mr Postema raises an important point. If the other places where reinfections have been reported are similarly recording false positives, then we can perhaps hope for herd immunity after all. But we cannot yet assume that it is possible.

      • From my perspective the explanation from the South Korean experts is questionable. One of the defense mechanisms of our body are secreted RNAses that degrade extracellular RNA because it is most likely of viral origin. Free RNA is therefore unlikely to stay for days or weeks in the tissue of patients.

        It is also unlikely that the RNA detected by the tests are from “dead” viruses as a virus doesn’t live in the first place. If its envelope gets compromised it will be most likely degraded by the host’s defenses.

        A more plausible explanation is a false negative testing in between the two positively tested time points because of how the swap was taken. False negative rate even of known positive patients is up to 2-3 out of 11:

  22. “Excess Deaths” is meaningful if you have enough historical data – it doesn’t matter “why” the deaths occurred only that as a statistic more deaths are occurring. For example, one can make the claim that the lock-down caused an increase in suicides – easy to claim and hard to prove that it actually made a difference. Had no lock-down occurred, I can claim there would have been many more deaths directly related to the disease (in certain areas) and that these deaths would have lead to excess suicides (from people grieving). It’s a claim, not a fact (so an opinion, nothing more).

    It is most likely that excess deaths are occurring as a result of health complications mixed with the symptoms of the disease. In older people who have health issues and are bed-prone, there is an expectation that death is near and so one needs look no further for a cause – their heart stopped.

    There is another way of looking at the “deaths” caused by this virus – and one that many will find distasteful. Take the mean age of those dying and subtract from the mean life expectancy of their group (adjusted for sex, race, smoking habits, etc). The higher the number is positive, the more “youthful” years that have been lost. This is like applying a weight to the statistic of death (and rather immoral according to some). If 1,000 people die who are 90+ years old, that makes for a negative number (the were past their live expectancy). If 1,000 children die, well now that is alarming (a large positive number). I suspect (but do not know) that if such a calculation were applied to the “excess deaths”, we would discover it is a low number, possibly negative.

    The reason this is actually important is because of economics. Older people require more and more resources to maintain a healthy life. This requires a healthy income, which requires a healthy economy. If you do too much harm to the economy, the older people are going to suffer the most. The economy WILL come back, but it could be years… Meanwhile, if you have run-away inflation then you will cause early deaths in the older people (through lost wealth and therefore access to costly medical choices). There is an important balancing act here if the objective is to save the most “living years” over time.

    • Robert of Texas does not, perhaps, understand the elementary morality of valuing every human life, however young or old. One should no more allow an elderly person to die of the Chinese virus without making reasonable attempts to defend that person’s life than one should slaughter a little child in the womb of its mother.

      The moment the State starts to calculate who shall be allowed to live and who shall be condemned to die, that is the end of morality, and history tells us that the end of morality is followed swiftly by the end of civilization.

      Fortunately, very few governments outside the totalitarian countries think as Robert of Texas does.

      • That reply was unnecessarily condescending. Read work of Kip Viscusi before resorting to sanctimonious righteous indignation about morals.

      • God may see the little sparrow fall but I don’t expect a government to do anything other than what perpetuates both it’s self and it’s supporters/benefactors. Love the Brits, especially those of the WWII era but that little bit of moralizing about what constitutes a just and moral State pretends a long and rich history of doing the opposite never occurred.

        While I appreciate your efforts on the Climate Change monte, I’m going to have to agree with Greg Goodman as to his assessment of you regarding this particular issue.

  23. I hate the term “excess deaths”. We are all going to die. Period.

    It is “accelerated deaths” or a lowering of the more official measure “life expectancy (in years”) that is happening with Corona Virus-2 ripping through vulnerable sub-populations across the various nations bringing about those people’s demise earlier than otherwise might happen with thier set of co-morbidities.

    Skipping over the obvious problems or accidental death, suicides, and murders,…None of us will die a natural death of “being too healthy as a cause.”

    So when CMoB writes about “excess deaths” above a statistically meaningful confidence interval, we are talking about an effect of lowering a country’s life expectancy. Then in a few years when sufficient herd immunity rises to levels to extinguish widespread transmission, then the Life expectancy values tracked by health professionals and epidemiologists should predictably rise again.

    Like a pack of wolves looking at elk or caribou or the Serengeti lion pride surveying a herd of wildebeasts looking for the sick and weak to single out for an easier score, Corona Virus-2 (COVID-19) is largely (though of course not exclusively) culling the herd (us). Eventually the herd (that is us, the human population) will be largely immune to it, and the virus will circulate at low levels with sporadic clusters for many years forward.

    • Mr O’Bryan appears to imply that we should take no precautions against the Chinese Virus or anything or anyone else taking our lives, on the morally tenuous ground that we are all going to die anyway. Perhaps he should read any textbook of Christian morality.

      • You are the one applying moralistic judgements CMoB. Not me.
        The virus isn’t moral or immoral. The 1918 Spanish Flu in the US had high mortality on the 18-22 yr old army conscripts, a demographic very different from the most affected with COVID-19. In a harsh economic reality, the life of a 20 yr old is worth more to a society than an invalid 80 year old in a nursing home. Morally we should try to protect both, but if we prioritize protecting the life of an 80 year old invalid at the great economic harm and future of poverty for the young, then that is a moral sin as well, and likely greater. A Sophie’s choice that should not be too hard to make now that we have data on what is happening with COVID-19.

    • There is a longer interview with Dr Giesecke here, explaining Sweden’s approach in more detail.

      For the sake of balance, this is an interview by the same interviewer with Prof Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London, the author of the report which convinced Boris Johnson to lock down the UK.

    • Eliza continues to fail to take account of at least the following points: a) Sweden’s comparatively low population density; b) the growing concern among the medical community in Sweden at the public-health agency’s policies; c) the fact that Sweden’s case-growth and death-growth rates are appreciably higher than in the comparable Scandinavian countries; d) the fact that the official chiefly responsible for Sweden’s policy has himself expressed concern at the growing death-toll in Sweden; e) the fact that Sweden’s earliest deaths occurred a week or three after the first deaths in the worst-affected European countries. Frankly, it is better to do what we have been doing in the head postings here: reporting Sweden’s cases and deaths and discussing them, but not yet drawing any firm conclusions either way. Like it or not, the jury is still out. The next month will tell us much. If Sweden’s lockdown proves to work, that fact will be reported here and will form the basis of our developing strategy for ending lockdowns.

  24. “the Chinese virus chiefly strikes the aged and infirm, many of them would soon have died in any event”

    This can be checked later, if we see “lack of deaths” in the weeks after covid19 finishes its harvesting.

    • Alex wrote:
      “This can be checked later, if we see “lack of deaths” in the weeks after covid19 finishes its harvesting.”

      Actually Alex, I suggest that the “lack of deaths” occurred BEFORE the Covid-19 mortalities of ~April 2020.

      I posted this on Monday 27Apr2020:

      Re the Financial Times article at:

      The input data appears to be here:
      Mortality monitoring in Europe (1Jan2016 to present)

      The winter flu season in 2019-2020 was the mildest in many years, with far fewer than average winter deaths. Sadly, elderly and unwell people die. Then along came Covid-19 and it killed a large number of elderly and unwell people who survived the winter flu season. Total ~winter deaths from all causes are depicted by the area under the curve in these plots, and are still (approximately) no greater than the 2017-2018 flu season – these deaths just happened later than usual

    • Correct. If “excess deaths” for the whole year are near normal then it’s likely that Covd-19 has ‘accelerated’ rather than caused deaths.

    • How many elderly are there in the US, Alex? With a population of 360 million and if 10% are classed as elderly, that’s 36 million people. That’s a lot of deaths before covid 19 “finishes its harvesting”.

  25. I still don’t understand “excess deaths”. Are there deaths statistical projections? If so, they aren’t real deaths since they exist only to help balance equations.

