Essential Facts About Covid-19

By James D. Agresti


Given the spread of misinformation about Covid-19, Just Facts is providing a trove of rigorously documented facts about this disease and its impacts. These include some essential facts that have been absent or misreported in much of the media’s coverage of this issue.

This research also includes a groundbreaking study to determine the lethality of Covid-19 based on the most comprehensive available measure: the total years of life that it will rob from all people. This accords with the CDC’s tenet that “the allocation of health resources must consider not only the number of deaths by cause” but also the “years of potential life lost.”

On one hand, these facts show that:

  • the average death rate for people who contract Covid-19 is well below 1% and is much closer to that of the seasonal flu than figures that were commonly reported by the press.
  • the average years of life lost from each Covid-19 death are significantly fewer than from common causes of untimely death like accidents and suicides.
  • the virus that causes Covid-19 is “very vulnerable to antibody neutralization” and has very limited ability to mutate, which make it unlikely to take masses of lives year after year like the flu and other recurring scourges.
  • if 500,000 Covid-19 deaths ultimately occur in the United States—or more than twice the level of a prominent projection—the disease will rob about 6.8 million years of life from all Americans who were alive at the outset of 2020. In contrast:
    • the flu will rob them of about 35 million years.
    • suicides will rob them of 132 million years.
    • accidents will rob them of 409 million years.

On the other hand, elderly people and those with chronic ailments are extremely vulnerable to Covid-19, and the disease is highly transmissible, which means it could spread like wildfire and overwhelm hospitals without extraordinary measures to contain it. This would greatly increase its death toll.

However, measures to limit the spread of C-19 sometimes involve fatal tradeoffs, and thus, overreactions can destroy more years of life than they save.

Just Facts asked Dr. Rodney X. Sturdivant—who has a Ph.D. in biostatistics and is the Director of Statistical Consulting Center at Baylor University and an Associate Professor of  Statistics—to critically review this research. He assessed it as follows:

This research clearly articulates what is known about Covid-19 and accurately reflects the true risks and ramifications that are critical for policy and individual decisions. The facts in this article reflect analyses that led me to co-sign—along with over 50,000 medical and public health scientists and practitioners—the Great Barrington Declaration. This calls for a policy of “focused protection” to “minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.”

Likelihood of Exposure

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a total of 15,271,571 cases of Covid-19 have been reported in the U.S. as of December 9, 2020. Given that the population is 331 million people, this amounts to one out of every 22 people in the United States. C-19 cases are not equally dispersed throughout the nation, so this figure is much higher in some areas and much lower in others.

Nevertheless, the current likelihood of being exposed to C-19 doesn’t depend on the number of people who have ever been infected—but on the number of people who are currently infected and contagious. Determining this is confounded by three key factors:

  1. Symptoms of C-19 typically don’t appear until 2–14 days after exposure, which means that people can be infected for days or weeks before having any reason to get tested.
  • The vast majority of people who contract C-19 develop only mild symptoms or none at all, and hence, they may never be diagnosed while they are infectious. Despite widespread anxiety over C-19, medical studies have been clear from early on that it poses such a minor threat to most people that they may barely know they have it:
    • A February 2020 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association based on data from China found that 81% of reported Covid-19 cases are “mild” and that the true figure is even higher because there are “inherent difficulties in identifying and counting mild and asymptomatic cases.”
    • In one of the few cases where asymptomatic cases could be reliably counted because an entire population was tested for C-19, Japan’s National Institute for Infectious Diseases reported in February 2020 that 51% of the people on the Diamond Princess cruise ship who tested positive for C-19 had no symptoms, even though the “passengers onboard were generally of an older age.” The portion of these people who later developed symptoms is currently unavailable.
    • A March 2020 paper in the journal Microbes and Infection notes that “most infected individuals … appear to be able to recover with little to no medical intervention.”
    • In another case where asymptomatic cases were reliably counted, the New England Journal of Medicine reported in April that universal Covid-19 testing of pregnant women at two New York City hospitals found that 88% of them who tested positive for the disease were asymptomatic upon admission, and 9% later developed a fever. Fevers are relatively common after childbirth, which means they were not necessarily from C-19. Accounting for both possibilities and the sampling margin of error, these results amount to a 65% to 99% asymptomatic rate with 95% confidence.
    • Perhaps most tellingly, the journal BMJ Thorax published a study in May about an outbreak of C-19 during an Antarctic cruise where everyone onboard “had no outside human contact” for 28 days. The passengers were quarantined in their rooms on the eighth day of the cruise, the crew wore personal protective equipment thereafter, and everyone was tested for C-19 on day 20. Among the 128 people who tested positive, 81% ultimately had no symptoms, 13% had mild symptoms, and 6% had serious symptoms, including one that died.
  • There are significant differences in the contagiousness of people infected with C-19, depending on whether they are symptomatic, pre-symptomatic, post-symptomatic, or asymptomatic. This reality has been shrouded in many publications because researchers often misuse an indicator called “viral load” to determine if people can transmit the virus.

    In the context of Covid-19, viral load is the concentration of the virus’ genetic material detected in body fluids. The Journal of Clinical Virology notes that this measure has been “widely used” in C-19 studies “as a proxy for contagiousness,” but a German medical journal explains that the mere detection of genetic material does not “does not imply presence of viable and replicating virus.”

    In other words, the virus may be dead or unable to reproduce because the person’s immune system has neutered it. The German journal adds that researchers commonly use viral load to measure contagiousness because it is “convenient,” while the proper method is “cumbersome.”

    The implications of using a convenient measure instead of an accurate one are evidenced by the fact that an August 2020 paper in JAMA Internal Medicine found that C-19 viral loads “were similar” in people during different stages of the disease—but studies that actually measure contagiousness show major disparities in their capacity to transmit infections:
    • An April 2020 paper in the journal Nature reports that live C-19 viruses could be “readily” cultured from the mucus of people with “mild” C-19 “during the first week of symptoms” but not “after day 8 in spite of ongoing high viral loads.”
    • An April 2020 paper in the journal Nature Medicine estimates that 1% of C-19 transmission occurs more than 5 days before symptom onset and that infectiousness peaks at symptom onset and then declines “quickly within 7 days.”
    • An August 2020 contact tracing study in the journal Respiratory Medicine found that none of 455 people who were exposed to an “asymptomatic Covid-19 virus carrier” caught the disease, even though each of them were exposed for an average of 4–5 days. The paper thus concludes that “the infectivity of some asymptomatic” C-19 virus “carriers might be weak.”
    • A contact tracing study published by the Annals of Internal Medicine in August 2020 found that merely one among 342 people who had “close contact” with asymptomatic C-19 virus carriers caught the disease from them. Based on this and other data, the study determined that the contagiousness of asymptomatic C-19 carriers is 91% lower than those with mild symptoms and 95% lower than those with moderate symptoms.

Applying the facts above and related data from the CDC and the Center for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University, Just Facts developed a methodology to estimate the number of people in the U.S. who currently have infectious cases of Covid-19. The calculations—which are detailed in this spreadsheet—find that roughly one of out every 54 people in the U.S. is contagious as of December 9, 2020.

Again, this is a national average and is not applicable everywhere because of large differences in the timing and severity of the pandemic in different areas of the country.


Fatal interactions between Covid-19 and other ailments like heart disease and diabetes make it difficult to determine the exact death toll from C-19. A range of evidence suggests that the CDC’s tally of Covid-19 deaths may be modestly inflated but still provides a reasonable measure of the pandemic’s severity.

According to the CDC’s estimate of “confirmed and probable” fatalities from Covid-19, a total of 288,762 U.S. residents have died from the disease as of December 9, 2020. To put this figure in perspective:

In comparative terms, deaths from Covid-19 are currently about:

  • 90% below annual fatalities from all causes.
  • 7.7 times average annual fatalities from the flu.
  • 70% above annual fatalities from accidents.

Although C-19 is a new disease and took its first reported life in the U.S. during late February, these comparisons may substantially overstate its deadliness. This is because fatalities from accidents, the flu, and other common causes of death occur in droves every year, and this is unlikely for C-19 because of the facts below.


The primary reason why the flu kills tens of thousands of people every year is that the viruses that cause it mutate in ways that prevent humans from becoming immune to them. Per the Journal of Infectious Diseases, “All viruses mutate, but influenza remains highly unusual among infectious diseases” because it mutates very rapidly, and thus, “new vaccines are needed almost every year” to protect against it.

In striking contrast, a March 2020 paper in a molecular biology journal that cites Michael Farzan, co-chair of the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at Scripps Research, explains that once a vaccine for Covid-19 is developed, it “would not need regular updates, unlike seasonal influenza vaccines.” This is because the part of the virus that the vaccine targets “is protected against mutation” by a feature of its genetic material, or RNA.

The same point applies to naturally acquired immunity. People who catch C-19 and other infectious diseases with low rates of mutation typically develop enduring resistance to them. The physiology textbook The Human Body in Health and Illness explains that such immunity, which is called “active immunity,” is “generally long lasting.”

This is the case with rubella, mumps, measles, polio. After people contract these diseases and recover, they rarely get them again or transmit them to others. Thus, they become firewalls against the spread of these contagions.

Media outlets like The Atlantic, Vox, and Forbes have turned the truth of this matter on its head by confusing the general nature of coronaviruses with that of C-19. The habit of calling Covid-19 “the coronavirus” can be very misleading because there are different types of coronaviruses, and C-19 is caused by just one of them.

Coronaviruses are a family of RNA viruses that includes some common cold viruses that tend to mutate rapidly, but the virus that causes C-19 does not share that trait. Per the same molecular biology paper cited above, the virus that causes C-19 “does not mutate rapidly for an RNA virus because, unusually for this category, it has a proof-reading function” in its genetics. The paper also explains that the same physical feature of the virus that makes it so contagious also makes it:

very vulnerable to antibody neutralization, and thus it is a relatively easy virus to protect against. I refer to it as “stupid” on a spectrum where HIV, which lives in the face of an active immune system for years, is a “genius.”

Simply put, the virus that causes C-19 is immunologically fragile, and thus, it far less likely to take lives regardless of acquired immunity and vaccines. If this proves true in the long run—as all available evidence suggests it will—the lifetime risk of dying from Covid-19 is greatly overstated by comparing its current death toll to yearly fatalities from the flu, accidents, suicides, and other common causes of death. This is because the vast bulk of people will develop immunity to C-19 either by catching it or through vaccines. In vivid contrast, societies don’t become immune to accidents, the flu, or heart disease.

All of the above facts about immunology in general and C-19 in particular were published in medical journals, textbooks, or encyclopedias near the outset of the pandemic in March 2020 or earlier. Yet, the World Health Organization sowed confusion around this issue by publishing a scientific brief and a tweet on April 24th that stated: “There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from #COVID19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.”

Many media outlets parroted that claim, even though the World Health Organization deleted its tweet later that day and wrote: “Earlier today we tweeted about a new WHO scientific brief on ‘immunity passports’. The thread caused some concern & we would like to clarify: We expect that most people who are infected with #COVID19 will develop an antibody response that will provide some level of protection.”

That clarification was closer to the truth but still misleading because it ignored the three  key facts above that were already proven by that time:

  1. The virus that causes C-19 has low mutational capacity.
  2. The virus that causes C-19 is very vulnerable to antibody neutralization.
  3. Viruses with these attributes are easy to protect against because vaccines and acquired immunity commonly provide long-lasting immunity against them.

Since April 2020, a torrent of research has continued to confirm those facts:

  • In May, the South Korean CDC published a study of 285 people who contracted C-19, recovered, and then tested positive again. Contrary to the assumption that they must have caught the disease a second time, the study found no evidence that even one these individuals was infectious. Viral culture testing was performed on 108 of the subjects, and “all had negative results.” Also, “no case was found” in which someone “was newly infected solely from contact with” one of the people. These facts indicate that these positive C-19 tests were caused by remnants of dead or harmless virus particles. Thus, South Korea changed its policy to treat such individuals as non-infectious.
  • In August, the journal Cell published a study of the immune system responses of 206 people in Sweden who had contracted C-19. Unlike other studies that only looked for antibodies, this one measured “T cells,” which are the body’s main source of “long-term immune protection.” This is important because antibodies quickly wane after infections, while T cells provide lasting immunity. The study found that:
    • 100% of the subjects who had severe C-19 and 87% who had mild C-19 had “highly functional memory T cell responses, suggesting that natural exposure or infection may prevent recurrent episodes of severe Covid-19.”
    • “In line with these observations, none of the convalescent individuals in this study, including those with previous mild disease, have experienced further episodes of Covid-19.”
  • In August, after C-19 had “affected over 23 million patients with more than 0.8 million deaths in over 200 countries,” the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases reported the first proven case of someone catching C-19 and then catching it again. This sometimes occurs with all infectious diseases—including with people who have been vaccinated—because immunity is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon. However, when it comes to C-19 and other ailments caused by viruses that are vulnerable to antibodies and have little capacity for mutations, such events are rare exceptions, not the rule.
  • In September, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published a genetic analysis of 18,514 virus samples collected from people who contracted C-19 in 84 different nations. The study found that mutations to date have been so “limited” that “a single vaccine” should be “broadly protective” on a “global” basis. The authors note this situation is very different from the viruses that cause HIV, the flu, and Dengue fever because their ample mutations make it nearly impossible to create effective vaccines against them.
  • In November, the journal Cell published a study of 15 people who recovered from mild cases of C-19 to determine if their immune systems developed “a multilayered defense that lasts.” The study found that all of them did, as evidenced by the presence of C-19-specific T cells and B cells in their blood. Both are sources of long-term immune protection, although T cells are the primary source. Researchers also tested the cells and found that they reacted appropriately when exposed to the virus that causes C-19. Those results, as the authors point out, are consistent with the fact that no one who previously had C-19 caught it again during major outbreaks on a fishing vessel and at an overnight camp.

Time will tell more about the mutations of the virus that causes C-19, but current indications are that it will not dramatically mutate and become an ongoing cause of numerous deaths.

Years of Lost Life

Beyond raw numbers of deaths, another crucial factor in measuring the deadliness of a public health threat is the years of life that it robs from its victims. In the words of the CDC, “the allocation of health resources must consider not only the number of deaths by cause but also by age.” Hence, the “years of potential life lost” has “become a mainstay in the evaluation of the impact of injuries on public health.”

This doesn’t mean that younger people are more important than older people, but it recognizes and accounts for the facts that:

  • humans cannot ultimately prevent death; they can only delay it.
  • there is a material difference between a malady that kills a 20 year-old in the prime of her life and one that kills a 90-year-old who would have otherwise died a month later.

These realities seem to be lost on some prominent medical authorities, like Howard Bauchner, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of the American Medical Association. He coauthored an editorial comparing 100,000 deaths from C-19 “to the number of U.S. soldiers killed in World War I or in the Korean and Vietnam wars combined.” This is deceptive because it fails to account for the facts that the average:

  • lifespan of U.S. residents is 79 years.
  • age of U.S. residents who have died of Covid-19 is about 75 years.
  • age of U.S. soldiers killed in Vietnam was 23 years.

While ignoring those facts, Bauchner says that “death seems like it should be an accurate measure of the pandemic’s evolution and effects—the worst outcome, an unequivocal outcome.” Given that death is ultimately everyone’s outcome, it is a flawed measure of the pandemic’s severity because it is incomplete.

