COVID Studies
From iGeek
By 04/2020 studies show we are being lied to about the denominator to inflate the death rate and scare people.
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2020-04-27 |
Studies[edit | edit source]
| 🗒️ Note: |
|---|
| This was April 2020, and we already had dozens of studies (these were only some that I found/re-links). We already knew that COVID IFR was being overstates by at least 10-30x what the WHO, CDC and Politicians were telling us. And maybe a little worse than the Flu (especially against certain cohorts). It still had a higher surge rate because so many were asymptomatic that it spread quickly. So it easily swamped countries with Socialized Medicine, like Italy. But that happened in a normal Flu surges as well. So a short term shutdown or social distancing wasn't a problem -- as long as you convince the public to do it VOLUNTARILY, based on the truth, not lies. |
- COVID Death Rates - IFR (Infection Fatality Rate aka Death Rate) is number of deaths divided by number of infections. These were intentionally exaggerated to scare people during COVID. In reality, the death rates settled to about Flu levels. (Though later variants were more virulent). The agencies meant to prevent panic and disinformation, were pertpetuators of it.
- COVID Monkey Study - 2020.04.17 SARS-CoV-2 study on rhesus macaques seems to show at least limited immunity.
- COVID Study - Boston - 2020.04.15 CDC did a random sample of the Pine Street Inn homeless shelter in Boston (as the area had a cluster of cases). 397 people tested: 146 tested positive, all asymptomatic. 36% positive and 100% asymptomatic, of some generally unhealthy people, hints that this is NOT the killer that the media portrays.
- COVID Study - China - Doctors did a model based on China total cases, hospitalizations and deaths, to calculate a 1.38% CFR (Case Fatality Rate / Death Rate), well below WHO/CDC's 3.4%. The biggest thing it showed is the age spread, that it was way more lethal to elderly than youth. And that undercounted cases by 85x, or it would be a 0.016% CFR.
- COVID Study - Colorado - San Miguel County, Colorado tested all 8,000 residents and ≈3% of the population had been exposed. Projecting that out would imply 2.6 - 10M total cases, instead of the 418K that is reported (reported numbers are off by 6-24x). This would push the CFR (Fatality Rate) down to 0.1-0.5% or 1/34th of the reported numbers.
- COVID Study - Diamond Princess - Cruise Ship Diamond Princess ≈20% (712) of the people on board (3,711) caught COVID, and 14 died. Despite cruisers being way more elderly than average population, 18% were asymptomatic, and it had a 1.1% CFR (Case Fatality rate), not the 3.8% that China, WHO and CDC was telling people.
- COVID Study - Germany - Germany random sampling (80% of town), in the hardest hit german area of Gangelt, and found that ≈15% case rate and thus a case fatality rate was 0.37%. Lots of media reports on this low death rate in Germany, while failing to note that's because they got a more accurate denominator (total case count).
- COVID Study - Iceland - Iceland did the earliest and largest random sampling (36,000 sample size, ≈10% of their population) for antibodies, and found between 0.3%-0.8% contained the antibodies, >50% were asymptomatic, which is a 0.3% case fatality rate.
- COVID Study - L.A. - USC and LA County Department of Public Health did an antibody scan of L.A. (863 sample size), and found 4.1% of 10.4 million people had been exposed (5x higher than expected). 221,000 - 442,000 people in L.A. County had COVID (instead of the 7,994 reported). Against 600 deaths means an CFR of 0.27% - 0.135% or similar to the seasonal Flu.
- COVID Study - Massachusetts - Chelsea, Mass random sample study found 64 of 200 people (32%) tested positive for COVID antibodies. None of them was counted in official cases, so we know that the denominator (cases) were understated, and thus the death rates are way overstated.
- COVID Study - Miami - Miami-Dade County completed two rounds of random sampling (1,800 sample size) covering 32 municipalities / 2.75 million people for antibodies, and both surveys found between 4.4% and 7.9% contained the antibodies, >50% had no symptoms. Extrapolated: 123K - 221K cases in the county, thus a 0.13% - 0.23% fatality rate, in an area overwhelmingly populated by elderly residents.
- COVID Study - NY - NY testing resulted in 24.7% of people in New York City had tested positive for coronavirus antibodies, 15.1% in Westchester/Rockland, 14.4% in Long Island, 3.2% in the rest of the state tested positive. 15% of pregnant Mom's were already infected with COVID and 86% were asymptomatic or mild symptoms.
- COVID Study - Netherlands - The Dutch did an antibody study, as they'd been hit hard by the disease, and found that 3% of the population (518,400) had COVID, compared to the 38,802 offical number. Which dropped their CFR (Fatality Rate) down to 0.9%.
- COVID Study - Santa Clara - Stanford did an antibody scan of Santa Clara (3,330 sample size), and found between 2.49%-4.16% of 1.9 million people had been exposed (or 50-80 times higher than expected). Which would mean 55,000-81,000 people in Santa Clara County have had it (instead of the 1,833 reported), against 69 deaths means an CFR (Death Rate) of 0.125%, or similar to the seasonal Flu.
- COVID Study - Theodore Roosevelt - We had an outbreak on an Aircraft Carrier (Theodore Roosevelt), and 20% (955 of 4,845 sailors) had antibodies: 50%+ were asymptomatic, 4 were hospitalized, 1 died. ≈0.1% CFR
- COVID Study - Washington - 2020.04.15 Seattle/King County was doing a SCAN of the population, and despite being a hotspot initially, seemed to show only 0.24% had been exposed. But this outlier may be more a reflection on the quantity/quality of testing, either that, or their lockdown efforts were so effective that they successfully avoided getting any Herd Immunity.
Conclusion[edit | edit source]
All the random sample studies found COVID-19 antibodies in large undercounted swaths of the population. The denominator matters. A half dozen studies that shows COVID to be ≈30 times less lethal than the WHO and CDC are saying is problematic. Both have been slow at not correcting the misconceptions that they and the media put out.
At this point, it's not an accident. They are intentionally trying to terrorize people (inflate the death numbers and not correct them) because they think it gets more compliance using terror than using truth.
That's a problem: that's politics, not science. I have a problem with that. I think it is self-defeating. Each time their lie is getting exposed without them being honest and correcting their first unverified overstatements, they are feeding the anger, and eventual backlash that will happen over being lied to for so long. That comes with risks. If a second wave comes, or another pathogen, people are going to die, because they've been taught not to trust the CDC, WHO or Government and the media, by these lies of commission and omission.
🔗 More
| |
| |
| |
Tags: COVID COVID Shutdown COVID/Science