    • In response to PaulH, excess deaths are the number of deaths in a given week that exceed the average number of deaths in that week over the previous five (or sometimes ten) years. If, as there has been in many European countries, there is a sudden spike in excess deaths at a time of year not usually associated with such spikes, and if the spike is bigger than any other spike, and if the spike follows the arrival of a highly infectious and highly deadly pandemic, then in the absence of any other explanation the cautious and responsible government will bear in mind the probability – though not the certainty – that the pandemic caused the increase in excess deaths.

      The value of studying the excess-death figures is that it overcomes the futile debate about whether people are dying of or with the Chinese virus. For they are dying in larger excess numbers than the reported Chinese-virus cases, which means that governments are undercounting those cases, possibly (and definitely in the UK) by a very large margin.

      • I had to read that explanation four times, but I think I understand how it can be a useful tool.

        As for the under-counting issue, remember these spikes and other artifacts are based on ‘reported’ case counts, not ‘actual’ case counts. There will necessarily be data that are late and possibly subject to revision. There may even be political reasons to “hide the decline”.

  26. 4076 new cases and 4419 new deaths in the United Kingdom “Public Health England (PHE) has developed a new method of reporting daily COVID-19 deaths, to give a more complete number of those who have died from the virus. For the first time from today, Wednesday 29 April 2020, the government’s daily figure will include deaths that have occurred in all settings where there has been a positive COVID-19 test, including hospitals, care homes and the wider community. Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales already report out-of-hospital deaths. Today’s figures have been revised retrospectively by PHE since the first death on 2 March 2020 to include additional data sources. This will bring the total number of deaths in the UK to 26,097 from 2 March until 28 April, including 765 deaths reported in the 24 hours to 5 pm on 28 April .

  27. For some years now The Economist repeats the flutter about aging populations and the need to keep GDP growth through immigration of the young. Moreover, there has been (until the outbreak) constant jabbing at the boomers (OK Boomer) about our “privileged, costly and selfish” role in society. Now they are telling me that my life is worth several millions and it must be saved at all cost. Cost it will.

    Those of us that do not work (I do) and draw national superannuation (I do) HAVE to be a financial cost to our countries. Now, apparently, we are to be wrapped in cotton wool. Where did this BS come from?

    M’Lord has mentioned covid panic within my generation. I would like to see the data behind this claim. I see no such thing. Quite the opposite actually.

    Cheers – M

    • Why can’t we maintain growth by increased adoption of robotics? Robotic production should be competitive with Chinese labour and much more secure.

      • I could not agree more. This has been clear for over a decade. Authorities and their consultants are in their own mirror-lined bubble. They are people-people. More the merrier as far as they are concerned, with as much diversity as possible.

    • Mr Carter says he wants evidence of panic within the older population. Well, the younger population are not panicking about dying of the virus, because the chance that they will do so is small. Some of the older generation are concerned, and have said so in interviews. Those who have imposed the lockdowns are largely people in their 50s and 60s, who have decided to act in good time to prevent the virus from spreading unduly fast or far. And those people, in some countries (the UK among them) have not yet realized that lockdowns can now be cautiously dismantled. For they are frit.

  28. So if corona virus (s) of one sort or another are definitely doing this , then I take it summer has come early, sunlight hours are way up , and people are out and about soaking up the sun and manufacturing Vitamin D, people are bathing in the sea , and in general enjoying excellent health and diet.
    That being the case we can rule out any effect on excess mortality from a late season flu , cold weather , low sunlight, people cramped up in houses,extreme high density housing, with poor diets and multiple underlying health conditions .
    Good to know.

  29. CMoB writes </iB

    aggravated by the Government’s month of dithering before locking down the country,

    A month?? The UK announced the full lockdown on March 20th. A month earlier the UK had only recorded 9 cases and, from what I recall, none were due to community transmission.

    • Mr Finnj imagines the British lockdown began on March 20. No, it was not announced until March 23 and not enforced until March 26 onwards. A properly-instructed government, seeing what had happened in China, would have taken decisive action on February 23, when the case count first exceeded 10. Indeed, if the successful South Korean strategy had been followed, HM Government would have tested all contacts of the very first case, isolated all carriers and tracked all their contacts. Had that been done with sufficient speed, vigor and determination, the virus could have been prevented from taking hold.

      However, the UK strategy for handling pandemics was fatalistic. It assumed from the outset that such a pandemic could not be contained. And that assumption has proven fatal. Within the next week or two it is likely that the UK will have had more deaths from the virus than any other country on Earth except the United States, where the death rate per million is considerably below ours.

      • If my memory serves correct, early on in the pandemic, the UK authorities were testing and quarantining cases and suspected cases. I say the authorities, because it wasn’t directed by the government. It seemed to me that the non elected officials were acting in the correct and prudent manner and doing what they were trained to do. But when the government got involved, the first thing was, they threw the towel in. I believe the UK had the means but the government overruled.

        • The only people I know of that were actually quarantined were the returning Diamond Princess passengers.
          All the othes were told to self isolate, which is decidedly not quarantine.

  30. Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness right up until the State and it’s armed minions say otherwise.
    Freedom of association? Gone. Freedom of Assembly? Gone.
    Other rights appear tenuous but at least the right of adult males to use women’s restrooms seems to be on the upswing.
    Constitution 2020

    • Mr DeCaro appears to believe that if legislators in various States disagree with him, then democracy must be set aside. In Britain, however, whether Mr DeCaro likes it or not the legislators gave HM Government explicit powers to deal with the current emergency. This is not, therefore, a power-grab by the executive but a responsible decision of the people’s representatives – a decision that is kept constantly under review, and that will be reversed as soon as the worst of the pandemic is under control. Not long now, I think.

  31. Christopher Monckton of Brenchley…

    I am a climate skeptic. But your use of “Chinese Virus” considering other information that the virus may have started elsewhere and your attempt to slander a country…is sad.

    The only thing that I can think of is that your trying to round up donations from racists.

    China is no friend of America or of me. It’s a dictatorship. No excuse though to call this “Chinese Virus”

    You have a magnificent name…and yet on this your a small man.

    • What evidence that this virus started elsewhere? There is no such evidence. It started in China. It originally came from a bat native to China. Hence Chinese virus.

    • In response to Blue Sky, there is no credible evidence that the Chinese virus emerged anywhere except China. I am currently studying its origin. The Chinese authorities themselves say that it first emerged in the Huanan Seafood Market, a wet market that also sold pangolins and other protected mammals prone to infection via bats, in the city of Wuhan, in the province of Hubei, China. However, there is some evidence, which the Western intelligence community regards as credible though not definitive (and probably incapable of confirmation, thanks to the destruction of evidence and disappearence of relevant personnel at the hands of the Communist regime), that the virus first emerged on or about November 17, and that at least the first two cases, in chronological order, had no association whatsoever with the wet market. Oh, and the Chinese propaganda machine now denies that wet markets existed or exist, which is more than somewhat baffling because if the wet market where the Chinese propaganda machine original said was the source of the outbreak did not exist then the intelligence community’s assessment that the virus was fabricated in the P4 biolab in Wuhan or its satellite becomes the most likely current explanation.

      Therefore, I call the Chinese virus the Chinese virus just as I call a spade a spade. And I note that one of the first propaganda messages peddled by many officials from the Foreign Minister downwards, and echoed by the Chinese Communists’ wholly-controlled subsidiary the World Death Organization, was that anyone who called the Chinese virus the Chinese virus was a “racist”.

      There has been a sudden explosion of such pietistic accusations of racism in this thread. Since I know that policymakers in many countries are now reading these columns daily for the information they contain, it would not surprise me if shills for the Chinese Communist Party were now trying to disrupt these discussions with ritualistic accusations of “racism”.