A much more complete measure of C-19’s lethality also includes the years of life lost by each victim. Yet, determining this is not a simple matter of subtracting their ages at the time of their deaths from the average U.S. lifespan. This is because:

  • the average U.S. lifespan includes the deaths of young people, which drives this figure down relative to what it is for older people. So even though the average life expectancy from birth is 79 years, people who are 79 years old live an average of 10 more years.
  • C-19 is more deadly to people with preexisting health problems, and these people have lower average life expectancies than healthy people of the same ages.

Based on the average life expectancies of people of different ages and the ages of people who have died from C-19, Just Facts calculates that C-19 robs an average of 13.5 years from each of its victims. This is an overestimate because it does not account for preexisting health conditions, and one working paper calculates that the actual figure could be as low as 1.76 years in the United States.

Even based on the exaggerated figure of 13.5 years, the average years of life for each person who dies of C-19 is much less than other common causes of untimely death. For example, accidents rob an average of 30.6 years of life from each victim, while suicides cost an average of 35.6 years. And once again, these deaths occur every year, while C-19 is unlikely to have an ongoing high death toll because of its vulnerability to antibodies and limited prospects for mutation.

At a March 30 White House press conference, Dr. Deborah Birx, a world-renowned immunologist, presented a slide of projections for C-19 fatalities based on “five or six international and domestic modelers from Harvard, from Columbia, from Northeastern, from Imperial who helped us tremendously.” The model projected that 100,000 to 240,000 deaths would occur if Americans followed social distancing and hygiene guidelines. Birx added that “we really believe and hope every day that we can do a lot better than that because that’s not assuming 100% of every American does everything that they’re supposed to be doing, but I think that’s possible.”

The high-end of that range has already come to pass, but even if 500,000 U.S. residents eventually die from C-19 at an inflated average of 13.5 years of lost life per person, the disease will rob 6.8 million years of life from all Americans who were alive at the outset of 2020. In comparison, the flu will rob them of about 35 million years, suicides will rob them of 132 million years, and accidents will rob them of 409 million years:

(Source Data)

Those figures reveal that accidents are about 60 times more lethal to Americans than this nightmare scenario for Covid-19. Likewise, the flu is about five times as lethal, and suicides are about 20 times as lethal. This is a substantially more comprehensive measure of deadliness than the tally of lives lost during a year—or any other random unit of time—because it accounts for the entirety of people’s lives and the total years of life that they lose.

It is important to realize that some people experience long-term adverse effects from non-fatal cases of C-19, but this is also true of accidents, suicide attempts, and the flu.

Death Rates

On March 3, 2020, the World Health Organization announced that “about 3.4% of reported Covid-19 cases have died,” and “by comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected.” Media outlets widely reported these figures and lambasted President Trump for saying, “I think the 3.4% is really a false number” and “I would say the number is way under 1%.”

On March 11, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told a U.S. congressional committee that the mortality rate of C-19 is “somewhere around 1%, which means it is 10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu.”

Contrary to the statements of the World Health Organization and Fauci, Oxford University’s Center for Evidence-Based Medicine currently estimates that the fatality rate for C-19 is “somewhere between 0.1% and 0.35%.” This is well below 1%, just as Trump stated, and it nowhere near 10 times the flu fatality rate, which has averaged about 0.15% over the past nine years in the United States.

Similarly, the CDC’s current best estimates for the C-19 fatality rate are:

  • 0.003% for people aged 0–19 years.
  • 0.02% for people aged 20–49 years.
  • 0.5% for people aged 50–69 years.
  • 5.4% for people aged 70+ years.

In August, Cambridge University Press published a paper analyzing why early coverage of the C-19 fatality rate was so inaccurate. The study found that purveyors of inflated mortality rates likely confused two different measures of mortality called the “case fatality rate” and the “infection fatality rate.” The first of these is rate of death among confirmed cases of the disease, while the second is the rate among everyone who had it, including those who were asymptomatic or never diagnosed with it. The paper notes that misinformation about the death rate “helped launch a campaign of social distancing, organizational and business lockdowns, and shelter-in-place orders.”

At the time that those exaggerated mortality rates were being broadcast, ample evidence had already undercut them. This is proven by the remainder of this section, which is word-for-word from an article published by Just Facts on March 17, 2020:

Initial media reports of a 2–3% mortality rate for Covid-19 are inflated, and the actual figure may be closer to that of the flu, which has averaged about 0.15% over the past nine years in the United States. A large degree of uncertainty surrounds this issue due to the same factor that prevents accurate counts of infections: unreported cases.

As explained by Dr. Brett Giroir—who has authored nearly 100 peer-reviewed scientific publications and serves as the Assistant Secretary for Health at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services—the Covid-19 death rate is “lower than you heard probably in many reports” because the bulk of people who contract coronavirus don’t get seriously ill, and thus, many of them never get tested.

Giroir calls this a “denominator problem” because if you’re “not very ill, as most people are not, they do not get tested. They do not get counted in the denominator.” Giroir’s best estimate is that the mortality rate is probably “somewhere between 0.1% and 1%.” This “is likely more severe in its mortality rate than the typical flu” rate of 0.1% to 0.15%, “but it’s certainly within the range.”

Giroir’s estimate accords with a February 2020 commentary in the New England Journal of Medicine by Fauci and others:

If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.

A prime example of how journalists misreport on this issue is a March 12th article in Business Insider by Andy Kiersz. In this piece, he compares the “death rates” of Covid-19 from the South Korean CDC to that of the flu from the United States CDC. Based on these numbers, he reports that “South Korea—which has reported some of the lowest coronavirus death rates of any country—still has a COVID-19 death rate more than eight times higher than that of the flu.”

What Kiersz and his editors fail to understand is that the denominator for the Korean rate is the number of “confirmed cases,” while the denominator for the U.S. rate is based on a “mathematical model.” The CDC clarifies how the model works by citing a study on swine flu, which multiplies “43,677 laboratory-confirmed cases” of the disease by 41 to 131 times to calculate the denominator for the death rate. In the authors’ words, they do this because confirmed cases are:

likely a substantial underestimate of the true number. Correcting for under-ascertainment using a multiplier model, we estimate that 1.8 million–5.7 million cases occurred, including 9,000–21,000 hospitalizations.

Put simply, Covid-19 death rates that are based upon reported or confirmed infections grossly undercount the number of people with the disease. This, in turn, makes the death rate seem substantially higher than reality.


Another important factor in weighing the risks posed by Covid-19 is its transmissibility, or how contagious it is. In this respect, Covid-19 is much more dangerous than the seasonal flu because it spreads very quickly and can overwhelm hospitals.

Scientists measure contagiousness with a basic reproduction number, which is the average number of people who tend to catch a disease from each person who has it. This measure is an innate characteristic of the disease because it doesn’t account for actions that people take to prevent it. A February 2020 paper in the Journal of Travel Medicine explains that any disease with a basic reproduction number above 1.0 is likely to multiply over time.

The same paper evaluates 12 studies of the basic reproduction number of Covid-19 in various nations and finds that they “ranged from 1.4 to 6.49,” with an average of 3.28 and a median of 2.79. Based on their analysis of these studies, the authors conclude that the basic reproduction number of C-19 will likely prove to be “around 2–3” after “more data are accumulated.”

In comparison to the flu, a 2014 paper in the journal BMC Infectious Diseases analyzes 24 studies of the seasonal flu and finds that the median result for the basic reproduction number is 1.28. The authors stress that the seemingly small difference between 1.28 and higher figures like 1.80 “represent the difference between epidemics that are controllable and cause moderate illness and those causing a significant number of illnesses and requiring intensive mitigation strategies to control.”

All of the facts above were published in scientific journals by February—but in direct contradiction to them—the Director-General of the World Health Organization gave a press conference on March 3 in which he stated that “Covid-19 spreads less efficiently than flu.”

A range of media outlets echoed that dangerous falsehood, as they did with others from the World Health Organization about immunity and fatality rates. Then with no apparent regard for the World Health Organization’s track record of spurious claims, Google/YouTube adopted a policy in May of censoring people who post content “that contradicts the World Health Organization (WHO) or local health authorities’ medical information about Covid-19.”

The high transmissibility of Covid-19 means that hygienic practices, social distancing, and other precautionary measures can save more lives than doing the same for common diseases like the flu.


There are, however, mortal dangers in overreacting because measures to limit the spread of C-19 have tangible impacts that can cost multitudes of lives. Numerous facts have shown that lockdowns, panic, and other responses to the pandemic have done just that. A small sampling of these include the following:

  • The authors of a July 2020 paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association found:
    • There is “an alarming trend across the U.S., where community members experiencing a health emergency are staying home—a decision that can have long-term, and sometimes fatal, consequences.”
    • In the five states that had the most Covid-19 deaths in March and April, heart disease deaths were 89% above normal, and diabetes deaths were 96% above normal.
    • “New York City’s death rates alone rose a staggering 398% from heart disease and 356% from diabetes.”
  • A scientific survey commissioned by the American College of Emergency Physicians in April 2020 found that 29% of adults have “actively delayed or avoided seeking medical care due to concerns about contracting” C-19.
  • A California-based ABC News station reported in May:
    • “Doctors at John Muir Medical Center in Walnut Creek say they have seen more deaths by suicide during this quarantine period than deaths from the Covid-19 virus.”
    • Mike deBoisblanc, head of the trauma unit at the hospital stated that he’s “seen a year’s worth of suicide attempts in the last four weeks,” and “mental health is suffering so much” that he says “it is time to end the shelter-in-place order.”
  • A scientific survey conducted by the CDC in July 2020 found that about 32% of U.S. adults had “symptoms of anxiety disorder” as compared to 8% around the same time last year. The perils of this are underscored by a 2015 meta-analysis in the Journal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry, which found that the overall risk of death among people with anxiety is 43% higher than the general population.
  • A study published by the American Medical Association in September 2020 found that 27.8% of U.S. adults had symptoms of depression during the C-19 pandemic as compared to 8.5% before the pandemic. The same 2015 meta-analysis found that depression is associated with a 71% higher risk of death.
  • An article published by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco estimated that “more than 20 million jobs” were “swept away” in the early months of the C-19 pandemic. The potential repercussions of this are highlighted by a 2011 meta-analysis in the journal Social Science & Medicine about mortality, “psychosocial stress,” and job losses. It found that “unemployment is associated with a 63% higher risk of mortality in studies controlling for covariates.”
  • A scientific survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation in late April found that 55% of U.S. workers “have lost their jobs or had a reduction in hours or pay as a result of” reactions to C-19. Regardless of whether these losses are brief or sustained, the same 2011 meta-analysis found that the correlation between unemployment and death “is significant in both the short and long term,” lending “some support to the hypothesis and previous findings that both the stress and the negative lifestyle effects associated with the onset of unemployment tend to persist even after a person has regained a job.”
  • Four federal bills passed to address the pandemic and buffer the economic fallouts of state-imposed shutdowns cost about $2.5 trillion, or an average of $19,000 for every household in the nation. This has played a key role in driving the national debt to the highest portion of the U.S. economy in the nation’s history. A broad range of facts show that this can have serious negative consequences, including lower wages, weak economic growth, increased inflation, higher taxes, reduced government benefits, or combinations of such results. These, in turn, impair people’s quality of life and can reduce their life expectancy.
  • A study published by the journal European Psychiatry in May 2020 found that:
    • governments failed to model the “increased short-term and long-term mortality” caused by the mental health impacts of Covid-19 mitigation strategies like social distancing and lockdowns.
    • these actions increased “suicide, depression, alcohol use disorder, childhood trauma due to domestic violence, changes in marital status, and social isolation.”
    • the average person in Switzerland will lose an average of about 0.205 years of life due to these mitigation measures.
    • “this loss would be entirely borne by 2.1% of the population, who will suffer an average of 9.79” years of life lost.
    • these figures are “likely to underestimate the true impact of the mitigation strategies,” and more life may be lost due to “economic adversity, changes to activities of daily living such as eating, sleeping, smoking and ordinary alcohol consumption, or decrease in medical provision to those who have health problems unrelated to Covid-19.”
  • A study published by Just Facts in May 2020 found that anxiety related to C-19 will ultimately destroy more years of life than can possibly be saved by lockdowns. With regard to this study, the accomplished psychiatrist Joseph P. Damore, Jr. wrote that it “thoroughly answers the question about the cure being worse than the disease.”

These facts prove that overreacting to C-19 can ultimately kill more people than are saved. Calling attention to this point, a study published by the journal Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness in June 2020 found:

Exaggerated levels of fear were driven by sensationalist media coverage during the Covid-19 pandemic. And yet, while the public was ordered to lockdown, overall costs and benefits to society from severe mitigation measures had not been assessed.

The implications of overreacting to Covid-19 or any other potential hazard are aptly summarized in a teaching guide published by the American Society for Microbiology. This book explains why “the factors driving your concept of risk—emotion or fact—may or may not seem particularly important to you,” but they certainly are because “there are risks in misperceiving risks.”

A Look Back & The Path Forward

On March 31, 2020—as more than 100 nations were implementing lockdowns—Just Facts published the following words and facts that support them:

Aggressive social distancing can extend the timeframe over which Covid-19 patients are infected and hospitalized, but it cannot by itself reduce those outcomes in the long run. This is because Covid-19 is so contagious that another outbreak will begin and quickly proliferate as soon as the distancing measures cease.

A slew of lethal outcomes over the ensuing months have proved that statement true, especially the global number of C-19 deaths per day:

(Source Data)

A sample of articles from the New York Times shows that this post-lockdown carnage occurred across the globe and took many people by surprise:

  • July 24: “As the pandemic continues to grow around the world … troubling resurgences have hit several places that were seen as models of how to respond to the virus,” such as Hong Kong, Spain, and Australia.”
  • July 29: “After months without a single coronavirus death, or even a confirmed case of local transmission, a new outbreak has struck Vietnam. And it’s spreading.”
  • October 17: “When the coronavirus began sweeping around the globe this spring, people from Seattle to Rome to London canceled weddings and vacations, cut off visits with grandparents and hunkered down in their homes for what they thought would be a brief but essential period of isolation. But summer did not extinguish the virus. And with fall has come another dangerous, uncontrolled surge of infections that in parts of the world is the worst of the pandemic so far.”
  • October 28: “But with countries like France, Italy and Britain reporting their highest death toll in months, and Germany facing soaring cases this week, the authorities are now scrambling to reimpose drastic measures to curb a surge in infections and hospitalizations that could result in more deaths than during the first wave of the pandemic.”
  • December 4: “We now know that the second wave in Europe has become deadlier than the first.”

All of this was predicted and predictable. Even the Imperial College of London, which provided the impetus for mass lockdowns, admitted in March that the “more successful a strategy is at temporary suppression, the larger the later epidemic is predicted to be in the absence of vaccination, due to lesser build-up of herd immunity.”

Making a similar point eight years before the pandemic, a 2012 paper in the journal PLoS One about “Immunity in Society” noted that:

when a sufficiently high proportion of individuals within a population becomes immune (either through prior exposure or through mass vaccination), community or “herd” immunity emerges, whereby individuals that are poorly immunized are protected by the collective “immune firewall” provided by immunized neighbors. In humans and other vertebrate communities … responses to a previously encountered pathogen are faster and stronger than those to a novel pathogen, and thus individuals are better at blocking its spread. [Emphasis added.]

Equally, if very few people are immune to a disease, they can transmit it to others instead of blocking it. Without a vaccine, the only way people can become immune to C-19 is by catching it and recovering. This means that too much social distancing may cause more deaths because young, healthy people—who would otherwise catch the disease, recover quickly, and become firewalls—remain as potential carriers.

Quantifying those dynamics, a study published by the British Medical Journal in October 2020 found these stunning and “counterintuitive results” about lockdowns in the United Kingdom:

  • The advice given to UK policymakers was focused “on reducing total number of cases and not the number of deaths.”
  • “Contrary to popular perception,” the Imperial College paper that was used to justify the lockdown never “specifically modelled” the lockdown.
  • When adjusted to reflect high transmissibility of C-19, the Imperial College model projects that once some basic preventative measures are in place like quarantining infected people and social distancing for the elderly:
    • the “closure of schools and universities would increase the total number of deaths.”
    • “general social distancing” of the entire population “was also projected to increase the total number of deaths.”
    • “postponing the spread of Covid-19 means that more people are still infectious and are available to infect older age groups, of whom a much larger fraction then die.”

Those outcomes assume a C-19 mortality rate of 1% (higher than reality) and that widespread vaccination does not occur for 800 days (probably slower than reality), but the basic point remains the same: Lockdowns to control the spread of C-19 can actually cause more C-19 deaths by preventing the development of herd immunity among healthy people—the vast majority of whom are very resilient to the virus.

And that only accounts for added C-19 deaths. In addition, lockdowns trigger hordes of other types of deaths both immediately and in the long-term by causing anxiety, depression, missed medical care, unemployment, and poverty.

Despite those facts, media outlets have often scorned the idea of herd immunity, like this October article in the New York Times that claims:

Many experts say “herd immunity”—the point at which a disease stops spreading because nearly everyone in a population has contracted it—is still very far off. Leading experts have concluded, using different scientific methods, that about 85 to 90 percent of the American population is still susceptible to the coronavirus.

That statement suffers from two fatal flaws:

  1. It is not true that “nearly everyone in a population” must catch C-19 to achieve herd immunity. Even simplistic models—which assume that immunity is evenly distributed and that all age groups take the same precautions—estimate that herd immunity for C-19 emerges when about 50–67% of the population is immune. Using more realistic scenarios, an August paper in the journal Science places this figure at roughly 43%.
  • The claim that 85–90% of Americans are still susceptible to C-19 is not based on substantially “different scientific methods” but only on studies that only test for antibodies, which can greatly understate immunity. As documented by the authors of a study conducted in Sweden and published by the journal Cell in August 2020:
    • “Our results indicate that public immunity to Covid-19 is probably significantly higher than antibody tests have suggested.”
    • Most studies of C-19 immunity merely test for antibodies, but “antibody responses are not detectable in all patients, especially those with less severe forms of Covid-19,” and this is the case with “most people” who catch C-19.
    • T cells—which are the body’s main source of lasting immunity—are present in the vast majority of people who have had C-19, and these cells respond like “those observed in the context of successful vaccines, suggesting that natural exposure or infection may prevent recurrent episodes of severe Covid-19” in people who don’t have antibodies.
    • Nearly “twice as many exposed family members and healthy individuals who donated blood during the pandemic generated memory T cell responses versus antibody responses, implying that” testing for antibodies “has underestimated the extent of population-level immunity” for C-19.

Collectively, these data indicate that herd immunity could have been achieved with much less loss of life than has already occurred. That would have required doing more to protect vulnerable people and allowing young healthy people greater freedom instead of locking them down. This is precisely the opposite of what certain high-profile media figures called for and government officials have done.

For the purpose of illustration, 43% of the U.S. population—or roughly enough to achieve herd immunity—is under the age of 33. If everyone in this age group went about their business and caught the disease while everyone else stayed Covid-free through diligent social distancing, hygiene, testing, and other creative measures:

  • 14,218 people under the age of 33 would have died based on the CDC’s best estimates for C-19 fatality rates at these ages.
  • the people who died would have lost a total of 800,000 years of life.

In comparison, 240,213 or about 15 times more fatalities from C-19 were recorded in death certificates filed by November 21, 2020. Given the ages of the deceased, this amounts to 3.2 million years of life, or four times worse than the idealized scenario.

That scenario unrealistically assumes prevention measures and herd immunity are so effective that no one over the age of 32 catches C-19, but like the British Medical Journal paper, it shows that there comes a tipping point where broad lockdowns cause more C-19 deaths than balanced measures. Again, that’s in addition to all of the other deadly effects of lockdowns.

However, strategic social distancing can keep hospitalizations at reasonable levels so that victims receive proper care, and it can also buy time to discover and mass-produce effective treatments.


During a March 14th press conference, U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams asserted that “this situation will last longer, and more people will be hurt” if “we are complacent, selfish, uninformed,” and if “we spread fear, distrust, and misinformation.” Yet, that is exactly what many media outlets, governments, and big tech companies have done.

Conversely, Adams said that “we will overcome this situation” if we “pitch in” and “share the facts.” The essential facts above confirm the wisdom of his words.

James D. Agresti is the president of Just Facts, a think tank dedicated to publishing rigorously documented facts about public policy issues.

4.5 6 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Frederick Michael
December 10, 2020 10:26 pm

Early on US COVID-19 deaths were doubling every 2.5 days. That peaked at a little under 8k per day early on. Delay the mitigations by 10 days and we’d have hit about 120k

deaths per day.

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 12:51 am

Try reading any of the dozens of articles discussing the ineffectiveness of lockdowns and masks. Frequent washing of hands with soap and water, on the other hand, would be a reasonable mitigative measure.

Frederick Michael
Reply to  BCBill
December 11, 2020 1:44 pm

I read plenty of them. The COVID-19 cases were on a remarkably pure exponential growth curve, then it bent downward.

Just a huge coincidence, right?

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 3:06 pm

That’s what every pandemic has done without intervention. It’s the natural course.

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 8:24 pm

yes, very very likely a coincidence considering that lockdowns and masks have done NOTHING to stop the increase in covid deaths for last 6-8 weeks. Lockdowns and masks (non-n95 masks) don’t work and cause havoc on society, children, education, small business, suicide, depression, child/spousal abuse, non-covid medical care (cancer treatments, heart screenings, diabetes…). It’s un unconscionable what we’ve done to ourselves.

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 11:10 pm

A beautiful demonstration of how effective lockdowns were, except that when you take the ~10 day exposure to infectability period, the cases started to descend before lockdowns were actually implemented, not after.

However, a more important discussion point, is how incredibly damaging lockdowns were for every life ‘saved’. Our great grandchildren will be paying for this insanity.

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 3:01 am

Good news! Since March, nobody in the USA dies from old age anymore – everybody dies of Covid-19!

I suggest that USA Covid-19 death stats are hugely overstated. Take Alberta’s ~500 Covid-19 deaths in our 4 million population and scale up to the total USA population – then only about 30,000 USA deaths can be attributed to Covid-19 – far less than the 250,000+ Covid-deaths quoted in bogus USA stats.

But then, USA deaths attributed to Covid-19 include motorcycle crashes, heart attacks, cancers, drive-by-shootings, parachuting “bounces”, etc.

If the body is Covid-positive, even if they have no symptoms of respiratory distress and they died of obvious other causes, they are coded as Covid-19 deaths in the USA. USA Covd-19 stats are worthless.

In fact Covid-19 is a relatively mild flu that is really only dangerous to the elderly and infirm. The full Gulag lockdown for Covid-19 was one of the greatest and most costly scams in history.

Here in Alberta, only ~13 people under the age of 65 have died from Covid-19 – Be very afraid! – Lock down everything, destroy the economy, the young and the poor, all for 13 deaths in a population of 4 million. Attaboys all around!

December 11, 2020 3:59 am

Covid is a hoax pure and simple. The democrats perpetrated a bogus Wuhan flu on the good people of the United States. The ONLY way the democrats could “possibly” win an election is to take control of the American people by shutting down their jobs and our schools. Covid is a hoax. We, as a country, should be roaring mad. Our children will lose one whole year of school due to a hoax. Americans need to get on their feet and stop this madness!

The democrats are very bad people. President Donald Trump is America’s only hope.

Reply to  Diane
December 11, 2020 9:02 am

Trump has blood 🩸 on his hands. He is personally responsible for almost 300,000 American deaths. If Biden were in charge at beginning of year, there would be NO deaths. At least that’s what the Democrats tell us.


William Astley
Reply to  RelPerm
December 11, 2020 1:48 pm

Trump is did not cause the covid crisis. Trump is the reason why there are two 95% effective vaccinations for covid. Before Trump’s warp speed covid program, the most effective vaccine ever made was less than 70%. Some were less than 50% effective.

I heard that the covid crisis is going to be solved before Jan. 20. A bunch of stuff is going to happen between now and Jan. 20.

A group of doctors have found (based review peer review studies that are stuck in the corrupt system) that Ivermectin, a drug that two researchers won a Nobel prize for the development of, if it is given early as soon as covid symptoms appear, obliterates covid.

Ivermectin is a super good antiviral that has been out for decades. That is the reason why the two researchers who ‘discovered’ Ivermectin won a Nobel Prize.

It is also almost a perfect prophylactic to protect against Covid. And of course it cheap.

Odd that the FDA does not seem to know or care about cheap and effective existing drugs that can be used to treat covid.

Something really should be done to fix that problem.

0% covid cases among 400 Ivermectin treats hospital workers in high risk region. 43% of the placebo getting hospital worker got covid.

Ivermectin “obliterates” transmission of Covid, but it’s too cheap to be used

This is a You tube video of a recent presentation of the Ivermectin covid results that has made at a congressional hearing.

Reply to  RelPerm
December 11, 2020 2:53 pm

William Astley, you missed the ‘sarc’ tag ….

Reply to  RelPerm
December 11, 2020 5:03 pm

he may have missed the sarc tag, but the (Astley) post was worth reading, thanks Bill.

Reply to  RelPerm
December 11, 2020 5:38 pm

Trump can’t get anything done without THE RUSSIANS.
If Biden had been president in 2020, not only would there be no flu deaths (until after the election) but people in nursing homes would be having walker and wheelchair races, rather than dying from COVID. Biden would have had a COVID vaccine before the name COVID was invented. And he would have accomplished all this from the White House basement. This is a serious comment, not sarcasm.

Reply to  RelPerm
December 13, 2020 2:02 pm

William Astley – a most helpful post – thank you.
Best personal regards, Allan MacRae

Reply to  RelPerm
December 14, 2020 2:01 pm

Watch what happens with Ivermectin. If Biden gets in, absolutely nothing will happen, and we can almost guarantee that before January 20, the FDA will simply ignore Ivermectin. I hope I’m wrong.

If Trump manages to get in he might put his foot down and clean house and get rid of the corrupt officials at the CDC and FDA, and get the country Ivermectin.

Supposedly we’re in an emergency, supposedly people are dying, and supposedly we need all the help we can get. I don’t doubt that Covid is real and dangerous; I do doubt that the FDA cares at all about a non-vaccine solution that might even make a vaccine superfluous. A lot of profits at stake, and we don’t want to spoil that party by getting a cheap, safe, and readily available drug to the people, do we?

December 11, 2020 5:03 am

“In fact Covid-19 is a relatively mild flu that is really only dangerous to the elderly and infirm. ”

And those who have the misfortune of ending up at the wrong hospital. At the beginning of this thing, virtually every hospital was the wrong hospital.

Reply to  icisil
December 11, 2020 6:29 am

Wrong hospitals are those that practice ritual intubation.

December 11, 2020 5:44 am

One of the flakes on twitter said “This disease is so scary 25% of the people get it and don’t even know it”

Fred Streeter
Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 5:25 am

Free at the point of delivery.

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 6:11 am

Yes, and snow is a thing of the past, as predicted 15 years ago. Oh, wait…

Reply to  mac
December 11, 2020 5:05 pm

is snowing now.

ak in vt
Reply to  mac
December 14, 2020 7:59 am

I have a very liberal friend who is a farmer. He believes in “global warming.” However, his reply is usually: “Great! Let’s see how we can take advantage of this and grow more food in Vermont.”

Some liberals can be infectious in a way. Though I do not agree there is man-made global warming if any warming at this time, it would be quite useful here in the cold north — except I do like snow from December through February.


AK in VT

Charles Higley
Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 6:52 am

“The vast majority of people who contract C-19 develop only mild symptoms or none at all, and hence, they may never be diagnosed while they are infectious.”

The fact that they even say this, not mention the existence of false positives, and assume, as a fantasy, that all of these people are active carriers is a huge joke. The high number of positives test results belies the high nonspecificity of the PCR test.

Typhoid Mary is famous because asymptomatic carriers are rare not common. Even Dr. Fauci has admitted that carriers are rare and a very minor and not worrisome route of transmission.

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 7:19 am

“If present trends continue…” is constructing an argument on the basis of data not observed — i.e. not evidence. To extrapolate an exponential function is bound to lead to extreme projections.

I have examined the epicurve of my home state with a Kalman filter. Our epidemic, which grew exponentially for almost a month level off by March 20, only one day after our Governor imposed very mild mandates. It then proceeded to decline until May 31. Why did the epidemic appear to limit itself? There is no data to indicate why, but perhaps people were spontaneously engaging in an amount of distancing to adequately limit the spread. Models suggesting long runs of exponential growth are possible only by assuming people are automatons, all exactly alike and do not ever alter their behavior — i.e. unrealistic.

Ian W
Reply to  Kevin kilty
December 11, 2020 12:53 pm

Why did the epidemic appear to limit itself?

Because most people are NOT susceptible to an RNA virus. If people are sufficient in zinc and vitamin D then they are unlikely to be susceptible as their level of intRAcellular zinc is high enough to block RNA viruses from using the cell’s ribosomes to replicate. So although the virus may enter their body and even get into cells via the ACE2 receptor that is as far as it will go. The infected cell may or may not die (apoptosis) but the virus will not replicate.

This means that the population is close to herd immunity – or more correctly there is a predator prey process in play. So the predator virus has infected all the prey susceptibles and can go no further, unless more susceptibles move into the area before the virus dies in the current hosts.

Fred Dombrose
Reply to  Ian W
December 16, 2020 7:28 am

Mild zinc deficiency is usually acquired and is common in older people – related to COVID19 mortality profile?

There are several cheap drugs that have been in common use for many years with a good safety profile (e.g. [hydroxy]chloroquine, ivermectin). Most recent criticism of them with respect to use in COVID19 treatment has been through flawed research, especially using in later stages of the illness and also using without zinc supplementation – that is, zinc ionophores without supplementation of the ion in patients whose zinc status was not appraised!

Here’s a great paper on Human Zinc Deficiency that covers the role of zinc in cellular immune responses:

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 9:58 am

James S.,
Are you kidding?
Why take an experimental vaccine with unknown risks when highly effective treatment exists with an inexpensive drug with a long history. Look into Ivermectin and zinc. Excellent results are found even in severe cases

Ian W
Reply to  Steve
December 11, 2020 11:58 am

Look into Ivermectin and zinc. Excellent results are found even in severe cases

Look into ANY zinc ionophore and zinc. These work prophylactically as well; ensure that people are sufficient in zinc, have a zinc ionophore in the diet or take one (many immune health supplements already do this with zinc and quercetin) . Ensure sufficiency in zinc vitamin D and selenium (they both modulate availability of intercellular zinc).

People with sufficient zinc and vitamin D are UNlikely to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection or indeed any RNA virus infection. The intRAcellular zinc blocks the RNA virus use of the ribosomes to replicate.