      The simplest way to dispel any such accusations is to publish the timeline of the Chinese regime’s defalcations, breaches of international law and crimes against humanity that led directly to the global circulation of this pandemic. The evidence against the Communist Party, both in Hubei and in Peking, and latterly in Heiliongjiang Province, is overwhelming and damning. Perhaps I had better present just some of that evidence here, so that people can decide for themselves whether the suspiciously large number of commenters now complaining about “racism” whenever the Chinese virus is described as what it is are wittingly or unwittingly doing the bidding of the increasingly desperate Chinese Communist regime – a regime that now lacks any legitimacy and must be overthrown by the suffering people of China. Enough is enough.

      • Monckton of Brenchley April 29, 2020 at 4:15 pm

        In response to Blue Sky, there is no credible evidence that the Chinese virus emerged anywhere except China. I am currently studying its origin.

        Maybe you should wait till you finish your study of origin before you label this the Chinese virus.

  32. It is not the virus that causes fibrosis of the lungs, heart and kidneys, but an excess of the hormone angiotensin II, which results from the inactivation of the ACE2 enzyme, to which Cov-2 attaches. Therefore, the one who counts only on his immunity is a fool.

    • That’s overly simplistic. Glutathione is the lung’s main antioxidant (up to 1000x more in lungs than in other parts of the body) and protects the lungs against pathogens. People with depleted glutathione are at higher risk of severe infection. Pharmaceutical/recreational drugs, acetaminophen (paracetamol) and alcohol (among other things) deplete glutathione. Having enough vitamin C is essential for glutathione to work optimally.

      • Cov-1 and another corona virus does it too. When they attach to the ACE2 enzyme it can no longer do its function.

    • Well I guess I will foolishly not worry about a disease that has a 0.00004% lethality of people my age. I have a bigger chance of dying from TB.

      • Mr Turner makes – over and over again – the elementary error of trying to derive the mortality rate of the Chinese virus in the absence of anything like adequate data, and while the number of deaths is still climbing rapidly every day.

        The early indications are that young people are not much at risk, which is why this column has been suggesting that they should be allowed to return to work, with suitable sensible precautions such as wearing face-masks and keeping their distance and washing their hands and not assembling in large crowds indoors or (in the light of recent UK evidence) outdoors.

      • Your chance of dying on the road or at work is close to 0% during a lockdown … so perhaps we should keep you in lockdown forever to keep your risk low 🙂

    • That is like arguing people don’t die from bullets because the rate of lead poisoning is very low 🙂

  33. It is likely that most of the additional excess deaths are also attributable to the virus but have not been reported as such.

    Leaping to a conclusion like an Olympic long jumper.

    What is more likely is that the Lockdown, not the virus, is responsible for the excess deaths.

    People with non-Covid symptoms are fearful to go to the doctor, leading to increases in heart-related deaths, missed cancer screening, other infections, domestic tension, blunt force trauma, stab wounds, suicidal aspirations, etc etc.

    It is easy as pie to make that allegation with zero evidence, as is the allegation that Covid deaths are under reported. That’s the beauty of zero evidence. Anything goes.

    • “It is easy as pie to make that allegation with zero evidence, as is the allegation that ”
      “missed cancer screening” might be a cause of more death, and not a prevention of death.

    • In response to the irredentist Mr Dubrasich, there is plenty of evidence that most of the excess deaths not yet attributed to the Chinese virus are indeed attributable to it. The discrepancy between the officially-stated death counts and the excess mortality data was particularly severe in the United Kingdom, where upon enquiry it soon became apparent that HM Government was counting only deaths in hospitals.

      After pressure from the news media and the public, from today HM Government is now including all deaths from the Chinese virus outside as well as inside hospitals in its daily tallies. Result – a sudden jump by more than 4000 from the previous 22,000 to today’s 26,000 deaths.

      Epidemiologists studying the excess-mortality data without Mr Dubrasich’s prejudice have concluded that even the new daily total from HM Government appreciably undercounts deaths from the Chinese virus. Similar stories are being told in other European countries with high death rates.

      No, it is not more likely, in these early stages of lockdown, that a large fraction of the deaths are attributable to the lockdown. Some fraction are, but that fraction is at present likely to be small.

      It is no good looking at questions such as these through prejudiced eyes. One must be dispassionate, and one must not simply dismiss the overwhelming and growing weight of data simply because one finds the results uncongenial.

      • Lord Monckton, please. I am not a dentist or an irredentist, or a provincialist, racist, anarchist, or prejudicial. But even if I was, it would not refute my argument. Your ad hominem attacks are logical fallacies and when you resort to such you weaken your position, not mine.

        The NHS (your country’s socialized health care system) was a basket case before the bat flu, and has plunged even deeper into incompetence and disservice with it. Your draconian Lockdown dissuaded sick and dying citizens from engaging with the NHS; either from established distrust, or fear of catching Covid in hospitals, or fear of mindless authoritarian backlash, or on the advice of NHS doctors who also have lost faith in their own bureaucracy.

        Heart conditions, pulmonary conditions, diabetes, pneumonia, intestinal inflammations, and a hundred other life-threatening conditions went undiagnosed and untreated because Covid-panic commandeered the system.

        You claim “epidemiologists’ conclusions” without citation. Are you making that up? In contrast, the evidence of dissatisfaction with the NHS from patients, doctors, nurses, Parliament, and the general public is widespread, longstanding, and voluminous wherever one seeks it.

        Please present your “growing weight of data”. I’m interested. The mountain of data that the NHS system is a wreck is already widely available.

      • Please explain what expertise your so called “Epidemiologists” have that could be in any way related to that cristal ball reading conclusion.

  34. “The darker the skin, the more likely is Vitamin D3 deficiency in sunless, northern climes. The large immigrant population in Britain has proven more susceptible to the Chinese virus than the Caucasian population – another reason why the UK figures are so bad. Finally, the Government failed to provide clear, timely instructions to care-homes for the elderly, where there have been thousands of hitherto-unreported Chinese-virus deaths.”

    The deaths from Chinese virus is overwhelmingly about deaths of people older than 60 years old and only thing comparable is deaths from 50 to 60 years old.
    UK has a fairly higher percentage of people who 60 and older. And that is the entire story of UK and Chinese virus. And applies to all countries.
    It why New York State has the high death per million of 1,197 per million and why Florida has low death of 59 per million. Florida has more 60 and older people than New York State, but Florida protected it’s older population. The extreme of how stupid NYC dealt with it’s older pop is that it send back “recovering” older people to nursing homes and also send a body bag with the patient. And when there was available a vast capacity near empty beds provided by the Federal govt.
    The UK:
    In 2011 UK had 22.5% was aged 60 years, and over 66 million times 22.5% = 14.85 million.

    For the population of 60 or older, one can assume a mortality from Chinese virus of 1%:
    1% of 14.85 million is 148,500 dying from Chinese virus if they are infected, though a lot more
    than that will become seriously ill and could recover.
    If 20% of population has 1% chance of death, in terms of entire population the death rate is
    .2% or if none of below 60 year old die, the total death of entire population is .2 % if they were infected.
    If there is the significant factor regarding herd immunity, then herd immunity will prevent all people
    from becoming infected, or herd immunity could stop the 14.85 million ever getting the Chinese virus and thereby lower that percentage of death. Or of 1/2 of 14.85 million are prevented from getting the virus, than it’s 1/2 of 1% [.5%}.
    Or course another way is to isolate the older than 60 years, and if 100% are isolated none die from the Chinese virus.
    And it’s possible the intensity of exposure the virus {the virus load} is a large factor in whether 60 year old or older, die. Likewise if 60 year old or older have enough Vitamin D3, they may not get very sick and/or don’t die.
    Anyhow, the population less than 60 years, have much lower mortality and that mortality rate is largely affected by mortality of 50 to 60 year old in that population.
    But to give a number for less than 60 year old population it is about .03% {as high estimate/guess}.
    66 million – 14.85 million is 51.15 million which times by .0003 = 15,345 deaths by virus and
    most of these deaths will be 50 to 60 years old.
    And if had herd immunity which limited number which got infected, and if have enough D3, and had exposure to low viral load, less would die. Though probably more important particularly with younger population than 60, is you get far fewer which got seriously ill, and managed to avoid dying.

    So, isolating older than 60 years [or at least large portion of them} should have been a no brainer.
    But we should never underestimate how stupid governments can be.
    But it seems the purpose of “the lockdown” is the huge amount people who would got seriously ill- who
    might have died, and would require medical treatment.
    Also other than Vitamin D3 {or sunlight} and I say maybe a zinc supplement, there is no known medical treatment, so addition purpose of “the lockdown” is to provide some time to find more types of medical
    treatments {which apparently we so far, have failed to do}.

    • Oh forgot to include a older news story:
      google: “death from coronavirus in UK age over 60”:
      “NHS figures show 92% of coronavirus victims in England are over 60 – while only FIVE under-20s have died from the killer infection”

      So UK current total is 26,097 and if times that by 92% it’s
      26,097 – 24,009 = 2088 died younger the 60 years old.
      So if UK had done better with with over 60 population, fewer of 14.85 million population would died.
      And instead of death of 384 per million it would have closer to Florida’s 59.
      But if UK did even better than Florida, it could about 1/10th or about 38 per million.
      But better would have generally, been doing things that doesn’t include having the Prime Minister, get infected.

    • Germany also has a remarkable result so far in in terms of it’s response to Chinese virus.
      So total pop of Germany is
      “60-64 years 5.49
      65 years and older 17.88”
      5.49 + 17.88 = 23.37 million people 60 or older
      And: “Germany’s current total population stands at 82.79 million” and:
      “40-59-year-olds make up the largest age group in Germany, at 23.9 million people.”
      {{2018 numbers}}
      Some interesting background stuff:

      23.37 / 82.79 = .28228
      So 28% of population are 60 or older in 2018 and probably a bit higher in 2020
      23.37 times 1% is 233,700 deaths they could have had.
      And to date they had: 6,399 deaths

      Now, they could problems with how deaths are counted, there has been such problems with lots
      of other countries in terms of nursing home deaths. And Germans seem quite proud about their long term care programs {see above refs} and these programs seems to me like a very civilized “plan”.
      But as said above, one can’t predict how stupid any government can be.
      But a point I want to make is it seems to me, that if a government has a lot politician interest in older people, like Florida does, that political focus, seems to be the greatest force that has been apparently successful against this Chinese virus.
      I also note the cultural respect for the elderly, which famously Asia countries seem to have, and will note
      the general success of Asia countries in how they manage this pandemic.
      And in terms monetary gain, such respect has resulted large cost saving in this pandemic and it seems to me this also applicable as general condition which probably is not as noticeable.
      Of course there is also the moral aspect- but I think even having such higher morals as general thing, is a “money maker”. Not net cost, but net gain.
      And advantage of this pandemic, is it’s measure how stupid countries, are. And maybe citizens should do something about it.

  35. @PaulH
    “Therefore, our standard method defines the winter period as December to March and compares the number of deaths that occurred in this winter period with the average number of deaths occurring in the preceding August to November and the following April to July. The calculation used is:
    EWD=winter deaths-average of non winter deaths.”

    There is a chart at 2. that shows the first year these data were collected for the 1950-1951 period, EW deaths were 106,400. The 5 year moving average was above 50,000 until the start of the 70’s.

  36. Christopher Monkton is looking more and more like Covid19’s answer to Michael Mann.

    Of course there will be more deaths due to the coronavirus scamdemic. Health services everywhere are in collapse, and furthermore healthcare practices have been widely condemned – “the genociding of the elderly”, someone put it. Almost everyone put on a ventilator dies.
    Businesses are going to the wall, British Airways is looking at laying off 40,000 people. Will people like Monkton be attributing suicides to coronavirus?

    “It is likely that most of the additional excess deaths are also attributable to the virus but have not been reported as such.” Umm … what about the reports from Italy, UK, US etc which indicate that every death in creation is being attributed to Covid19? The authorities are quite open about it. 99% of Italian ‘Covid” deaths are associated with other serious conditions

    There is a meme about someone whose parachute didn’t open being declared a Covid death. The time for joking is over – looks like anyone who shows positive according to the disreputable tests is recorded as a coronavirus death, even when the death was quite clearly a drug overdose or a head injury.

    • Yeah, the Vietnam Death numbers would be MUCH higher too, if they counted heart attacks, strokes, and overdoses.

    • If Ms McKenzie does not like the facts that are provided here about the Chinese virus, she need not read them. She can continue to bury her head in the sand.

      In the head posting, I have provided hard evidence that this virus is proving both more infectious and more fatal than even the most extreme year for flu or other winter respiratory infections.

      I do not like that evidence any more than Ms McKenzie does, but my training and experience as a policymaker have taught me that the evidence is to be considered calmly and dispassionately, and not with the desire – regrettably exhibited by Ms McKenzie – to peddle a particular narrow viewpoint.

      In these columns I have presented the evidence for and against lockdowns, and have discussed the conditions precedent to ending them, and have produced a simple test, with graphs every day to show progress, that allows people to see that soon it will be possible to bring the lockdowns cautiously to an end.

      Ms McKenzie tries, more than somewhat futilely, to maintain that the additional excess deaths that have occurred following the worldwide spread of the pandemic are somehow not attributable to it. But the statisticians and epidemiologists disagree with her. She is entitled to her opinion, for one must not assume that the experts are always right.

      But there is a great deal more evidence, some of it in the head posting, for the fact that the Chinese virus is the chief cause of the observed excess mortality in recent weeks than there is for the climate-change nonsense.

      She must learn to follow the evidence, and not to follow her prejudices.

    • MoB the really funny part is BaahBaaahRa does even realize that “True Pundit” is an inflammatory fake news site that takes the mickey out of stupid people by making up stories. In usually targets progressives and Democrats but got BaahBaaahRa.

      Someone obviously told BaahBaaahRa about the sky diver satire but she was still to stupid to realize her linked art was in the same vein and taking the mickey out of stupid people …. ooops embarassing.

      • Gateway Pundit referenced:
        A report in the Ventura County Star, which stated “coronavirus death toll increased to 16 on Thursday as county officials reported two additional deaths, including a 37-year-old man. The man died as a result of a drug overdose while infected with COVID-19”; and
        LehighValleyLive, which reported, “Lehigh County Coroner Eric Minnich confirmed the patient died Friday night at St. Luke’s University Hospital in Fountain Hill. He said the primary cause of the man’s death was a head injury from a fall at home, but that the virus was listed as a contributing factor to his death.”

        Sad to see what WUWT has come to.

        • Barbara the WUWT site obviously causes you some distress. Of course there is a very easy solution.

          Don’t visit!

  37. The question is whether a person who suffered from Covid-19 and does not have the virus, but it has pulmonary fibrosis, is healthy?

  38. Don’t attack the person attack what they say cheers. I have to say I’ve been very guilty of this re Mocktons posts. I apologise.

  39. Perhaps Mr. Monckton would be so kind as to estimate what part of these excess deaths were first caused by the initial incompetent reactions (such as the New York governor forcing nursing homes to accept coronavirus patients) and are now being caused by governments locking down everybody instead of protecting the vulnerable.

    • Yes those , and all other epidemiological factors which might have a bearing on the excess deaths numbers.

    • Well, if Lark will provide the evidence, I shall examine it. But I do not investigate mere speculation rooted in prejudice.

  40. At this point I’m convinced at least half the numbers are fabrications to induce panic. And anyone not ready to get most of the economy back to relatively normal needs to be treated as a chicom agent.

  41. “That is 117,641, or 32%, above the 371,302 deaths that would be expected over those six weeks in an average year. ”

    117,641 is also 0.015% of Europe’s population.
    Not quite “startling”.
    Assuming one tenth of the population caught it (conservative estimate), that would be a death rate of about 0.1%.