One of the things that was immediately obvious in this pandemic was the very LOW number of people infected by this supposedly contagious virus. London from the arrival of the virus in January to the lockdowns in March had the underground service running with 5 million passenger journeys a day all maskless and often packed close to each other. An ideal transmission mechanism for a contagious virus. But still a very small number of people were infected compared to the London population of ~9 million. If you graph all the infections /hospitalizations/deaths in UK just against a Y axis of 9 million the numbers are not frightening at all indeed most of the lines are flat along the X axis. Plotted against 60million the population of UK none of the figures for infections/hospitalizations/deaths are visible.
So what I missed in this post was the obvious fact that most people are NOT susceptible to the virus. Possibly, their INNATE immunity, zinc and vitamin D levels are sufficient so that even if virus actually enters their body the virus cannot replicate in the cells. So no symptoms and possibly not even an adaptive immunity reaction. Yet, all the models assume (as this article does) that the virus can infect everyone equally – the models’ base assumption is therefore false and their results wildly incorrect. However, like climate models, they are repeatedly quoted and pored over by gullible innumerate politicians.

paul courtney
Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 10:46 am

Mr. Michael: If you apply maths to fictions, your result will still be fictitious. Thanks for the proof.

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 6:32 pm

Sweet Jesus you actually think we would’ve had 120,000 deaths a day? That is just outrageous.

Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 11, 2020 8:13 pm

great article. lots of info and much to digest and verify.

Fredrick, 120K dead per day? Don’t be crazy. Lockdowns were implemented in majority of states @ end of march. By @ middle of April we reached the peak and it started slowing down. There may be many reasons for the slowdown but the most likely are either the virus was reaching its peak alread (by the time lockdowns were initiated) or the lockdowns themselves worked and caused the slowdown.

My opinion is that the virus had reached max by end of March and would slow down naturally WITHOUT any lockdowns. The evidence to support this is that we are more locked down than ever and everyone is wearing a diaper on their face (even alone in their cars) but covid deaths are exceeding the peak earlier in April.

Lockdowns dont work (gotta open up sometime and now you have a bunch of people who havent been exposed yet ripe to be infected and so we endlessly open/lockdown/open/lockdown, which is no way to live or run a business).

Masks dont work (most studies before covid indicated their ineffectiveness for the general public, especially with cloth or non-n95 style masks… denmark study w/ 5000 people should essentially no difference in catching covid between masked and non-masked usersl.

if lockdowns and masks worked, we would not be foing through this.

And for all those who talked about ” you just wait and see how bad covid is omce all the excess deaths are counted up for 2020″. According to this story, we’re at 90% for all deaths with only 3 weeks left until end of year, so it’s getting very unlikely we will see an increase in excess deaths for 2020.

In summary, lockdown and mask mandates are useless on the scale we’ve imposed them… and you’re smoking something if you think 120K would have died per day.

JP Guthrie
Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 12, 2020 2:05 am

There is no such thing as “free.” You will pay indirectly, and the cost will be far higher than you imagine. I wish economics were a required class in primary schools, we would all be better off, and would not be so easily deceived by the political class.

Here in Japan we also have a national healthcare plan. It is not free, each person pays around $200 per month for coverage. If you don’t pay into the plan, you are not covered. If you go to a hospital you must present your insurance card after treatment, the plan pays for 70% of medical costs of covered treatments, you pay the remaining 30% before you leave the hospital. If you have no money, you go to a hospital for indigent people.

In Japan people have high economic literacy, economics is one of the most popular subjects in university. And this is probably why Japan has not enacted any lockdowns or mandates throughout this entire crisis. Ordinary people can measure the costs, benefits, and consequences themselves. The news media here is also economically literate, it knows that sensationalism may increase readership and clicks, but in the long term it harms their advertisers, the advertisers employees, and the news media themselves.

ak in vt
Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 14, 2020 7:52 am

I hope you read this James. Please watch this 28 minute video of 30 doctors from the u.s., U.K. and Europe discussing the vaccine(s). There is NO music, NO drama, just simple talk averaging one minute a doctor. I believe Dr Andrew Kaufmann produced it.

1. None of the vaccines have gone through all proper stages (never been any animal testing)
2. Astra Zeneca vaccine is being produced in China thanks to several hundred million dollar donation by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
3. At least two of the vaccines use the experimental mRNA process which is genetically modified and have been designed in such a way as to CHANGE the GENETICS of YOUR immune system in order to react to fighting “covid” (they are not standard vaccines that give you the microbe in order that your body recognizes the vius and is always ready for a defense should larger numbers of the virus enter/multiply in your body)
4. The last fast-track vaccine wreaked havoc on the population (especially children): look up the swine flu vaccine — even the liberal media still reports on how horrible that was — to learn how much damage was caused.

Here you go:


AK in VT

ak in vt
Reply to  Frederick Michael
December 14, 2020 8:09 am

Has not anyone noticed how wrong the graph is showing the deaths and years of life lost to “covid,” flu, suicide and accidents?

The average annual number of deaths in the U.S. is approximately: 2.6 million people.

The graph shows almost 3 million deaths by flu, over 3.7 million by suicide and over 13.3 million by accidents. In other words, more than 20 million people have died in 2020 in this country which is more than 7 1/2 times the normal rate of death! I’m surprised anyone is alive.

We need a new chart. One I can display at my retail outlet without having people laugh at me and tell me my math and science are false. If 20 million people died this year and usually do every year, the county would be empty in less than 3 decades.

I am a “covid” skeptic — still not convinced there is even a new disease as it was never isolated in the proper scientific method of obtaining a pure sample of virus separated from all else — but, I need better charts to convince others.

Thank you.

AK in VT

Manuel Onate
Reply to  ak in vt
December 14, 2020 3:03 pm

Note the title of the graph. It says during their lifetime.
The rationale of most of the article is that COVID will mostly be a one-time event, while flu, accidents and suicides happen every year.

December 10, 2020 10:56 pm

I am not a heartless ba**ard.
But to enable comparisons of different medical treatments we must put a $ value on human life.
QALYs or quality adjusted life years are the accepted measure.
1 QALY = 1 healthy year of life
As a rule of thumb a QALY is equal to about one GDP per capita. (USA $53,000)
A USA hospital is very likely to carry out a treatment if it cost less than $53,000 per year of added life the treatment will provide.
Calculations will need to be done for each country.
Simple calculation as example
Using Sweden 7300 deaths for 10M population.
Australia 900 deaths for 25M population.
So Australia’s lockdown arguably saved 2.5×7300-900=17300 lives.
But QALYs saved might only be 17300 x 10 years x .5 (person already sick) =86500 QALYS saved
So lockdown saved 86500 x A$54,000 = A$4.7billion
The cost of the lockdown is estimated at more than A$300billion.
4.7/300= 0.015
Re do the figures anyway you like but it hard to argue that lockdowns aren’t a waste of money.

Reply to  Waza
December 14, 2020 8:02 am

Interestingly, the same calculation can be applied to prioritizing vaccinations — but that will be done by political optics rather than science.

The US has already said it will give the first doses to health-care workers. But Norway studied its entire population to estimate risk by occupation, for the first and second waves of the pandemic. Doctors, nurse, and other health care workers were are elevated risk in the first wave, when PPE was scarce and the virus was not well understood. In the second wave, since July, health workers were at no higher risk than the general population. The high-risk occupations in the 2nd wave were non-healthcare workers with heavy exposure to the general public — bus/taxi drivers, bar and restaurant wait staff, hotel receptionists, and so on. (BTW, teachers were at no higher risk in either wave, even for countries which kept schools open — want to bet they’ll still get priority since NEA is one of the biggest Democratic political donors, and they can blackmail the parents until they are allotted vaccine?)

The dominant risk factor is age. Over-65s are at 50x to 100x the risk of under-40s, depending on which study you look at. If you want to save the most lives, the elderly would be vaccinated first. Correcting for QALYs would skew the priority a little younger, but not much. The increased risk of death per decade of age overwhelms everything else, from hundredths of a percent under 30 to double-digits percent over 75.

I’ll bet if you asked doctors and nurses today, most would say vaccinate the most-at-risk first. Putting health workers at the head of the line makes great newspaper copy and honors their efforts in the first wave, but it isn’t based on “science”.

Patrick MJD
December 10, 2020 11:22 pm

We have ads on TV here in Australia that now say “Detol” kills COVID-19. I kid you not.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
December 11, 2020 1:36 pm

I do not understand. To what does “Detol” refer?

Patrick MJD
Reply to  peyelut
December 11, 2020 2:04 pm

Its a disinfectant. Google it.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
December 16, 2020 7:11 pm


Disinfectants are generally good for killing germs on surfaces.

Bleach is good, though surface should be washed first as organic materials on the surface will consume some of the bleach.
Ammonia not as good as bleach.
Recent research shows Benzalkonium chloride and other quaternary ammonium compounds are good against SARS-CoV-2, and do not contain alcohol so are easier on your hands.

Steven Miller
December 10, 2020 11:25 pm

“Delay the mitigations by 10 days and we’d have hit about 120k.”, Frederick Michael

Yeah… the “mitigations” have been so incredibly successful. In fact there is NO EVIDENCE, based on anything even resembling the scientific method that the “mitigations” have had any effect at all

Reply to  Steven Miller
December 11, 2020 12:09 am

Yes, infections (e.g. “cases”) occur, but disease progression is not inevitable. The peak exponential deaths preceded the mitigation strategies. The scientific evidence demonstrates that masks in a controlled environment with trained personnel either have no to little effect including increasing infection rates. Their performance in the general population is worse. The observations demonstrate that lockdowns did not prevent viral spread, likely due to a mischaracterization of transmission modes and mitigation tactics. Early treatments (e.g. HCQ cocktail, Ivermectin protocol) reduce hospitalization and deaths by 80 to 90% or more.

The early number of excess deaths occurred in Planned Parent facilities and denial/stigmatization of early, inexpensive, low risk treatments by politicians, press, and experts. The excess deaths are still driven these ill-conceived Choices.

Reply to  n.n
December 11, 2020 5:10 am

A consensus is beginning to build that ivermectin is the most efficacious, and is effective at all stages of illness including prophylaxis.

Reply to  n.n
December 11, 2020 2:25 pm

Good news

Italian MDs’ court appeal overturns State ban on HCQ. HCQ now legal for early Covid-19 treatment in Italy

December 10, 2020 11:28 pm

Unwarranted optimism— the probability of winning the lotto jackpot is almost zero. Rational thinking is not to bet. But lots of people continue betting regularly. Who knows it could be me.
Unwarranted pessimism— the probability of getting C-19 is lower than other mortality that a person is exposed daily. Hide or isolate. Support lock downs. Who knows it could be me.

December 11, 2020 12:12 am

Blah blah. This article assumes the validity of the scamdemic, then the author proceeds from that datum to prove and disprove and just generally document the self-referencing utterances of “concensus science”.
I think “concensus science” is all I need to say. I’ll also admit to only reading the first two thousand words or so, before I just got bored with the repetition of “official facts”. Sometimes the gem of truth hides right at the end of articles on this site, I did not find it here.

Miko Fox
December 11, 2020 12:39 am

No mention of the problems with PCR testing? All the math hinges on it.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Miko Fox
December 11, 2020 2:06 pm

A PCR test does not prove you have the virus or the disease.

Reply to  Miko Fox
December 11, 2020 11:32 pm

the article didn’t mention a lot of relevant things, like the faulty methodology behind calling a positive PCR test a case (it isn’t without corresponding symptoms), the differences in the statistics at the start (when PCR tests were expensive & kits were rare) and at the end (when PCR tests became cheap & kits are all over the place), leading to a material difference in the meaning of a case. Also, he didn’t discuss things like the economic cost/value of the intervention measures.

However, that doesn’t detract from the good material that was included. Sometimes you have to limit discussion because of space.

December 11, 2020 12:45 am

Very nice summary, thank you. So if your summary is accurate, and I believe it is, does anybody know what the heck is really going on?

Reply to  BCBill
December 11, 2020 5:53 am


Abolition Man
Reply to  Disputin
December 11, 2020 7:53 am

There are quite a few people that seem to have a pretty good idea of what is going on.
The ChiCom-19 virus was an extremely powerful and useful tool for the corporate media elite to get rid of two of their biggest bugaboos: Donald Trump and the middle class Americans that support him! The virus was used to instill needless fear into large swathes of the public and allowed crooked politicians to ram through extensive mail-in voter changes that could be utilized as another way to rig the 2020 election!
Instilling fear was important as it left many people too scared to leave their homes, thus putting them completely out of touch with their friends and neighbors and reliant on the media for all their news and information. Information about inexpensive and effective treatments for the virus could be suppressed at the same time that the futility and damage of lockdowns and mask mandates could be prevented from reaching the public. The politicians who made these decisions will not dare to admit their mistakes, so they will have to continue pushing these incredibly destructive policies that the ChiComs pushed through the WHO and their corrupted Western leaders! In the mean time churches, small businesses and most of the American public are suffering tremendously; many will never recover the prosperity they were experiencing in late 2019 unless the Trump legal team can stop the Steal and get him the second term he won!
The ChiComs will also benefit greatly from getting a compromised Joe “Beijing” Biden into office! If the DemoKKKrats can complete the stealing of the 2020 election the CCP will breathe a big sigh of relief! With Biden compromised from his extensive criminal activities around the globe, and son Hunter on tape with underage girls in “horrifying” situations, the ChiComs feel they can control him to their gain. They’ve had quite enough of the Trump Administration pushing back against their attempts to bully their neighbors around Asia and in other places around the world. Even if Biden is removed from office due to advancing dementia or exposure of the Biden Crime Family, that still leaves Kamala Harris in office; a woman of extreme leftist politics and no morals whatsoever! Either way the ChiComs win, and the Western ruling elites think they can work with them and survive; completely delusional! I’m not sure if 1984 or the movie ‘The Matrix’ is more apropos, but neither is an outcome I, or any other thinking individual, would relish!

Reply to  Abolition Man
December 14, 2020 2:14 pm

Right on, Abolition Man.

If Biden gets in, we won’t have a country anymore. We’ll be slowly ushered towards The Great Reset for “the good of all.” We’ll have to participate: our country will be broke and we’ll all be scared, not to mention we only have, what, ten years to make outrageous (but united) sacrifices to save the planet from burning to a crisp? Kamala will be sure to do what she’s told– after all, look what a prize she’ll have!

Those at the top will do whatever they want to, of course; the rules will only apply to the masses.

People lack imagination to see how this has been in the works for many decades. They absolutely wanted to make sure Trump didn’t get in, and the media played their part in painting him as orange man idiot liar racist. Half of America swallowed that lie. Now that same half is saying that there’s nothing to see, the election was perfect, beautiful.

Walter Horstingg
Reply to  BCBill
December 11, 2020 7:01 am

Big Government Control and Big Pharma Profits

Russ R.
Reply to  BCBill
December 11, 2020 7:43 pm

Every statistic can be tortured until it says what you want it to. One statistic that is harder to contort than most is actual deaths. Death is a binary event, and an official death certificate is issued. So it is harder to hide what officials want to hide, and exaggerate what they want to exaggerate. Now what caused it always a problem to determine. But we can compare deaths to “excess deaths” produced by a panDEMic. And if you consider that many people died with the Wuhan Rest Home Strangler, but only as a contributing factor.
Look here, and check the button for Excess deaths with and without COVID-19, then update. It is interesting to also see various states (NY, NJ, MA) that contributed heavily to excess deaths.

Reply to  Russ R.
December 16, 2020 7:18 pm

Beware that death certificates are not necessarily accurate nor match hospital media releases.

Doctors can be sloppy, and face quandary – was death caused by:
– COVID-19 infection
– pneumonia that took advantage of degraded lungs, as SARS-CoV-2 and INFLUENZA create
– heart due extra stress
– combination (heart supplies blood to lungs, if both weak your risk is very high I believe)

December 11, 2020 1:19 am

Taiwan was one of the first countries outside China to record CV-19 cases. They implemented their pandemic response. After 11 months 725 recorded cases and 7 deaths, it was done and dusted in a couple of weeks.

Australia was one of the first countries outside Asia to close borders. That proved effective and largely eradicated the virus. It escaped from hotel quarantine in Victoria through a series of events that make Fawlty Towers appear a serious drama – for example security guards sharing the one mask they had been issued. The second wave in Victoria was spiralling out of control when the recorded case rate got to 750/day in a population of 5M; basically all of Melbourne. The hospitals were already in chaos with one losing about 30% of their Covid staff to self-isolating at one point. My son was a physician in the Covid ward at the beginning of the wave when they had 3 cases. Within 3 weeks they had three dedicated Covid wards with typically 100 cases of Covid or suspected Covid; high turnover because a negative test meant the suspected case could be moved into more open wards. It was demanding work because anyone presenting at the hospital had to be treated as having Covid. The hospital were never designed for serious infection control across a number of wards.

The Victorian government instituted a severe lockdown that included a 23 hour curfew and 5km radius in the 1 hour permitted to venture off premises that was strictly policed. It is a blur now but went for about 3 months under those conditions then slowly eased. The rest of Australia was operating largely without restriction except limits on interstate travel.

Australia’s current account has improved through 2020, there have been fewer suicides, fewer deaths in general, there has been a substantial reduction in business failures but they may have been deferred through generous government handouts. There is some indication of food price inflation but that is being tempered by China placing import taxes on Australia’s produce; nominally for blaming them for releasing the virus but more likely due to the growing trade imbalance. Iron ore prices have continued to climb and are up near record levels at AUD184/t on volume of 800Mtpa – crucial industry for Australia to protect. Electricity prices are down. Fuel prices are down. Natural gas prices are down.

The vast armies of SKI tourists who would normally be on cruises or touring Europe are forced to spend the kids inheritance in Australia. That is good for the local economy.

Australia’s action was mostly swift and effective. Victoria provided amusing relief with Do Pi Dan maintaining his teflon coating with even more slime as he reported in daily press conferences for 120 consecutive days. He changed to casual attire on the weekends.

The experience in Victoria highlighted some issues with immigration policy and poor work practices that weaken the culture but generally it was handled by most in good humour and more than 80% of the population firmly believe it was worth the effort; my son at the top of that list. Do Pi Dan stands a reasonable chance of re-election in a year or so; clearly incompetent but he he showed up and that counts with a lot of people in Victoria.

Reply to  RickWill
December 11, 2020 5:15 am

Peru had the harshest lockdown in the world and the highest mortality rate in the world, I believe. Your turn…

Reply to  RickWill
December 11, 2020 6:26 am

The Victorian government instituted a severe lockdown that included a 23 hour curfew and 5km radius in the 1 hour permitted to venture off premises that was strictly policed. It is a blur now but went for about 3 months under those conditions then slowly eased.

If a 23 hour lockdown that was strictly policed had to go on for 3 months for a disease that has at most a 10 day infection period, something is wrong. After the first 10 days there should be a tremendous reduction in active cases assuming people just stayed apart. Plus if someone is sick in a household I would assume the other members kept their distance.

Reply to  rbabcock
December 11, 2020 1:07 pm

Your assumption of distance is an impossibility in some households. There are some government housing facilities that can have up to 4 generations totalling a dozen people living in facilities designed for a couple with two children. These are low socio-economic areas housing recent immigrants, often from sub-saharan countries who have difficulty with the English language and are distrustful of government motives. Some of these multi-storing housing facilities had guards on every level and police outside to prevent people from exiting unless they had a permit to work as an essential worker. Food and other supplies being delivered at no cost; and incompetent government packing pork with the supplies! They were like that for a month until they were each Covid free. That was at the start of the second wave as they were the locations that caused the initial burst in cases.

It can take 10 days before the infection even presents with symptoms in some people and they can be contagious within two days of contracting it. Some people have taken months to become Covid free after contracting it. There was also a driven desire to eradicate the virus and not have a third wave. Victorians could see what was achieved in all the other States and wanted to be there so willing to give up a lot in a relatively short term.

Also keep in mind that not everyone could ZOOM to work. The essential services and supplies never missed a beat; mail deliveries slowed and meat processing was down but there were no shortages at any time during the second wave. In the one hour of limited freedom per day that I only used once a week to shop, the local streets were bare.

I am on my third tank of fuel for 2020. About 20% of the last tank full was used by the mechanic during a forced particulate burn on the diesel engine particle filter – that was a common problem with diesel cars and light trucks that were confined to small journeys.

Reply to  RickWill
December 11, 2020 10:35 am

Australia also is warmer and went into summer. If Australia had a climate like the northern hemisphere numbers may have been different

Reply to  nc
December 11, 2020 1:28 pm

The second wave was essentially done by August, the coldest month. The lockdowns were extremely effective. Selected suburban lockdowns combined with masks did not get the infection rate below 1 so much more severe constraints were applied.

A feature of the hard curfew between 9pm and 5am was that policing it was very easy. The streets were dead. Robberies dropped to nothing. Usual crime in general was very low. Unlicensed brothels were easily observed and closed down. Gatherings for parties were easily spotted and shut down with hefty fines in the tens of thousands of dollars being levied. The daily update on the issuing of fines was often a comedy show that demonstrated Victoria has its fair share of dills. I figure there were a few mistresses who felt unloved. People would be caught more than 20km from their home with a work permit and they said they wanted a donut or chicken pieces from a particular shop – stupid excuses. It was tough for people living alone and those in unfriendly relationships. One of the first easing was to alone people living alone to visit another nominated household.

Having let the genie out, Do Pi Dan was singled minded in getting it back in. The police had extraordinary powers to detain and levy fines. The only thing different to Wuhan was the only padlocks were on cells. A few ended up in them; some on the thinnest of reasons.

Peter Sable
Reply to  RickWill
December 12, 2020 10:11 pm

Australia’s action was mostly swift and effective.

Effective at what? Creating a population completely vulnerable to another imperfect border where one carrier slips through and infects a population with zero immunity causing yet another panic? That kind of fragility is terrible.

Herd immunity works, and it doesn’t take 70% of the population. Sweden has shown it takes 20%-25%.

Isolate the vulnerable. Let everyone else get the disease so that they don’t spend an entire bloody year in fear, raising the suicides and drug addictions among the youth from 20%-50%.

Joe - the non epidemiologist
Reply to  RickWill
December 14, 2020 5:59 am

Icisil ‘ comment – “Peru had the harshest lockdown in the world and the highest mortality rate in the world, I believe. Your turn…”

Likewise – during the months Sept through November, the states of Colorado & MN had very high compliance with closings, masking etc to slow the spread while the states of NE, ND, SD, Wisconsin, MT, ID had restrictions that were much looser and far less compliance, yet all the states mention had very similar infection rates.

Meanwhile in Texas, where compliance is abysmal, the infection rate was running 30-40% less than Colorado.

Mother nature has its finger on the control knob, not man.

December 11, 2020 1:32 am

what is that old saying ‘figures lie and liars figure’ I don’t think that many people died from wuhan, they might have died with wuhan but not from it

if you could take out the nursing home/extended care deaths from the total I really think the senior deaths would not be much higher that other rates.

if the powers that be really wanted to migrate the deaths from wuhan they would make HCQ widely available and let the people decide

Reply to  ronk
December 11, 2020 8:49 am

It was all Trumps fault ! After all everything else is.
If it was not for the democro virus Biden would be in jail along with the. “most intelligent person I know HUNTER “

December 11, 2020 1:46 am


Excellent article. No mention of the way the virus spreads, which from all I can read is, four things done in crowded poorly ventilated spaces: Coughing, sneezing, shouting, and singing.

Shall we encourage people who are coughing and sneezing and feverish to stay HOME? Shall we encourage people in crowded public poorly ventilated spaces to remain QUIET?

Wow, I am an engineer with experience in the gas mask business, where ventilation is very important. Less viral load, less transmission. No one appears to be communicating this to the public.

Outdoor transmission is virtually non-existent, so the stadiums being empty is just spoiling the fun, not saving lives….

Michael in Dublin
December 11, 2020 1:53 am

very limited ability to mutate???

I would like the writer to respond to how this fits in with the paper by Prof R Didier
“Dramatic increase in the SARS-CoV-2 mutation rate and low mortality rate during the
4 second epidemic in summer in Marseille”

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
December 11, 2020 4:54 am

seems to have crossed the human-mink boundary a couple of times leading to new mutation in humans

Since June 2020, 214 human cases of COVID-19 have been identified in Denmark with SARS-CoV-2 variants associated with farmed minks, including 12 cases with a unique variant, reported on 5 November. All 12 cases were identified in September 2020 in North Jutland, Denmark. The cases ranged in age from 7 to 79 years, and eight had a link to the mink farming industry and four cases were from the local community.

Danish authorities have announced the following planned or ongoing public health actions:

Culling of all farmed mink (more than 17 million) in Denmark, including its breeding stock;
Enhancing surveillance of the local population to detect all COVID-19 cases, including through population-wide mass PCR testing for the region of North Jutland;

Reply to  ghalfrunt
December 11, 2020 5:25 am

so humans gave it TO th poor mink
and then they gave it back with some adaptation?
killing all the poor minks doesnt seem smart
and if they did feel the need then using the skins would have been sensible

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
December 11, 2020 9:07 pm

Actually, the virus mutates all the time. What’s different from influenza in this case is that the part of virus that has the spike protein is quite stable. That part doesn’t mutate. When you talk about the various strains they are talking about changes in the RNA string in areas that have little impact on the virus.

December 11, 2020 1:55 am

Virtually every nation in the northern hemisphere has imposed masks and social distancing restrictions for the past several months. Despite putting these measures in place, they are all experiencing a second wave. A seasonal wave.

This is all the evidence needed to prove that masks and social distancing are ineffective against the spread of coronavirus infections.

End the mask.

Reply to  Klem
December 11, 2020 5:04 am

Notice how lockdown affects numbers in France Italy UK . Notice how well Sweden without lockdown is getting on (people are advised to isolate not ordered).

Yes a 2nd wave happened but then the rapid rise in cases was slowed by lockdown.
Without lockdown you have antimaskers, party goers, nail boutiques etc all spreading the virus

Bob Vislocky
December 11, 2020 2:04 am

Years of life lost is a unique way of assessing the lethality of Covid-19. However the main chart at the top of the post is grossly inaccurate.

To get the years lost the author uses 500,000 covid deaths, which will be roughly a year’s worth since the date of the first confirmed death the way things are going here in the US. In that same roughly one year’s time the author estimates that 2.9 million, 3.7 million an 13.4 million will die from influenza, suicide and accidents respectively. In actuality those annual death rates are only ~ 50,000 40,000 and 160,000 respectively in the US which is 60-100 times less than the author estimated.

So the bars need to be drastically shortened so that they are only 1/60th to 1/90th of the length displayed. This would mean that covid is just as deadly as the other listed causes of death even based on years of life lost.

Roy Martin
Reply to  Bob Vislocky
December 11, 2020 6:26 am

It looks like the number of flu, suicide and accident deaths are over the remaining lifetime of the individuals, not just annually.

That would only make sense if he graph assumes that COVID deaths will last just one year, and there will be no additional deaths in following years (herd immunity, resistance, vaccine).

My interpretation could be wrong, but the graph could definitely use clarification.

Reply to  Bob Vislocky
December 11, 2020 11:59 am

There is nothing ‘unique’ about using QUALY’s to determine the impact of public health measures: it is standard. So if a person dies in an accident at age 20, with a life expectancy of 79, there are 59 years of life lost. If a 70 year of heart disease, he has lost 9 years. If vaccination saves 1 10 Y/O child in 1000 from dying of measles, you have gained 69 QYALYs for your population.

Here the median age of death from covid is 85. For someone who reaches the age of 65, the life expectancy is 85. (Note that the life expectancy of a newborn is 82 because he still has to get through all the things that might kill him before 65.) On these data, the QUALYs lost by covid here are minimal to non existant.

Peta of Newark
December 11, 2020 2:04 am

To my mind the whole lockdown idea is simply, purely and completely childish.

What sort of mind imagines that by hiding away inside your house, home, flat or wherever for a few days will make The Virus go away?
Like a poor game of Hide & Seek, where if you hide long enough, the seeker will get bored and give or go away.

It is soooo childish

Am reminded of the London Bombings of 2005.
I’d arranged to go London for the weekend immediately following the blasts on the Thursday. My hotel was directly over the tube station that was bombed.

But over that weekend, the spirit of the people was exhilarating. It was incredible, the electric, the atmosphere & ‘everything’
They (all) came out to enjoy the nice weather (no climate worries then) and the message they were sending was “FU bombers – come get me if you dare”

But what have we now?
Timid frightened people and they are being frightened by the very people who should NOT be frighteneing them.
i.e. Their Own Government

But no.
See the suicide figure?
I worked it out by learning to ‘rave’, to dance and visit music festivals. That apres-bombing spirit is still there and THAT is (young) people who have worked out how to ‘stay alive’
In those situations you get the friendship, the social interactions even if no words are exchanged. Body Talk if you like and it is THAT which I’d assert helps prevent suicides, not least.
(if only my kid brother had learned that at age 23 when he took his own life and 33 years ago now)

But what do we get?
If young folks have an impromptu party or ‘rave’, their neighbours all report them to the police who arrive all heavy handed and dole out £10,000 fines.
If = students are also told they will be ‘sanctioned’ by their university authority.
Fined 10K for trying to help yourself and others avoid a mental catastrophe!!!!

It Is Absolute Madness that’s going on here in Western (haha) Civilisation with Covid and ALSO Climate Change

What. Went. Wrong.

Reply to  Peta of Newark
December 11, 2020 5:10 am

Peta of Newark December 11, 2020 at 2:04 am
What sort of mind imagines that by hiding away inside your house, home, flat or wherever for a few days will make The Virus go away?
no one expects the virus to disappear because of lockdown. lockdown is meant to slow the infection rates and protect the health service. that is all.

only herd immunity will limit the virus under normal living. herd immunity reached by infection will cause unacceptable deaths. Vaccines are the exterminator.

December 11, 2020 2:17 am

Posts come and go but they rarely get deleted without a comment – have a look upthread.

WUWT probably the least censored site on the internet. Things can get posted here that would court legal action on an Australian hosted site.

December 11, 2020 2:18 am

As far as I can tell, lockdowns are like closing the barn door after the horses have left. By making sure the disease didn’t spread in the first place, countries like Taiwan have managed to avoid lockdowns and still have an enviable record of very few infections and deaths. Taiwan learned from SARS. Most other countries didn’t.

Figures don’t lie but liars figure. I don’t trust anyone’s data. There are way too many people with some kind of axe to grind.

Don’t be blase about getting the Wuflu. There is evidence of long term damage to vital organs like the heart and liver as well as other afflictions. link

Reply to  commieBob
December 11, 2020 5:34 am

If they analyzed people who caught other viral illnesses to the degree they are with covid the same “long term damage” would probably be there as well.

December 11, 2020 2:49 am




“Since it made its entry on to the world stage, COVID-19 has torn up the existing script of how to govern countries, live with others, and take part in the global economy in a dramatic way.”

Former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has assured the elites of the World Economic Forum (WEF) that a Joe Biden presidency would quickly advance the globalist “Great Reset” agenda “with greater speed and greater intensity than many might imagine.”


December 11, 2020 2:51 am

The numbers given in the article vary some from those in Houston, TX so far.