    • Stephen W. appears to be unfamiliar with mortality statistics. If in just a couple of weeks the excess deaths suddenly spike as they have done, anyone other than an armchair DIY epidemiologist nursing a profound and irrendentist prejudice would at least be open to the possibility that there just might be some sort of a problem.

      Reading the head posting would be a good start. There, Stephen W would learn that even a 5% excess over the normal weekly death rate is treated as severe by statisticians, and 15% excess as very severe. There are good reasons for this. Excess mortality statistics are not collected just for fun. They are collected precisely so as to obtain an independent assessment of changes in mortality so as to flag up and enquire into any sudden increase.

      In the present instance, the sharp increases we have been seeing in some European countries and US states were foreseeable, provided that one kept a close eye – as we have here – on the key indicators, the most important of which, at this stage of the pandemic, is the estimated daily compound rate of growth or decline in active cases.

      It was by following those numbers that we were able to expect increased excess mortality, which is why I began looking at the excess mortality statistics a couple of weeks ago.

      One appreciates that some people have very strong views, and are distressed because of the sudden change in circumstances: but it is important to be ruthlessly dispassionate and to look at the evidence honestly and carefully, and not to assume that because a few weeks’ figures represent a small fraction of a given population the matter will rest there.

      Watch the case-growth rate. Even when it falls below zero, there will be many more cases and deaths to come. The math is ineluctable, and I shall explain some more of it tomorrow.

    • If Eliza wishes to forget about the virus, she should cease to read articles about it. However, it is plain from the continuing strong response to this series from commenters that the series is of widespread interest to readers from all round the world.

      There will be many, many more deaths from this virus before the worst is over. It is better to face that fact than to try either to ignore or to minimize it.

  42. Chinese Virus that crippled American economy is twice as lethal as playing Russian roulette with a six shooter if you are going to a British hospital with the CV infection.

    “More than a third of NHS patients ill enough to be admitted to hospital with Covid-19 have died, a rate comparable to that seen in ebola wards in Africa, scientists said today.
    Researchers gathered data from almost 17,000 patients admitted to 166 NHS hospitals between February 6 and April 18.
    By that time 49 per cent had been discharged alive, 33 per cent had died and 17 per cent continued to receive care. ”

    • astonerii

      One’s views should never be censored unless they breach guidelines that show they are obviously distasteful, racist, hateful, abusive or even off-topic or trolling. In general, WUWT allows a broad range of criticism unlike the Guardian who has banned me 5 times for basically just disagreeing with the content of an article or post.

      What is it you think you posted to get it censored?

      • I posted what exponential growth would look like if Sweden were not succeeding. Apparently they cannot handle the truth. If it were the exponential growth that they claimed it should be they should be up to at a minimum 500 deaths a day. But instead they are actually past their peak.

  43. We can reduce the covid-19 fatality rate by a factor 10.

    Our entire population is significantly ‘Vitamin’ D deficient, Calcium deficient, Magnesium deficient, and Zinc deficient.

    This is the biggest scandal in medical history. And you absolutely will not believe the amount of peer reviewed studies that support that statement.

    Hey big surprise. Our bodies require ‘Vitamin’ D and 80% comes from sunlight. Six months of the year it is absolutely impossible for white people, regardless of temperature, in Northern countries to make sufficient Vitamin D.

    ‘Vitamin’ D is a proto hormone that is used in 200 microbiological functions in our body. We need this chemical. If we get it and some minerals then we do not get cancer.

    Current Recommended Vitamin D – 600 UI
    Amount required ‘conservatively’ low – 4000 UI to reduce 70% of most common diseases including cancers.

    Correcting the herd ‘Vitamin’ mineral deficiencies will reduce our herd medical costs by roughly 50%. In the Canada, system that fact and the fact that…

    Hundreds of thousands of Canadians are dying every year and hundreds of thousands of Canadians are suffering with painful, expensive, debilitating diseases, because of a preventable Vitamin and mineral deficiency and to make it worse

    Those people who are most Vitamin D deficient are Canadians who have dark skin.

    There is going to be an emotional explosion, when the young and not so young Canadian snowflakes, who are Big Bang nerds find out.

    The facts are not complicate. And the people are organized and looking for real cause.

    Correcting the ‘Vitamin’ D/Calcium deficiency reduces the incidence of breast cancer by 70%, eliminates type 1 diabetes, reduces type 2 by 40%, reduces the incidence of multiple sclerosis by 64%, and so on,

    Correcting only the Vitamin D deficiency reduces the incidence of flu by 50%.

    Zinc deficiency linked to immune system response, particularly in older adults

    • Mr Astley is correct to say that rectifying Vitamin D3 deficiency is crucial. Martineau et al. (2017), in a meta-analysis of 10,500 patients treated with Vitamn D3, found that daily doses of 1000 IU (25 mcg) were better than weekly bolus doses, and that in patients with vitamin D both the incidence and severeity of respiratory viral infections was reduced by not 50% but 70%.

      And still HM Government has not recommended that everyone should take vitamin D supplenetation as a prophylactic.

      • Having suffered from low vitamin D in the past ( too much working inside)
        I simply get a shot every 3 months here in Korea, along with daily supplements.
        This is a NO REGRETS option

        I form no opinion on the issue of its effectiveness against covid 19

        Science may someday render a verdict. However, it is odd that governments don’t
        recommend no regrets actions.

        • You could also walk around in a hazmat suit which would give you much higher odds of survival … do you think the government should recommend everything you can do to minimize your risk?

  44. Lord Monckton-san:

    Just a few points:

    1) From the excess death data you presented, it again seems very likely the Swedish model worked best and the global economic lockdown policy was a complete disaster.

    2) Since Sweden will likely obtain Wuhan flu herd immunity in May, their Wuhan flu deaths will be much lower than counties who shutdown their economies when the next flu season starts in October.

    3) The global economic shutdown has ironically destroyed/bankrupted the global hospital/medical staff systems because people have virtually stopped going to hospitals, except for emergency medical care, so rather than preventing hospitals from being overwhelmed, the shutdown destroyed them with huge decrease in operating revenues..

    4) Because so many people have stopped going to hospitals, there will soon be an increase in excess deaths from: heart attacks, cancer, strokes, diabetes, kidney/liver failure, etc,, that would have been preventEd had they gone for regular medical checkups.

    5) The global economic shutdown is putting a tremendous strain on the food/farming/meat industries and there WILL be food shortages this year and next, which will only increase the longer this insane economic shutdown continues. How many excess deaths will global food shortages cause?

    It’s estimated 100 million people in the poorest counties are on the verge of starvation due to poor crops and the recent locusts plague. How many excess deaths will there be in these poor countries if industrialized countries have food shortages?

    6) The global economic shutdown will already cause a severe global recession and perhaps even a global economic collapse from all the money printing, government spending, national debts skyrocketing, etc… How many excess deaths will this cause?

    Stay safe, Lord Monckton-san.

    • –SAMURAI April 29, 2020 at 8:29 pm
      Lord Monckton-san:

      Just a few points:

      1) From the excess death data you presented, it again seems very likely the Swedish model worked best and the global economic lockdown policy was a complete disaster.–

      What is exactly the Sweden model?

      It seems that the Sweden model is not to lockdown “as hard” and then have other people complain, and the Swedes saying “We going to do it our way”.
      The Sweden model was already a disaster. They failed too much, in regards in beginning in protecting their elderly population, but then they corrected that failure, by using better ways of protecting their older population. But that failure was costly.
      Sweden deaths per million is 244 deaths per million.
      Florida deaths per million is 59 or 1/4 of deaths per million as Sweden.
      Why not talk about the Florida model?
      Or what about Finland: 37 deaths per million or 1/6th of Sweden’s death per million.
      Or Norway: 38 deaths per million.
      The only thing which seems notable or exceptional, is I think Sweden allows kids to go to school, though I don’t know all the details of this.
      But opening public school/daycare {or never closing them} is good idea or good model to follow.
      Though can’t have the world use Sweden model, because Sweden is different and it has relatively low population density. {other than let kids go to school, that can be a global solution}

      “2) Since Sweden will likely obtain Wuhan flu herd immunity in May, their Wuhan flu deaths will be much lower than counties who shutdown their economies when the next flu season starts in October.”

      An important part of what Sweden is doing is isolating it’s elderly, and so, they are not getting herd immunity.

      -It’s estimated 100 million people in the poorest counties are on the verge of starvation due to poor crops and the recent locusts plague. How many excess deaths will there be in these poor countries if industrialized countries have food shortages?-

      There is not a food shortage, and there might not be much of a meat shortage.
      We might still have toilet paper shortage- but it wasn’t caused by the lockdown.

      Anyways many US states are beginning to creep out of lockdown. They took too long- I blame the media for the delay.

      • Gabaiki-san:

        1) Many countries that foolishly implemented economic shutdowns have higher death rates/million: Belgium, France, Spain, Italy, UK, Netherlands, etc.

        The insane economic shutdown policies didn’t greatly reduce deaths, plus, when the flu season starts again October, Sweden’s deaths will be few and all other countries without herd immunity will suffer immensely.

        2) I’m in the food industry, and I talk with food manufactures all around the world on a daily basis. There already is a food shortage and it will become much worse the longer this insane global economic shutdown continues…

        You didn’t even address my concerns of the global economic recession (or perhaps even an economic collapse) which will occur because of the insane and ineffective global economic shutdown.

        • –Gabaiki-san:

          1) Many countries that foolishly implemented economic shutdowns have higher death rates/million: Belgium, France, Spain, Italy, UK, Netherlands, etc.–

          With these EU countries, they didn’t really have a choice regarding lockdown,
          Just like China didn’t have a choice. They had a choice of style of lockdown- china chose
          to beat women on street who didn’t wear face masks, and welded people into their buildings, and etc.
          EU countries had different style, but all had to do a lockdown. In US it was more about making a choice, and some US states didn’t lockdown.
          I would say New York State made a choice to lockdown, before it had to lockdown, but New York State delayed too long before deciding to enter lockdown, and the State and City made a number of other mistakes {mostly the city with it’s really dumb mayor who made the most of the mistakes}.

          “The insane economic shutdown policies didn’t greatly reduce deaths, plus, when the flu season starts again October, Sweden’s deaths will be few and all other countries without herd immunity will suffer immensely.”
          Well, one aspect of lockdown {which China didn’t do} was stop international air travel, and Trump was one of first {but not the first} to stop Air travel from China {except to bring back any Americans that wanted to return to US}. I would imagine not many Chinese chose to return to China- from any country.
          And I think the lockdown in terms of air travel, was the best action taken by US in regards to any other lockdown measure. So first with China, and next with Europe. Europe should stopped air travel from China before the US did, and then Europe could decided whether they wanted to stop air travel from the US. Or Europe shutting down air travel to China, should been much easier then compared to US {I guess EU imagined it was a superpower- Russia didn’t have any problem with the issue- but Russians tend to be practical}.

          –2) I’m in the food industry, and I talk with food manufactures all around the world on a daily basis. There already is a food shortage and it will become much worse the longer this insane global economic shutdown continues…–
          Nope, we are actually at war, and Trump is invoking his war power- that means food industry is like medical workers, and you guys are now, soldiers in the war effort.
          I don’t know if guys match the heroes of the medical workers, but I suggest you give a twirl.

          “You didn’t even address my concerns of the global economic recession (or perhaps even an economic collapse) which will occur because of the insane and ineffective global economic shutdown.”
          Well it’s like running from the bear, and the US will run faster.
          So, hopeful other people can keep up.
          I am, worried about South America.

          • Gbabaiki-san:

            You’re just repeating yourself and are unable to refute with evidence any of my points of concern with economic shutdowns and why they’re meaningless and worse than the disease itself…

            If world governments don’t immediately start to phase out these insane shutdown policies, the economic and social repercussions will be much worse than the Wuhan flu.

      • ‘What is exactly the Sweden model?”

        there is no such thing.

        you have Swedish policy but POLICY does not describe how people actually BEHAVE

        people continue to make the mistake of comparing policies as opposed to behavior.

        • Steven-san:

          The “Swedish Model” involves NOT: insanely shutting down the entire economy, closing schools, running up massive national debts to compensate corporations and people thrown out of work by crazy government mandates, destroying currencies by profligate money printing, arresting people for playing catch ball or driving down the street, etc…

          It means people exercising common sense personal hygiene protocols of mask wearing, hand washing, not shaking hands, suspending large events of over 50 people, and most importantly, protecting the most vulnerable demographic of 65+ with comorbidities as much as possible until herd immunity or a vaccine/drug regimen is developed.

          The Swedish model works and government shutdowns are completely insane.

      • “The Swedish Model” Consequences:
        “The country has recorded 2462 deaths on Thursday night, but the number will end between 10,000 and 20,000, says biologist Uno Wennergren and math professor Tom Britton to the Swedish TV station SVT on Wednesday night. – This is serious. That is why it is of the utmost importance that we manage to keep the current rate of infection, says Tom Britton.
        And I have to agree with Mosher that it is more about behavour tha politics.

        • Nobody-san:

          Sweden is expected to hit herd immunity by the middle of May.

          There are currently 2,500 deaths, which may hit 6,000 Sweden hitsherd immunity for a fatality rate of 0.1%, which is the same as the regular flu….(6,000/6 million)

          Even if it’s 10,000 deaths, that’s a 0.16% fatality rate…

    • Steven, model Latin America and South America. And perhaps Africa, but I don’t Africa is likely going a problem, before South America, particularly Brazil with pop of about 200 million, and currently a death
      per million of 26 and total deaths of 5,513
      Brazil might better numbers than most of South America. I would not trust Venezula’s numbers any more than I trust China’s.

      • Gbaikie-san:

        Souther Hemisphere’s flu season is from May~October, which is why relatively few Wuhan flu deaths have so far been reported there.

        Let’s see what happens with Wuhan flu deaths in Southern-Hemisphere countries over the next 5 months during their flu season before making comparisons between Southern and Northern Hemisphere Wuhan deaths…

        • Brazil is already worst then what China reported, China reported 3 per million, which obviously problematic, but I mean total death of 4,633 {in country with more 6 times to population of Brazil}.
          But in Brazil the spread has been slower. Well, maybe not, depending on when you imagine it actually started in China.
          But I think it’s been slower due to lack of things which make this virus catch fire.
          Brazil has reported 79,685 total cases, and think there is more then 300,000 people in Brazil who have the virus.
          And btw, when China was first reporting peaking at around 80,000 cases, I also thought China also had more than 300,000 cases {at least}.
          And currently, China tens of millions who have virus {at least}.
          But also think US has tens of million of people infect with china virus {maybe less and maybe more}. And EU has much more than US {more died in EU and EU has much larger total pop than US}.

        • SAMURAI-san

          I mentioned this before, but it was so good, I am going to say it again.
          US is a superpower. And that means {whether we like it or not} we have
          to take responsibility for the rest of the World.
          So, you can think about US lockdown as saving the rest of the world.
          Or you think about not locking down as war crime against the rest of the world.
          So, China and WHO committed a war crime against the rest of world, and US would
          be doing a similar thing, if the US didn’t lockdown.

          And that is why China is not a superpower, nor will it ever be one.

          • Gbaikie-san:

            You should read the US Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to learn what the true purpose of the US is…

            The sole purpose of the US Federal and State governments is simply to protect and defend the inalienable individual rights of life, liberty and property of US citizens…not to be the world’s piggy bank/police force…

            Yes, the US’ Federalist system of limited government and a free enterprise economy are the examples the rest of the world would be wise follow, and we should lead by example by immediately phasing out the incredibly stupid and disastrous Wuhan flu economic shutdown while there is still time to avert a major global recession/depression or perhaps even one of the worst global economic collapses in modern human history..