Houston, population roughly 2.2 million, has had over 102,000 COVID-19 cases with 1,475 deaths. I post a summary of City of Houston reported cases/deaths daily on my Twitter feed -@Katphiche

o The single racial/sex group most at risk is Hispanic men. They make up about 22% of the population and account for 36% of all COVID deaths.
o 17 men die for every 10 women, with women making up 52% of COVID cases. Between the ages of 30 to 79, it’s 20 men dying for every 10 women.
o The estimated average age of those dying is almost 69 years of age.
o The elderly are most at risk:
Age 70+ 6.61% of cases, 51.05% of deaths, 11.36% death rate
Age 60+ 15.36% of cases, 74.72% of deaths, 7.15% death rate
Age 50+ 28.79% of cases, 89.97% of deaths, 4.59% death rate
Under Age 50 71.21% of cases, 10.03% of deaths, 0.21% death rate

Reported % Est. Avg Deaths/
Deaths Deaths Age Cases (%) Condition
112 7.59% 65.0 0.11% No underlying health conditions
1,363 92.41% 68.9 1.33% With underlying health conditions
1,475 100.00% 1.44% Total cases 102,604

1,475 % of Death Rate Cases Thru % of
Deaths Deaths Age Range by Age Range 12/9/2020 Cases
Unknown 62 0.06%
Age 0-9 4,602 4.49%
5 0.34% Age 10-19 0.06% 8,984 8.76%
15 1.02% Age 20-29 0.07% 21,959 21.40%
36 2.44% Age 30-39 0.17% 21,234 20.70%
94 6.37% Age 40-49 0.58% 16,256 15.84%
225 15.25% Age 50-59 1.64% 13,741 13.39%
346 23.46% Age 60-69 3.85% 8,998 8.77%
354 24.00% Age 70-79 8.44% 4,195 4.09%
273 18.51% Age 80-89 15.55% 2,573 2.51% Age 80+ Cases
116 7.86% Age 90-99
11 0.75% Age 100+
1,475 100.00% 102,604 100.00%

Full City of Houston COVID case/death summary is posted on Twitter daily @Katphiche

Reply to  Katphiche
December 11, 2020 3:59 am

I had the above reply pretty well formatted before posting, after posting, it appears formatting is gone with columns all run together.

Tables can be accessed on my Twitter feed @Katphiche
I update the COVID(19 case/death summary of the City of Houston reports daily and post them on my Twitter feed.

On Twitter, tables can be seen/downloaded as jpg files
On Twitter, in Chrome (not sure about other browsers)
-click on image to enlarge
– then right click on image and use “save image as” to save on your computer

You can also
-click on image to enlarge
-then right click on images and “Open in a new tab” which gives a very large image that can be scrolled across or you can also use “save image as” from this screen

@Katphiche on Twitter

Reply to  Katphiche
December 11, 2020 6:53 am

Use the [code] [/code] html tag, that helps

December 11, 2020 3:03 am

Every dollar wasted on COVID is a dollar that now will not be spent on something else.
My simple calculation above shows the Australian government has over reacted by a factor of 68(say an even 50).
Compare cost benefit analysis for the Victorian governments east west link tunnel.
From 2013 the $15billion road project reported by the Sydney morning Herald.
“Using the most basic methodology preferred by Infrastructure Australia, the project was assessed as having a benefit-cost ratio of just 0.45 in March 2013.
In other words, it was a dog: according to the government’s own numbers, the project involved a loss-making return of just 45 cents for every $1 spent.”

But the same government is prepared to waste several hundred billion on a virus to return 1.5 cents for every $1 spent.
It’s my kids money.

Reply to  Waza
December 11, 2020 5:20 am

So I assume you do not value your children’s future. If they became infected do you just say “what will be will be” and let them recover/die/be incapacitated?
Vaccines are expensive – don’t make them. Natural herd immunity will save us?

Covid19 will be here for a very long time (for ever?) It may mutate as it did in mink and come back more virulent.

US has a disastrous growth in cases. How many will get long covid and require long term treatment. Australia life is almost back to normal. US will not be in this situation until 60% vaccinated I would like to know the total cost of inaction?

Reply to  ghalfrunt
December 11, 2020 6:46 am

The survival rate is something like 99.7% and above and children have been specifically found not to be at risk — your type of hysterical non-fact based “logic”/smear is a big part of the problem — the UN now says 200 Million are at risk of STARVATION across the planet due to the insane/stupid/non-fact based “lockdowns” — how about them? “So I assume you do not value” their “future”….

The PCR “test” — that the inventor stated was never meant to be used this way and is useless — is up to 90% FALSE POSITIVES — and you base your view on “cases”? We are being scammed by networked Psychopaths in “Health” Care — a plague of Faucis — who are politically minded and NWO Lackeys (financially tied to Gates Foundation/Rockefeller Foundation) trying to set up The Great Reset NWO Agenda in coordination with fellow traveler corrupt politicians worldwide — that will impoverish and enslave the Peons in an ongoing Medical Martial Law that will make the whole world “China” — the fact people cannot grasp what is going on (if they are not in fact in on it….) is unbelievable. Do you not have any analytical skills? Gates Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation “gamed and “planned” this entire thing — Fauci transferred $3.5 million to the WuHan Lab — and there is good evidence the CVirus was developed in the USA before that but had to be move when a Warning was issued against the dangers of what was being done — there should be a massive investigation and arrests instead we see him on Time Magazine’s Cover, where The Great Reset was pimped just a few weeks ago….People need to wake up.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  ghalfrunt
December 11, 2020 8:02 am

“So I assume you do not value your children’s future. If they became infected do you just say “what will be will be” and let them recover/die/be incapacitated?
Vaccines are expensive – don’t make them. Natural herd immunity will save us?”

They wouldn’t be saying that if the Wuhan virus was as lethal as the Sars-COV-1 virus of 2003, which was 10 percent fatal. Fortunately, Sars-COV-1 disappeared after infecting about 8,000 people.

We are going to have more unknown viruses in our future. We ought to work on a way to handle them effectively. The Wuhan virus was a good experiment and teaching lesson for us. It shows us we have a lot more to learn in dealing with pandemics.

Abolition Man
Reply to  ghalfrunt
December 11, 2020 8:11 am

Only an idiot would maintain that the ChiCom-19 virus is dangerous for children! Over a dozen studies around the world have shown that children rarely get the virus and that their fatality rate is about 0.0%! Why would you keep throwing out this straw man when you know that children are much more likely to be affected by the destruction of their parents and families due to financial ruin, increased alcoholism, drug abuse and suicide! Please stop lying to yourself and us, or donate half your wealth and income to those around you who are losing EVERYTHING!
We are not in a pandemic any longer; the virus is endemic now and is highly seasonal, so we will be dealing with it from here on out! Simple and effective treatments are available that don’t destroy the livelihoods and mental health of the public; but maybe that is the outcome you desire!

Reply to  ghalfrunt
December 11, 2020 5:25 pm


I do value my daughter’s future.

That is why, at the beginning of this whole show, I locked her in her room and have not let her out since March 9. She has her own bathroom. I leave the food on a stool by the door. Since she doesn’t need to go anywhere I have determined it is reasonable (and safest) to swap out two baskets of laundry once a month. She has cut her own hair….

I am thinking of her future.

How long do you think I should leave her locked in her room (she is 12 years old now) ?

December 11, 2020 3:06 am

The media has exaggerated the lethality of Covid-19: all we hear is 24/7 coverage. That said, it’s a serious disease and should be taken seriously.

I don’t know what to say about the Australian experience with lockdown. It seems to me that unless they hermetically seal the country, Covid will creep back in and lockdowns will recur. We might argue that lockdowns were appropriate when we first got hit with Covid, but restrictions on businesses and activities continues and many of us are fearful that Big Doctor is being used to usher in Big Brother. Perhaps a wild conspiracy theory but we have to acknowledge that that could happen if we do, in fact, continually allow Big Doctor to play Big Brother. Freedom requires vigilance.

Ivermecton has been found to stop the replication of Covid-19. This is a widely-used, safe anti-parasitic. Dr. Kory, part of the FLCCC group of about nine physicians, gave an impassioned testimony to a Senate committee on December 10, urging the adoption of this game changing drug– a “miracle drug,” as he said.

More detailed info on Ivermecton is given in this talk by Dr. Marik, which was done almost two months ago.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Don132
December 12, 2020 8:02 am

“Ivermecton” is a typo; it should be Ivermectin.

Reply to  Roger Knights
December 12, 2020 10:19 am

That’s a very kind way of telling me I misspelled it! Thanks.

December 11, 2020 3:13 am

A long article that could be much simplified like this.

By March-April 2021 ~500,000 deaths will be due to covid19 in the USA. Some additional deaths will also have occurred due to diversion of medical resources from lockdowns, although it should be noted that this would also increase once medical resources reach capacity due to treating COVID19 patients.

If the US did nothing this would be 1-2 million. (Easily shown by early infection and death rates in New York, before measures were taken). By the time vaccines are widely available (-ie sometime early next year, but with some time to take effect) it’s a trade off between hard and soft lockdowns, and total deaths and severe illness requiring hospitalisation.

An additional point is that very early on it wasn’t very clear whether the above figures could have been higher, or even that the virus could have gotten worse, so the argument for stronger lockdowns early on is a bit stronger than for later.

The question is whether as a society what trade offs one is willing to make between overall deaths and level of hospitalisations, who actually dies, and overall economic costs of measures taken against this.

An argument could he made for soft lockdowns, as in Sweden, it seems harder to argue for virtually no measures taken at all. It is certain that deaths would well exceed the figure of ~500,000 deaths in the USA by March-April, as seems now likely, if no measures were taken.

Reply to  Thingadonta
December 11, 2020 5:48 am

“If the US did nothing this would be 1-2 million. (Easily shown by early infection and death rates in New York, before measures were taken).”

If covid mortality follows natural mortality (which it does) then there’s only so much low hanging fruit available to pick off. So the 1 -2 million figure is nonsense; a ridiculous extrapolation of numbers with a large dollop of panic, nothing more. An exorbitant number of deaths in NY were due to Planned Parent (h/t n.n.) slaughter and the aggressive use of mechanical ventilation, which can and does cause the same disease it is used to treat.

December 11, 2020 3:22 am

Looks like a bio engineered virus to kill the elderly and reduce social security, medicare and medicaid rolls. Every government in the world has pension problems.

December 11, 2020 3:42 am

Deaths are WITH COVID in their system – not FROM COVID. There is a difference. You can look up the definitions. PLEASE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Add that the PCR tests run at over 35 cycles giving around 90% false positive results you will find the whole thing is insane!! If this were a submission to Hollywood it would get tossed as too stupid to be believed, even in the movies.

Reply to  sdr
December 11, 2020 4:50 am

The only way to avoid being so dumb is to really be unlucky and get COVID, as Boris Johnson learned in a hard way. I got it and my family got it too. Fortunately no one died but we were lucky. Some of my friends did die FROM COVID. It was not easy and, for days, I had strong muscular pains and lack of appetite. I had flu lots of times and it’s not even comparable. Watch your Hollywood dumb movies but, please, do not make stupid conclusions.

Reply to  JN
December 11, 2020 6:57 am

People get sick from the Flu all the time and die — I had the Bird Flu or whatever the ChiComs released in 2007 and it was terrible and went on for months — thousands died — — NO ONE CARED.

It wasn’t being used for an obvious political agenda and the Mainslime Media didn’t try to cause massive panic and hysteria as it has with this CVirus. Sucks to get sick but it happens and people do die — for some reason now we are being told that this is not “normal” — you seem to believe for some reason you should be exempt– because you got sick and didn’t like it — shut the country down and reduce many, many to poverty == what a solution — let me guess, you are retired and get a check in the mail or otherwise do not have a livelihood at issue where you face losing everything due to this lunatic response to a CVirus where 99.7% survive and over 90% of the “testing” is FALSE POSITIVES. I have found the most vocal for lockdowns and lunatic “measures” are all receiving a check in the mail or have absolutely no chance of losing their source of income.

Due to the lockdowns the UN is stating 200 Million people are at risk for STARVATION. I have known several people who had this CVirus and they were sick — like a Mild Flu. The people who die, even the CDC now states, have 2 or more co-morbidities nearly always. Comments like yours are the ones with “stupid conclusions” — the reaction to this CVirus has been obscenely stupid but it has been totally political — we now know that it is all about the NWO Great Reset to impoverish the Peons and usher in the Agenda that NWO Gates/Rockefeller Foundation and their bought off lackeys are pushing. Some are in on it and others are too stupid to understand what life will be like if they pull this off.

George Tetley
Reply to  Georgia
December 11, 2020 9:19 am

100% Georgia

Reply to  JN
December 11, 2020 7:15 am

Look up the definitions!!! You may start with the COVID Tracking Project and then proceed to the CDC. You will find that deaths are WITH COVID, not FROM COVID. Obviously some people die FROM COVID, but they are a small minority of the total deaths WITH COVID.

I am truly sorry for the death of your friends.

Reply to  sdr
December 11, 2020 11:49 am

All the friends that died (3) were from Covid. One entered with strong symptoms of COVID to the intensive care and end up dying with sepsis. COVID work also by lowering our defensive system and make us weaker for days, increasing the mobility from other diseases or physical fragilities, such has vascular complications. That conversation of WITH COVID or FROM COVID does not add up at all and it’s a complete fallacy. No one can, if they are truly honest, filter out who dies from Covid and opportunistic diseases that are triggered or who does not die directly or indirectly from Covid. At the end of this we can check the increased annual mortality rate and draw conclusions. Until there is a futile exercise.

Reply to  JN
December 11, 2020 11:51 am

mobility should be morbidity (stupid auto-type correction

Reply to  JN
December 11, 2020 9:05 am

The only stupid conclusions here have been offered by. You

Reply to  nottoobrite
December 11, 2020 11:38 am

your nickname says it all…do you even know what a conclusion is?

Reply to  sdr
December 11, 2020 6:48 am

I have to go by what they FLCCC group puts out: these people are, in my view, the most trustworthy sources on Covid-19 treatment. Dr. Kory says this disease is serious and many people are dying from it; I believe him.

Nevertheless, I also believe that government dictates to control this disease are out-of-line and dangerous.

December 11, 2020 4:30 am

Join this “… and the disease is highly transmissible, which means it could spread like wildfire and overwhelm hospitals without extraordinary measures to contain it. This would greatly increase its death toll.”
“… based on data from China found that 81% of reported Covid-19 cases are “mild” and that the true figure is even higher because there are “inherent difficulties in identifying and counting mild and asymptomatic cases.”
Seems to mean Covid should spread like wildfire before, during and after “mitigation”. Meaning it has the identical characteristics of seasonal colds and flus…which, of course, it is.

See a review of how Covid is simply just like all it’s brothers and sisters and parents by a bio-engineer:

December 11, 2020 4:34 am

The precautionary principle with covid-19 will finish what was started with the precautionary principle on global warming. The world has gone mad.

Just say no!

Michael P
December 11, 2020 4:46 am

The discussion of immunity duration could be tightened up a bit. Specifically, coronaviruses generally are believed to have proof-reading functions, including the ones that cause the common cold. (Roughly 20% of colds, according to various sources.) So the distinction between the four historically endemic coronaviruses, which we know can cause repeat infections in humans, and SARS-CoV-2, is not so obvious.

On the bright side, recent infection with this endemic coronaviruses seems to lead to even less-severe cases of COVID-19:

December 11, 2020 4:57 am

I contemplated the flu rate vs covid rate as well, and thought about the uncounted denominator problem. I’m going to put it out there that while the covid denominator is grossly undercounted, the flu denominator is grossly undercounted even worse, which would put the flu death rate as a hundredth of a percent, instead of a tenth of a percent.

I didn’t even know there was a flu test before this year. People just suffer through the flu.

I think many states are losing some of their c-19 testing as the population won’t get tested and suffer interogation and locking up in case they test positive. I know michigan is.


December 11, 2020 5:22 am

I didn’t read the entire article yet. But I already found some facts that must be mentioned. (To avoid running foul of the spam filters, I am leaving off links.)

First, according to an article in the New York Times titled “Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.” the tests are 100 to 1000 times too sensitive. What this means is the actual number of people WITH the disease is much much less than official numbers. The result of that is, of course, deaths by COVID are massively overinflated.

Second, at one time, the CDC said you could count a person as a COVID-19 death even without laboratory confirmation. It has been confirmed that hospitals make more money for each COVID-19 death. So, hospitals can make more money by simply saying someone died of COVID and there is no check to see if that is true or not. The result of that is, of course, deaths by COVID are massively overinflated. While it is true that these people died, I am quite certain that over 80% of them did not die because of COVID-19. However, I have no idea how many of these people really had COVID-19. And I mean honestly had it, not oversensitive test had it. I have an anecdotal story from my local hospital of someone who died at my local hospital of a heart attack that the doctors counted as a COVID-19 death, and the family was very angry about that.

There would have been fewer deaths if 4 idiot governors didn’t put sick people in nursing homes to make more money. And if Emerson Hospital in New York didn’t purposefully use bad treatment that was killing people just to make more money. (youtube dot com/watch?v=UIDsKdeFOmQ )

Reply to  Wade
December 11, 2020 9:15 am

Elmhurst. Reformatted your video link to display here. Everyone should see it to better understand some of the factors at play in NYC that led to the high mortality there.

December 11, 2020 5:39 am

When I read that from the CDC…to brain it just feels like a repackaged version of the precautionary rule. Which feels like manipulation to me.

“In the words of the CDC, “the allocation of health resources must consider not only the number of deaths by cause but also by age.” Hence, the “years of potential life lost” has “become a mainstay in the evaluation of the impact of injuries on public health.”

December 11, 2020 5:55 am

It hasn’t.

December 11, 2020 6:10 am

Shame for publishing such blatant lies. Featured chart claims 2.9 million death per year in US from flu, 3.7 million for suicide, 13.3 million from accidents! Real numbers from flu, 59 thousand, suicide 48, 000, accidents 167,000. The fake numbers are 80 times higher than the real rates. Covid -19 has in reality caused an 18% increase in the OVERALL death rate, something that did not even happen in the 1918 flu. And the gullible people on this website accept these absurd lies without comment!

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 11, 2020 6:54 am

You need to work on data interpretation. The chart is correct. Your interpretation of that chart is wrong. Those are not “per annum” numbers in the chart.
I can’t help you with that basic inability to read. Only you can help yourself.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 11, 2020 7:33 am

Read the text above the chart.
The bar chart is an extrapolation over the lifetime of everyone alive in 2020.
About 81 years for flu, not annual deaths

Richard M
Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 11, 2020 9:11 am

Eric, you are reading the chart wrong. It is not deaths. Look at it again. From the article itself:

– an average of 37,000 people per year died from the flu over the past nine years.
– around 170,000 people die from accidents every year.

Seems to agree with your numbers. Maybe WUWT readers are taking their time reading what the article actually is saying. You should try to do the same.

paul courtney
Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 11, 2020 11:38 am

Mr. Lerner: Well, I’m a gullible person on this website, and when I accept lies, I always comment!
My favorite is to misread a chart, conclude that the author a liar, and rush in a comment so all may know I’m an idiot. Shame, indeed.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 11, 2020 11:47 am

It is a blatant lie to compare the lives lost over the next 80 years with lives lost per year by Covid-19. You have simply added a factor of 80 to one side. The correct comparison is annual rates–that is what the Covid number is. To multiply the other numbers arbitrarily by 80 is a lie. Why 80? Go whole hog and multiply the figure you want to exaggerate by 1000 for deaths over the next millennium. If you leave off the lying multiplication factors, Covid is already ten times a worse threat than suicide, 3 times worse than all accidents. It is 20 times worse than the Sept11 attacks that were used to justify two invasions.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 11, 2020 5:46 pm

So, Eric, your concern is only reasonable if are assuming that we will continue to have 500,000 deaths per year, from the covid, throughout the life span of the folks that are alive in 2020.

Are you assuming that we will continue to have 500,000 deaths per year into the far away foreseeable future? Or do you think this thing will wrap itself up (either through natural process, or vaccine intervention, or a a combination of both) within the next year?

Reply to  DonM
December 12, 2020 6:06 pm

In the long run, we are all dead. Life has 100% mortality rate. But to everyone–even the characters on this website–it matter WHEN you die. COVID_-0.5 million deaths, 6.8 million years of life lost. That means 14 years of life lost for every COVID death. Does it matter to you if something takes 14 years of life away? I am sure it does, no matter what you will say for arguments sake.

If we use the same lying argument about other epidemics, maybe you will see the point. The Black Death was not really that much of an event, since only 1/3 of Europe died in it. But, other causes of death, over the populations’ life expectancy of 35 years, led to 100% mortality, so three times as much. Not a big deal at all, clearly.

Or take World War 2. 60 million deaths out of a population of 2.5 billion. Other causes of death took 40 times as many lives, over the lifetimes of throe alive in 1940. No big deal.

Instead of this lying comparison, look at comparable one-year or less events–COVID deaths are 100 times as much as the Sept 11 attacks; four times the annual US combat death in WWII–equal to US combat death for the entire war, about equal to the 1918 flu, 150 times the worst year of the polio epidemic.

In 2020, OVERALL death are on track to be 20% higher than in 2019. In no other year in the past 120 years, even including 1918 , did the death rate jump by anywhere near that amount.

AND all these death were totally due to idiots and criminals who refused to take the basic steps, like wearing masks, that countries like Japan and S. Korea implemented-as well as the policies that have gutted the capacity of the US health systme to deal with predictable epidemics.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 13, 2020 2:13 pm

Again with mask crap….

As an engineer/scientist in the medical and pharmaceutical field I find the mask, (face diapers) ridiculous. You cannot wear the same mask indefinitely. General protocol is a max of 4 hours. Are you following this protocol? Once you over burden the material with moisture and heat it only serves to transport everything on the inside of the mask to the outside world and vice-versa. Thereafter every breath, every pressure pulse of speech launches all that material into a finer aerosol than it would have without the mask. This latter part happens from the moment you don a mask and only get worse with time.

Air is considered a fluid when calculating it’s movement through space and thus it follows Newtonain Physics. Would you expect the mask to
be effective if you were swimming a liquid? You must realize you are swimming in an ocean of air.
Furthermore, on the question of moisture and heat; this adds mass to the warp and weave of the “fabric”. This causes the fibers to expand and
reduces the efficacy, if any, of the material trap or retain any viable particles. To add insult to injury
since the mask is not check valve once the mask is compromised it fails in a bidirectional fashion. That’s a vector-based failure.

Here is good discussion on the mask vs respirator question.

Beyond any of the above is your brain and inability to actually think rationally so far gone and broke that you have forgotten that virus escaped from a biological lab. A building that is designed to both keep microorganisms in and keep them out. Layers upon layers of highly monitored filtration. And you expect a single piece of “cloth” to protect you. The mask is not check valve. It efficacy drops quickly. The same 3-5 square inches is that is being used and abused.

December 11, 2020 6:13 am

If only there was a isolation
Pdf >40 FOI replies from 34 institutions in Canada, US, UK, England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Australia, NZ, Denmark: → no record describing isolation of “SARS-COV-2” from unadulterated sample anywhere ever

Joel O’Bryan
December 11, 2020 6:36 am

The analysis basically ignores the fact that children are at such a low risk of morbidity and mortality, that is, their schools and thus their learning should not have been shutdown. Online learning for a K-5th grade is an utter disaster.
The impacts to their learning curve will be substantial for an entire generation for decades to come. This will be the longest term and most significant impact of the COVID lockdown stupidity.

Author wrote, “This means that too much social distancing may cause more deaths because young, healthy people—who would otherwise catch the disease, recover quickly, and become firewalls—remain as potential carriers.”

I’ve been saying exactly that since April when it became apparent who in the at population are the at risk groups. The cold, hard reality is that an 80+ yr old dying has far less implications for a society than a 23 yr old healthy adult. And that young person then becomes a barrier to further transmission.
This is the least appreciated and most important fact of why general population lockdowns sustained for many months is an utter disaster from an immunological perspective for a virus with such low mortality for healthy people.

IMO, When the history is finally written, which will be AFTER a generation has passed so that there can be an honest assessment of what the decisions were and what their full costs were, historians will NOT be kind to people like Dr Fauci and the lockdown madness.

And don’t even get me started on mask mandates in/for the general public that includes small children. In the general public, they are little more than “Talisman” pseudoscience.

December 11, 2020 6:46 am

I’m the facility director of a hospital in Canada. The ‘overwhelming the healthcare system’ comment is not a trope, it is true.

That said, targeted restrictions need to happen to lessen unnecessary suffering to all.

You should have dived into that.

Reply to  Joe
December 11, 2020 7:00 am

Intensive Care etc. are meant to run at nearly 100% and by law should be able to be at 125% — this is being used now as “overwhelming” the healthcare system — there is so much lying going on it is unbelievable — there is a political agenda behind all of this and it is the NWO Great Reset and the “leaders” of your country are all for it.

Reply to  Georgia
December 11, 2020 7:40 am

And what happens when they get more patients and they’re already at 100%? They get overwhelmed….

Reply to  Joe
December 11, 2020 8:33 am

Has happened before. Influenza caused the Italian health system to collapse in 2017 or 2018 (I believe that’s the right year). The answer is to build better capacity.

Reply to  Joe
December 11, 2020 11:29 am

We’ve had “hallway healthcare” in Ontario for many years. The CV-19 surge is just one of many. The blame rests squarely on the top-down approach to healthcare management. Some examples:

“Surgeries postponed due to severe flu cases overwhelming Toronto ICU” – in 2018:

“Hospitals overwhelmed by surge of flu cases” – in 2011:

Reply to  PaulH
December 12, 2020 6:29 am

On the other hand, we have this:

“Calgary’s COVID-19 field hospital hasn’t seen a single patient with the illness” – Oct. 25, 2020:

Paul C
Reply to  Joe
December 11, 2020 7:05 pm

In the UK, the NHS has most hospitals at a lower occupancy rate than at the same time last year – which was not a bad flu season. However, there were just a few that said they were higher. When you looked at the actual number of beds occupied, however, they had less beds occupied. Restoring the number of beds to the same as last year would get the occupancy rate down – reopen the mothballed ward. A certain amount of flexibility is built into the capacity, and contingencies exist – such as using recovery rooms as intensive care, which means no operations. In a hospital 100% is not full. It is a request for more funds. The virtually unused Nightingale overflow hospitals should have been used for isolation of covid patients so that the NHS didn’t infect so many patients that didn’t have COVID-19 when they were admitted.

Tom Abbott
December 11, 2020 6:47 am

From the article: “At a March 30 White House press conference, Dr. Deborah Birx, a world-renowned immunologist, presented a slide of projections for C-19 fatalities based on “five or six international and domestic modelers from Harvard, from Columbia, from Northeastern, from Imperial who helped us tremendously.” The model projected that 100,000 to 240,000 deaths would occur if Americans followed social distancing and hygiene guidelines. Birx added that “we really believe and hope every day that we can do a lot better than that because that’s not assuming 100% of every American does everything that they’re supposed to be doing, but I think that’s possible.”

The high-end of that range has already come to pass”

Well, this is a distortion of reality. I don’t know if it is deliberate disinformation, or just ignorance of the facts. The above statement implies that the Wuhan virus computer model Dr. Birx presented was inaccurate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Wuhan virus model Dr. Birx presented was right on the money. The model covered the period up to the beginning of August 2020, which this writer either left out on purpose, or is unaware of, and on that date, the death rate was slightly lower than her high figure by a few thousand.

Anyone who says Birx got this wrong doesn’t know what they are talking about.

Her figures were a mitigated death rate of from 100,000 to 240,000 from the Wuhan virus through early August of 2020. The actual death rate came under the 240,000 figure. The 100,000 figure was based on Americans abiding by the social distancing rules 100 percent of the time, and the higher figure was for less than 100 percent compllance (based on 50 percent compliance, I believe).

Dr. Birx’ (and Trump’s) initial mitigated Wuhan virus death estimate was correct.

We should all insist on the facts, and when we see facts being abused, we should all speak out. We need the truth in order to function properly as a society.

Carl Friis-Hansen
December 11, 2020 6:59 am

Was it yesterday or the day before yesterday, Michael Schnedlitz prodruce live in the German parliament a COVID-19 test on a cola drink. – After five minutes the test was completed and showed that the cola was infected with Corona!

Although he speaks German and many of you may not understand all he says, it is really so funny that I don’t want you to miss it.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
December 11, 2020 7:38 am

Naomi Seibt has put up the same video on Twitter with subtitles for the most interesting moments:

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
December 11, 2020 8:25 am

Seems to be in Austria, not Germany

Reply to  Krishna Gans
December 11, 2020 5:51 pm

half a dozen of one … 5 of the other

Kevin kilty
December 11, 2020 7:08 am

For nearly five centuries plague was the scourge of Europe. Malaria and cholera and a host of other diseases were also, but not for quite so long. Theories about these diseases were many but included alignment of planets and stars, wrath of God, daemons and witches, contagion, spontaneous generation, chemical imbalance of the air, and so forth. Even modest movement away from the more ridiculous postulated causes on the basis of observations could not prevent these same causes from being considered again and again.

This I believe is a very solid article filled with facts and good sense, but almost no one will read it, and a number who do will revert almost immediately to their preconceived notions about COVID-19, which were put firmly in place by listening to the opinions of the media or friends. For example, a close family member lectures us about COVID-19 based on what she is told by her friends who are medical technicians trained only in very narrow specialties like, say, radiology or sonography — need I say more?

A pediatrician in Boulder, which has had strict lockdowns and mandates for half-a-year, has told a friend of mine that he is now diagnosing an alarming increase in children with Type II diabetes. Will we ever determine the collateral damage done by ill-conceived public health policy?

December 11, 2020 7:08 am

There still seems to be a lot of confusion and misuse of terms. The virus SARS-Cov2 is the causative agent of a disease termed Covid-19. The PCR test does not test for Covid-19, it tests for the presence of Coronavirus RNA. A positive PCR test does not mean that a patient has Covid-19. The MSM seems to report the number of positive PCR tests as cases of Covid-19. They are not the same thing. It is not surprising that there is a lot of confusion about the number of cases, deaths and the infection rate.

Nick Schroeder
December 11, 2020 7:10 am

85.6% of C-19 CASES are among those UNDER 65 years of age.
80.1% of C-19 DEATHS are among those OVER 65 years of age.
24% of C-19 deaths occurred in nursing homes and hospice care.

The death rate for those over 85: 11,313 per million.
The death rate for those 75 – 84: 4,404 per million.
The death rate for those 65 – 74: 1,641 per million.
The death rate for those under 65: less than 700 per million.

Japan has the highest global percentage of 65+, 27%, yet just over 2,000 deaths.
What do they know/do the rest of the world does not?
That would take some actual journalism, i.e. not you.