          • –Yes, the US’ Federalist system of limited government and a free enterprise economy are the examples the rest of the world would be wise follow, and we should lead by example by immediately phasing out the incredibly stupid and disastrous Wuhan flu economic shutdown while there is still time to avert a major global recession/depression or perhaps even one of the worst global economic collapses in modern human history..—

            I think we getting there.
            And I hope we get some baseball, soon.
            Shutting down Basketball, made sense, but Baseball should have continued.

      • between country comparisons are not that interesting.
        Even comparisons between states dont tell you that much.

  45. Your faith in lockdowns doesn’t take into account that deaths in the UK peaked on 8 April and in London on 4 April. These correspond to infection peaks 21 days prior on 18 March and 14 March respectively – 6 days and 10 days before lockdown began on 24 March. Similar results can be shown elsewhere such as in New York where hospitalisations plateaued on 25 March just three days after lockdown began meaning infections plateaued much sooner. Official figures from Germany and Switzerland also show that the reproduction rate fell below 1 before lockdown was introduced.

    If infections peaked or plateaued before lockdown the lockdown cannot be responsible. Instead it must be a combination of the lighter measures introduced earlier, public awareness, and a pre-existing resistance in the population. These are the key facts that lockdown proponents are not addressing.

    • Yes richard, purely as a function of deaths per number of infections, COVID-19 is likely close to bad “normal” flu (i.e. not 1918 flu). But there are going to be a lot more infections than with normal flu. It’s very infectious plus it’s new therefore little to no immunity in the unexposed population and no vaccine. That means more deaths overall.

      It does require more intervention than flu. It just doesn’t require nation-destroying lockdowns.

  46. “Sequential CQ / HCQ Research Papers and Reports
    January to April 20, 2020
    Executive Summary Interpretation of the Data In This Report
    The HCQ-AZ combination, when started immediately after diagnosis, appears to be a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients. It avoids worsening and clears virus persistence and contagious infectivity in most cases”*wI-0lE54xujKNIM6mnOjsA#

  47. This is older news, but news to me:
    Patterns of COVID-19 Mortality and Vitamin D: An Indonesian Study
    This is a retrospective cohort study which included two cohorts (active and expired) of 780 cases with laboratory-confirmed infection of SARS-CoV-2 in Indonesia. Age, sex, co-morbidity, Vitamin D status, and disease outcome (mortality) were extracted from electronic medical records. The aim was to determine patterns of mortality and associated factors, with a special focus on Vitamin D status. Results revealed that majority of the death cases were male and older and had pre-existing condition and below normal Vitamin D serum level. Univariate analysis revealed that older and male cases with pre-existing condition and below normal Vitamin D levels were associated with increasing odds of death. When controlling for age, sex, and comorbidity, Vitamin D status is strongly associated with COVID-19 mortality outcome of cases.–

    • –VITAMIN D UPDATE: Patterns of COVID-19 Mortality and Vitamin D: An Indonesian Study. A Facebook friend’s succinct summary of the findings in this study: “Just under half (49.7%) of cases had normal vitamin D status, and only 4% of them died. Just over a quarter (27%) had insufficient vitamin D status, and most of them (88%) died. Just under a quarter (23%) had deficient vitamin D status, and almost all of them (99%) died.”

      The study calls anything over 30 ng/ml as normal Vitamin D; my doctor prefers in the neighborhood of 60. No guarantee from these data, though, that more is better, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case. On the other hand, you’d expect lower death rates in Italy and Spain than Germany, then, wouldn’t you? Or are that many Germans going on winter holidays in the Greek islands?–

      {That’s where story was linked from, I forgot to add that link. And that above quote is Glenn Reynolds comment}

  48. 1. As I can see – this is typical for the British – east of Germany, this is not Europe anymore (…).
    2. In this Europe (but this is, truly, Europe – “dear” lords) – “post-communist”, also in eastern Germany – the tuberculosis vaccine is still being used (in eastern Germany until 1990, similarly in Portugal). In “your” Europe no. But in “our” Europe (and Portugal) the rate of infection CoV-2 (and death) is minimal. Why don’t you use the TB vaccine (most likely it strongly increases CoV-2 resistance) for your risk groups?
    3. “…as well as deaths arising from the temporary abandonment of normal treatments for other conditions…” – also as a result of “fear” of the hospital – in people with other deadly diseases. Here, the number of deaths also increases rapidly.

    • total skeptic April 30, 2020 at 2:04 am
      2. In this Europe (but this is, truly, Europe – “dear” lords) – “post-communist”, also in eastern Germany – the tuberculosis vaccine is still being used (in eastern Germany until 1990, similarly in Portugal). In “your” Europe no. But in “our” Europe (and Portugal) the rate of infection CoV-2 (and death) is minimal. Why don’t you use the TB vaccine (most likely it strongly increases CoV-2 resistance) for your risk groups?

      In the UK the BCG vaccine was administered to everyone aged ~15, used to be done to us all at school until 2005, after then only to children who were at risk. Given that the most at risk group to COVID19 are the older age groups and in the UK they will have had the BCG vaccine it seems that your hypothesis is refuted (I understand that France also used BCG until 2007).

  49. “daily supplementation with 10,000 units (25 micrograms) of Vitamin D3.”
    Typo, think you mean 1000iu?

  50. COVID-19 understood as lung desease. But what about heart, blood vessels, stomach, brain, skin, liver etc.
    “While our understanding of COVID-19 has been progressing relatively quickly, there is still so much we don’t know. This virus appears to be acting like syphilis, “the great imitator,” with so many different manifestations in people—and we don’t know why that is true.” How many deaths are a result of these other ways of infecting?
    And what about aftereffects?
    There will be lots of premature deaths.
    I would clearly stay away from the virus as long as possible.

  51. Strict lockdowns are not needed to fight off virus.
    Slovakia had soft lockdown from start of epidemic, meaning stay home and reduce outside activity as much as possible.
    Mandatory face masks outside of home, thorough searching and testing contacts of positives.
    Mandatory 14 days quarantine for people coming from abroad, first in state until test result, then when negative rest home.
    Preventive mass testing in high risk communities as gypsies and retirement homes.
    Result after 7 weeks is that virus is receding, last days only 13, 6, 2, 3, 7, 5 new cases.
    Check daily cases and number of deaths per million graph.

    Total number of deaths is today 23 from 1396 total. This is giving whole country 4 deaths per million, best value in Europe by far margins.
    Infection is under control, country is making above average 4500 tests per day, 1 per 1220 people daily.
    It looks that virus is on track to be eradicated. R0 is under 1 and daily cases are going down.
    Currently economics is working on 70%, people are normally working with masks, shops are open with hygienic measures, people can travel, can freely go to nature, or for sport, restaurant can be open from window or for delivery. Anybody can go for a walk or bike only face mask is must between people (not family).
    Closed are bars and human contact services.
    What was point of success? Immediate action after first case, lockdown excluding work in first 2-3 weeks of epidemic start, face masks ordered after 1 week of start.
    Lockdown is most important on start of epidemic, when curve is exponential and most steep. After that people will learn how to protect themself, will get masks, will use to social distancing.
    When you prevent first exponential grow of cases, then it is quite easy to slowly end measures and guard your new cases numbers.
    There is no miracle in Slovakia’s numbers, just clear head of those making decisions on epidemic start, ordering face masks against advice of WHO and lot of good work.
    Easy way was just to let it rampage as other states did. Facts are currently clear, we saved around 3000 lives with costs for economy lower than in states more affected.

  52. But in England, alone, within Europe, excess mortality for age group 15-64, plumb normal for the time of year elsewhere, which age group mortality typically relatively unaffected by coronaviruses or colds, spikes in similar fashion to the older age groups:

    So, either England had, for one week, an atypical, worst, healthcare outcome for the working population on the continent of Europe or, inconceivable, improbable, incredible though it may be, the ONS figures may have been massaged somewhat to produce this recent spike in mortality across the board……..

    Badger, nodding gravely, said to Mole ‘Of course, once you have excluded the impossible, what you are left with, however improbable, must be………..’

      • The compilation pulls in numbers from all over place and time…..some early, some late, some forgotten, some potentially double counted, inadvertently, obviously, and then corrected, later.

        Anyone who has ever worked for a government organisation will recognise how the culture can, in times of panic, operate.

        Top down pressure, imperatives, are particularly effective in large, monolithic, organisations, both public and private.

        But happy to admit that I could be completely wrong and that there could be, no doubt, an entirely plausible explanation for a sudden rash of working age mortality, only in England out of the whole of Europe, for one week…..

          • There is unlikely to ever be any useful answer to that question because Covid 19 became a notifiable disease in Britain 05 March so has to be mentioned by any death certificate where present.


            ‘….we use the term “involving COVID-19” when referring to deaths that had COVID-19 mentioned anywhere on the death certificate, whether as underlying cause or not.’


            ‘There were 3,912 deaths involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) that occurred in March 2020 in England and Wales; of these, 3,372 (86%) had COVID-19 assigned as the underlying cause of death.’


            ‘We define a pre-existing condition as any health condition mentioned on the death certificate that either came before the coronavirus (COVID-19) or was an independent contributory factor in the death.’


            ‘Of the 3,912 deaths that occurred in March 2020 involving COVID-19, 3,563 (91%) had at least one pre-existing condition, while 349 (9%) had none. The mean number of pre-existing conditions was 2.7.’


            So England has 86% of mortality ‘involving Covid 19’ assigned to Covid 19 as the underlying cause, despite the average of underlying conditions amongst 91% of deaths ‘involving Covid 19’ being 2.7 underlying conditions, whereas in Italy that figure of deaths ‘involving Covid 19’ actually assigned to Covid 19 as the underlying cause is estimated to be 12% .

            Everyone clear?

  53. To all of the so called elite in the northeast USA and the always correct EU, you might want to ask why the response of your brilliant overlords in NYC and other bastions of genius level IQ have produced such deadly results compared to the rest of the world outside of the equally big pharma bribed EU. I have lived in Hong Kong for 5 years, and hydroxychloroquine is routinely used EARLY in the treatment of COVID 19 as it has been in China, Korea, Australia, Japan, Singapore, Thailand, and many others in this region. Once it was discovered it seemed to help reduce critical cases they told everyone of their results in JANUARY!!!. Korea was the first outside China to have to deal with the COVID problem and they settled on using hydroxychloroquine after positive reviews from Chinese doctors, not the CCP. The Koreans and the Chinese continued to use it because it produced positive results. You can easily find they still use this as the first line of treatment. They also will throw just about anything else that could help if this doesn’t work. Despite being ignored previously they still tell anyone who will listen to use this to reduce the seriousness of the disease. They used their best efforts, and NO ONE HAD TIME FOR THE PRECIOUS “CORRECT” TESTING METHOD CLAIMED TO BE NEEDED because people were DYING!!!!! In New York you might get some treatment just before you die, but they can’t risk it before. Amazingly western Europe seems to be equally suicidal. If you wonder how this has worked outside the west, Hong Kong has had 4 deaths out of 1038 cases. This is a 0.39% death rate in one of the oldest populations on the planet. Australia where you might remember Tom Hanks and his wife were quickly given chloroquine (after which they whined it upset her stomach…you have to wonder would she have enjoyed the VENTILATOR MORE!!!) has had 88 deaths out of 6738 cases or 1.31%. Yes, Australians have just as many health issues as the rest of the western world. Korea has 2.3%, Singapore 0.09%, Thailand 1.84%, Taiwan 1.4%…..etc) This data is easy to obtain online. NO COUNTRY in this region has had the disaster of NYC. In NYC, they have 160,000 cases with 12,287 deaths which represent a death rate of 7.89% so far (they report only 19% of the cases have resolved, while in HK and Australia are over 80% are resolved). So far over 80% of the people who are hooked to a ventilator in NYC DIE!!! It remains to be seen if they progress to the ridiculously bad levels of 12 to 15% of the Western EU leaders but give them time for more bad decisions…maybe they will just get there. So, would the eternally self righteous medical establishment please explain your horrendous results before telling ANYONE else how to treat COVID 19.

  54. One-word retort: “nocebo”
    Multi-word retort:

    diminished access to medical services
    diminished wealth
    diminished exercise
    diminished human contact
    increased stress
    = increased mortality

  55. One needs to look closely at the background of those advocating vaccines, including Gates, Fauci, Birx (scarf lady), Redfield (head of CDC) and many others.

    People may call me a “conspiracy theorist” but it almost seems that the intent of partial lockdowns, followed by infection, as advocated by the Oxford epidemiologist referenced above, are designed to wear people down so they will submit to vaccinations. In fact, Denmark has just passed a mandatory vaccination law:
    Are people on board with this?

    Meanwhile, it seems that hydroxychloroquine + Zinc is an effective treatment, especially at the early stages of infection. Furthermore, in several US states, governors and/or medical establishment has intervened to prevent anti viral treatment, or to limit it to in hospital use only, when it may be too late.

    • Richard Mann May 1, 2020 at 1:47 am
      Meanwhile, it seems that hydroxychloroquine + Zinc is an effective treatment, especially at the early stages of infection. Furthermore, in several US states, governors and/or medical establishment has intervened to prevent anti viral treatment, or to limit it to in hospital use only, when it may be too late.

      The testing on hydroxychloroquine have shown it to have no significant benefit and in fact had potential for side effects which is why it was recommended to be used under medical supervision.
      On the other hand, tests on remdesivir have shown significant benefit and has been recommended for routine use.
      The placebo groups in the remdesivir tests were offered the drug since it was not ethical to continue them given the benefits.

  56. Please see the following link,

    April 27, 2020

    The Honorable Doug Ducey
    1700 West Washington St.
    Phoenix, AZ 85007

    Dear Governor Ducey:

    This concerns your Executive Order forbidding prophylactic use of chloroquine (CQ) or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) unless peer-reviewed evidence becomes available.

    Attached and posted here (https: // ) is a summary of peer-reviewed evidence, indexed in PubMed, concerning the use of CQ and HCQ against coronavirus. We believe that there is clear and convincing evidence of benefit both pre-exposure and post-exposure.

    In addition, Michael J. A. Robb, M.D., of Phoenix is compiling all reports as they come in. As of this date, the total number of reported patients treated with HCQ, with or without azithromycin and zinc, is 2,333. Of these, 2,137 or 91.6 percent improved clinically. There were 63 deaths, all but 11 in a single retrospective report from the Veterans Administration where the patients were severely ill.

    Most of the data concerns use of HCQ for treatment, but one study included used the medication as prophylaxis with excellent results. Many nations, including Turkey and India, are protecting medical workers and contacts of infected persons prophylactically. According to, deaths per million persons from COVID-19 as of Apr 27 are 167 in the U.S., 33 in Turkey, and 0.6 in India.

    Based on this evidence, we request that you rescind your Executive Orders impeding the use of CQ and HCQ and further order that administrative agencies not impose any requirements on the prescription of CQ, HCQ, azithromycin, or other drugs intended to treat or prevent coronavirus illness that do not apply equally to all approved medications that may be used off-label for any purpose.


    Michael J. A. Robb, M.D.
    President, Arizona State Chapter of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

    Jane M. Orient, M.D.
    Executive Director, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

    CC Speaker Rusty Bowers, Rep. Warren Petersen, Rep. Nancy Barto, Sen. Karen Fann, Sen. Rick Gray, and Sen. Kate Brophy-McGee


    Sequential CQ / HCQ Research Papers and Reports, January to April 20, 2020 https: //

    The probabilities of clinical success using hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc against the novel betacoronavirus, COVID-19, revised Apr 26, 2020 https: //

Comments are closed.