Covid-19 is not a problem for the young and healthy herd.
Mother Nature and her buddy Grim Reaper are just doing their jobs, culling the herd of the too many, too old, too sick warehoused too close together as Medicare/Medicaid cash cows in poorly run contagious lethal elder care facilities.

The US, Brazil, India, Mexico and the UK together have more C-19 deaths than the ENTIRE rest of the world combined.
The top ten countries account for more than 2/3rds of the global deaths.
Covid-19 is NOT a wide-spread, contagious, lethal pandemic.

NYC and six states together account for more C-19 deaths than the ENTIRE rest of the country combined.
The top fourteen states plus NYC account for over 70% of the C-19 deaths.
Covid-19 is NOT a national problem.

Denver, Arapahoe, Jefferson and Adams counties together have more C-19 deaths than the ENTIRE rest of Colorado.
The top ten Colorado counties account for 87% of the C-169 deaths.
Covid-19 is NOT a state-wide problem.

There are about 2.8 MILLION deaths every year in the US.
That’s about 233,000 PER MONTH
53,800 PER WEEK
7,700 PER DAY
320 PER HOUR!!!!!!!!!!!

Nationwide Covid-19 deaths are about 9% of all deaths, but each state is a different story.
Leading the pack NYC Covid-19 represents almost 30% of ALL deaths.

Good job, Cuomo!!

Abolition Man
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
December 11, 2020 8:29 am

Thank you, once again, for trying to put the relevant facts in perspective!
It would seem that the US has made a complete mess of our ChiCom virus handling! Too many with poor nutrition and the general health problems created thereby. Too many willing to follow our inept leaders and the herd mentality off the cliff of lockdowns and mask mandates! Too much money to be made by corporations for inexpensive, effective treatments to be allowed!
Sadly, I’m no longer sure we will ever be allowed to speak the truth about this fiasco; too many of our elected leaders have the deaths of thousands, if not tens of thousands, on their hands! I guess that’s how Killer Cuomo won his Emmy!

Curious George
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
December 11, 2020 8:43 am

“There are about 2.8 MILLION deaths every year in the US.
That’s about 233,000 PER MONTH
53,800 PER WEEK”
Nick, can you please share an official source of these data with us?
I am interested in 2015 to 2020 data.

December 11, 2020 7:15 am

A long article that had some good points and bad points
Good points
Easy to understand writing
Included discussion of effects of lockdowns
Did not brag about Sweden
Bad points
Accepted flu deaths and COVID deaths as accurate counts
Promoted speculative 43 percent herd immunity
Did not explain what herd immunity meant (not a COVID “victory”)
Did not include a caveat that we are in the middle of a pandemic so final numbers may differ and possibly change conclusions too

December 11, 2020 7:38 am

This is a excellent piece of fact finding. It will be my primary reference when I meet with the head of my child’s school regarding masking of young children. Mine is 8YO and in 3rd grade.

My kid: My teachers hate me
Me: Why do you think that?
My kid: Because I get in trouble when I want to breathe.
Me: When do you want to breathe?
My kid: Every second of every day.

As a parent, I can’t condone child abuse and it’s starting to look sadistic. There is no risk for children and they are being abused by irrational and cowardly adults.

Tom Abbott
December 11, 2020 7:45 am

From the article: “roughly enough to achieve herd immunity—is under the age of 33. If everyone in this age group went about their business and caught the disease while everyone else stayed Covid-free through diligent social distancing, hygiene, testing, and other creative measures:”

What percentage of those people would suffer from long-term adverse health effects from catching the Wuhan virus?

That’s not the real topic of the article, but long-term adverse health effects can’t be ignored when we are suggesting that people allow themselves to be infected with the Wuhan virus. High percentages of recovered Wuhan virus patients are showing signs of inflammation in various parts of their bodies long after the virus is gone.

The good news is early treatment can probably solve most of these aftereffects. But nobody is talking about early treatment.

I don’t think it is a good idea to suggest to people that they just go ahead and get themselves infected with the Wuhan virus, unless we also tell them about the possible health problems they may have in the future even though they have a small chance of dying from the Wuhan virus itself. And they need to know that early treatment is a safeguard to their future health.

Early treatment would allow us to open the economy back up. It would remove the fear of the Wuhan virus. Early treatment will be necessary at least for another year or two, until enough vaccine gets around to vaccinate everyone who wants it.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 11, 2020 8:27 am

“High percentages of recovered Wuhan virus patients are showing signs of inflammation in various parts of their bodies long after the virus is gone.”

I don’t think that’s uncommon with any viral respiratory illness.

Reply to  icisil
December 11, 2020 1:45 pm

Yes. Multiple and varied debilitating symptoms of both post viral and unknown etiology are pretty common with an estimated annual incidence rate of 2000-2500/100,000 population in the UK – about 2%, mostly in women and concentrated in the middle years 40-55. Unlike most other health conditions, the rate is higher with higher socioeconomic status.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Fran
December 13, 2020 6:31 am

I find it kind of amazing that you don’t see the Wuhan virus as being a special problem. I hear you saying, “I want a certain outcome, so I’m going to look at it this way”.

Do a search on covid long-haulers. Tell those people the Wuhan virus is no more serious than the common flu. And it’s not just old people that are affected.

Do a search on SARS-Cov-1. You will find that people who were infected with it in 2003 are still experiencing adverse health effects today, 17 years later. The Wuhan virus is its cousin and is obviously causing long-term adverse health effects.

Long-term adverse health effects may be in a lot of Wuhan virus survivors futures. Dismiss it at your peril.

Remember: Early treatment will fix a lot of the problems with Wuhan virus. So these long-term effects are somewhat self-inflicted by Trump Derangement Syndrome which has officially banned this method of treatment. But you can find a doctor who will prescribe you medicines to treat the Wuhan virus, and people should do so, as soon after testing positive as possible. It’s cheap, safe insurance.

No doubt, TDS has caused many unnecessary Wuhan virus deaths and injuries with the demonizing of the HCQ treatment and the dismissal of early treatment as a result.

Dismissing the seriousness of the Wuhan virus will cause more unnecessary deaths.

December 11, 2020 8:24 am

I’d like to find out more about the “pre-symptomatic, post-symptomatic, or asymptomatic” spread of CV-19. If it is so rare as to be a non-issue, then we could do away with assuming everyone is poison. That would mean no need for masks, social distancing, plexiglass barriers, etc. when dealing with the general public. Sick people would stay in bed until they recover, and we would continue to protect the elderly and immune-compromised.

Thomas Gasloli
December 11, 2020 8:56 am

“Collectively, these data indicate that herd immunity could have been achieved with much less loss of life than has already occurred. That would have required doing more to protect vulnerable people and allowing young healthy people greater freedom instead of locking them down. This is precisely the opposite of what certain high-profile media figures called for and government officials have done.”

Those of us who were saying this in March were told we were stupid, even on this website, and repeatedly by Monckton. Everything the governments did was wrong. Worst of all was when Democrat governors ordered the transfer of patients with COVID to elder care facilities; the CDC and NIH stood silently by while the likes of Whitmer & Cuomo infected and killed old people through this criminally negligent action.

Paul Johnson
December 11, 2020 10:24 am

It’s clear that Covid hospitalizations and death are concentrated among the “vulnerable” population. These are the people who will be vaccinated first, but it will take many months to cover the general population. Once the most vulnerable population is vaccinated, however, shouldn’t hospitalizations and deaths immediately decline sharply? Shouldn’t this be largely over by March?

Roger Knights
Reply to  Paul Johnson
December 12, 2020 8:15 am

“Covid hospitalizations and death are concentrated among the “vulnerable” population.”

I’ve read that vaccines are less effective the older one is. For instance, flu vaccines are only 10% effective for persons over 60 (or 70?). This phenomenon should be part of the discussion about the Covid-19 topic.

December 11, 2020 10:51 am

“In summary, based on the existing and cumulative body of evidence, we recommend the use of
ivermectin in both prophylaxis and treatment for COVID-19. In the presence of a global COVID-19
surge, the widespread use of this safe, inexpensive, and effective intervention could lead to a drastic
reduction in transmission rates as well as the morbidity and mortality in mild, moderate, and even
severe disease phases.”

This is a summary of knowledge of invermectin, not peer reviewed, and using some not-yet peer reviewed material, but it’s nevertheless a summary of what we know now.

Of course, the FDA will spring into action and approve (and recommend) this safe drug for the typical (non-clinical trial) treatment of a disease that’s devastating the US. Right? Or will we instead be hearing of all sorts of reasons why this drug is unsafe and doesn’t work?

Any bets?

December 11, 2020 11:44 am

What is going on is that a majority of the population want the govment to ‘look after them’ by imposing restrictions on everyone. Here in BC Canada the party in power called a mid-covid election because polling indicated that all the restrictions would give them a majority and they did.

We will not see an end to the nonsense until the polls show lockdowns and masks are no longer supported by the majority. Unfortunately the media and the health administration is consistently stoking fear, so I guess it will be a long time before normality.

What is worse is the treatment of small businesses. If Walmart has a worker test +, he is shunted out for 14 days. If my brother in law’s small store with 5 employees gets a +, he is shut down until all of them test negative. You can imagine what this will do to a food store. The effects of the lockdowns are supported by many big retailers because they are clearing out the competition.

December 11, 2020 1:40 pm

I read it.

December 11, 2020 1:47 pm

Here is an interesting look at how the virus has impacted the yearly average death rate so far through this year. …

The graph shows that the current US death rate is 1.12% above the average in 2020. Yet that number was higher back in 2015/16/17 when it reached 1.27% above average. I don’t remember any lock downs back in 2015. nor any scary news stories about the elevated death rate. The media plays on the ignorance of the average person.

Reply to  goldminor
December 12, 2020 6:35 am

The US had fewer cumulative deaths than expected since 2017 compared to ‘excess deaths’, creating a deficit prior to the start of CV19 of nearly 425K people living beyond their predicted lifespans. US deaths in 2020 have partially closed this deficit to under 180K fewer number of people dead than expected since 2017 as of November 7.

comment image

The large number of older people who lived longer than expected since at least 2017 were among the most vulnerable in 2020. Their inevitable deaths were blamed on people not wearing a mask.

Reply to  Bob Weber
December 12, 2020 1:34 pm

Interesting, thanks.

Reply to  goldminor
December 12, 2020 6:22 pm

The chart says “projections, does not include effect of COVID 19” The actual CDC data shows death running 20% above last year.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
December 13, 2020 10:31 pm

maybe humor can help people see truth
comment image?_nc_cat=109&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=fTOVVkY5P4YAX-mnhBt&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=e7c244b93ba4cf58e272922e29bec0b0&oe=5FFD8388

December 11, 2020 2:21 pm

Does the vaccine lessen the symptoms or give immunity ?

Peter Sable
Reply to  Ron
December 12, 2020 10:14 pm

> Does the vaccine lessen the symptoms or give immunity ?

Who knows? We’ve never used an mRNA vaccine widely and the sample size has been to small, especially considering < 10% of the population get severe symptoms.

Does the vaccine cause sterility in 20 year old women who don't need the vaccine? We don't know

Does the vaccine damage fetuses? We don't know.

Does the vaccine cause auto-immune reactions? Most definitely. Probably don't care if that someone is 80 and would die from the disease 15% of the time, but a 20 year old?

December 11, 2020 4:00 pm

What can we expect from first-generation COVID-19 vaccines?

December 11, 2020 7:18 pm

So did I.

December 11, 2020 8:13 pm

I had the Covid back at the beginning of October and I had it for about a month. Why a month? I have leukemia so I’m immunocompromised. It took that long for me to get it out of my system. The only reason I knew I had it was because my sinus cavities were clear and I couldn’t smell. Honestly, I’ve had hangnails worse than my Covid infection. The only long term effect I’ve had is a highly increased sensitivity to salt. Bizarre!

Cameron Kuhns
December 11, 2020 10:26 pm

Richard Greene, that comment is a flat out lie. If Biden was president in 2020, he wouldn’t have done anything for several months or longer and there would have been many more deaths than there are now. Of the 280+K deaths to date, how many of those deaths are solely attributable to C-19?

Reply to  Cameron Kuhns
December 12, 2020 3:17 pm

Cameron Kuhns
I assume you meant my comment that ended with: “This is a serious comment, not sarcasm.” Sorry, I lied, it was pure sarcasm. I was a bad boy. But I actually can’t stand Biden.

In my opinion, almost no one dies of the flu alone, other than the very deadly SARS1 and MERS. Almost every “COVID death” has another medical problem or genetic weakness. So flu is not really the only cause of death.

For people in nursing homes expected to die within a year, I would blame their deaths on whatever disease sent them there, rather than flu. Even if COVID was their last straw.

I suspect COVID deaths are grossly over-counted because “flu deaths” are always over counted by CDC, according to doctors. This year the claimed deaths from other strains of flu are so low it seems that’s another clue COVID deaths are being overstated.

At one point in October the deaths per COVID infection seemed to be 1 of 1,000 outside of nursing homes. Much better than 1 or 2 of 100 in April and May. Of course you have to guess how many people are infected since so many have no symptoms and will never be tested.

joe the non epidemiologist
Reply to  Richard Greene
December 14, 2020 6:04 am

To add one point –

The 1918 spanish flu was quite deadly to healthy individuals from age of birth through age mid 50’s with very low death rates for people over age 55.

The reason is that there was flu epidemic 1873-1875 which the older generation developed immunity.

The point being made is that immunity is what saves the human race. Delaying or retarding the development of the human immune system will have far worse long term damage to the human race.

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 16, 2020 6:54 pm

I and some medical people suspect that Canadian statistics for deaths from INFLEUENZA are greatly under-reported.
One reason is the rate normalized for population is much less than in the US.

Roger Knights
December 12, 2020 7:52 am
Nick Graves
December 13, 2020 2:11 am

There might be a chance of a happy ending:


December 13, 2020 2:41 am

“French infectious disease expert shocked by the number of adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccine”

“Take the example of fever. It can occur transiently after an injection; it is classic. But here, 15.8 percent of 18- to 55-year-olds had a fever of 38 degrees Celsius or higher within seven days after the second injection. And 45 percent had to take medication for fever or pain. Another 55 percent had headaches and 62 percent were tired. No, really, that’s much too much, perhaps there’s a problem … ” Caumes said.

Reply to  mwhite
December 13, 2020 5:50 am

Thanks for the link
Very interesting.

December 13, 2020 8:10 am

Great article, thanks

December 16, 2020 6:43 pm

Thankyou for a comprehensive summary.

One caveat is you compare the 2020 death rate from COVID-19 with an _average_ of several recent years of INFLEUENZA.

I say the proper comparison is with a bad season of INFLUENZA, because COVID-19 is an unusual event just as a bad season of INFLEUENZA is an unusual event.

INFLEUENZA varies year-to-year, but note for example the Asian Flu, Hong Kong Flu, and Swine Flu. (I don’t recall if Avian Flu was a pandemic.) There have been lesser but still deadly years since. (The Kansas Flu of 1917/1918 was i an ear of much less medical knowledge and likely quite delayed recognition, so is not a good comparison.)

Comparison with SARS-CoV-1 may be worthwhile, depending on how widespread it was. I understand that MERS was deadly in regions where it was common, but did not become a pandemic here.

PS: As for length of immunity, I understand that a decade or three ago old people were not as badly affected by an INFLEUENZA strain as would normally be expected, because they still had some resistance from 1917/18.

Richard Steward
December 17, 2020 2:08 am

Print is much harder to read. Why is it GREY and not BLACK?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights