A quick update on the novel coronavirus and the emerging data that throws into question the validity of everything the response was based on
Based on the hysteria that has been incited by health officials, politicians, and media members (to name a few), you would think that a new plague was killing everyone in its path and lining the streets with bodies.
Models predicting millions of deaths worldwide, supported by the World Health Organization and their "experts" have inspired the entire world to tank the global economy, cost millions of people their jobs, and people to panic to the point that they are consuming fish bowl cleaner in the belief that it will save them.
So how did we get here?
Well that's a long and confusing story where there is no clear answer.
We do know this new coronavirus originated in China late last year, which doctors warned government officials there about as far back as November. The communist regime silenced whistleblowers, destroyed data related to scientist's findings on the new virus, and chose to ignore the issue entirely rather than even attempt to contain the outbreak in its infancy, which is detailed quite simply here.
As late as January the WHO was still parroting propaganda from the CCP that stated there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus, a lie so blatant it's hard to understand how anyone can attribute it to anything less than purposeful deceit.
As for many of the models used to predict millions of deaths worldwide? Turns out, they aren't exactly above board.
The most popular model which is being pushed by authorities worldwide is from Imperial College London, which projected very high fatality and transmission rates and made a series of assumptions about the virus that are proving to be inaccurate to say the least.
One of the big assumptions, and what is being used to promote the entire "social distancing" agenda, is the rate of asymptomatic transmission. Without having actual numbers of asymptomatic transmission, the model simply assumed a rate of 50% that of the rate of symptomatic transmission - new studies are showing that the rate is likely closer to 1%.
This model touted COVID-19 as the "plague of the century". According to the model, 2 million people would die in the US alone in the near future.
The code that generated the model was written 13 years ago by a professor by the name of Neil Ferguson, who is refusing to make his source code open to the public (and apparently has no documentation for the code) to see just how this model and the code that created it works.
Perhaps the code is perfect, doesn't have any flaws, and is outputting exactly what should be expected. Perhaps it was used before and generated correct models, and that's why it's being used now?
Neil Ferguson in fact used this code (which from his statements, he has shown no indication that he revised or updated it since) to model projections for the 2009 flu pandemic, commonly known as the swine flu.
Now the swine flu did affect millions of people, hospitalizing hundreds of thousands and killing over 12,000 in the United States out of an estimated 61 million infected. It's case fatality rate however ended up being about 0.03%...the seasonal flu is about 0.1% for comparison.
Ferguson's projections from this code? Millions would die and lockdowns were needed to contain the spread.
I shit you not.
How on earth a professor who wrongfully predicted millions would die from the last large pandemic the world saw (which ended up with a far lower case fatality rate than the typical flu) is all of a sudden being taken seriously and having his model used worldwide (without even releasing the code so others can see how it actually works and replicate or update the model with updated factors) comes from nothing other than blatant stupidity or intentional malice, or a combination of the two.
The WHO, along with officials in many countries, have been using this guy's model to form their advice and reactions, either unwittingly or knowingly crippling the economy and ruining millions of people's lives off of what can be described, at best, as shoddy "science".
The Truth in Numbers
Now how about all these numbers being spouted every day by health officials and media members?
First, let's take a quick look at how current practices work in regards to collecting death statistics, which are the numbers everyone is worried about.
Current medical practices dictate that anyone that tests positive posthumously or in the lead up to their death for COVID-19 is counted as a fatality from the virus. This isn't anything new, however it's important to note, particularly in the case of Italy.
To explain it in very simple terms, if you want to look at the case of the common flu (which very rarely kills anyone that isn't at an advanced age and/or has other serious conditions), take this example: an 80 year old man dying of stage 4 brain cancer, whose immune system is already extremely compromised, also catches influenza while in hospital and thus is posthumously found to have had the flu in addition to brain cancer. Despite the fact the flu itself didn't cause the man's death (though it may have sped it up), his death is counted in the totals for how many people die from the flu.
You may now realize why this is significant - the deaths counted for the flu, and likewise the coronavirus, don't actually mean that many people died because of the flu.
Everyone on social media and indeed the mainstream networks has been clamouring on about Italy and their "scary" numbers, but how about we provide a little perspective here.
First off, the average age of death in Italy from this virus is in the mid-80's - people who are already at risk of death from things like the common cold and flu, and tend to have pre-existing medical conditions that exacerbate those risks.
Italian health officials the other day released some numbers that give us more information about the reality of the situation - of the deaths to that point, roughly 48% had three or more pre-morbidities not including COVID-19 - that's three diseases or illnesses they had before contracting the coronavirus. About 25% each had one pre-morbidity and two pre-morbidities - the deaths with no pre-morbidities accounted for just 0.9% of Italy's reported deaths due to COVID-19.
In a study conducted by Science Direct that looked at Italy's higher than normal fatality rate for flu cases, Italy averaged 23,000 deaths per year from the flu between 2013 and 2017. For the span of October 2019 to late February 2020, the reported deaths from the flu are just 240...which begs the question how on earth we've seen such a massive drop in flu deaths being reported in the country - are they being attributed to coronavirus instead, or are they simply discounting the common flu entirely?
As for the deaths being attributed to the coronavirus, Italy's National Institute of Health issued a report Sunday that found just 12% of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus - meaning that the numbers we are seeing attributed to coronavirus may be inflated by a factor of eight when you are looking for the cause of death, which is what many interpret the death counts being shown in the media as.
As we see more and more actual data coming in and more testing done, more concerns over prior numbers and models are coming from the scientific community.
A new Oxford study has estimated that in reality, as much as half of the population of the UK has already been or is currently infected with the novel coronavirus, which is feasible given that the vast majority of cases result in mild or no symptoms and thus most wouldn't have been tested.
The team at Oxford insists on large-scale anti-body testing to confirm how many people have already had and recovered from the virus (likely without even knowing it) and estimates that just 1-in-1000+ cases actually need hospitilization. Oxford's renowned medical wing lowered their estimate for the actual case fatality rate to just 0.2%, a stark contrast to the roughly 4% often reported in the media that ignores the fundamental flaws in the numbers presented and the fact the tests aren't representative portion of the population - a basic statistical flaw that makes the reported mortality rate all but useless.
Sunetra Gupta, professor of theoretical epidemiology stated that she is "surprised that there has been such unqualified acceptance of the Imperial model."
That's not to mention that no one seems to have any data regarding how precise the tests being used to detect the virus are, in regards to false-positives and false-negatives alike. Plainly put, nobody seems to know what the fuck is going on and yet they're making world-changing decisions anyway.
Gaslighting the Globe
So why is the world shutting down its economies, destroying businesses and people's lives, all based on incredibly flimsy and weak scientific models and predictions?
It's impossible to know for sure at this point, but a look at the way the majority of news outlets are reporting on the cases along with the actions of certain countries, it's hard to believe that everything is out of sheer stupidity and without malice.
The media's odd protectionism and even praise for China throughout the entire ordeal draws easy comparisons to Soviet-style propaganda such as the Stalin-apologists that helped hide the starving of millions of Ukrainians during the Holodomor.
Though articles have been written showing China's silencing of whistleblower's and absolute bungling (at best) of the outbreak, many of those same outlets have been praising China's reponse in recent months, for their complete lockdown and limiting of casualties (with no question as to the validity of numbers put out by the CCP).
News organizations have openly praised China's willingness to help other countries deal with the virus, even promoting the fact that China is "helping" Italy by supplying ventilators and masks and calling into question why the US wasn't helping other countries in the same way. Of course, Italians were quick to point out (which was hardly reported) that in fact, China had not sent out aid to Italy, and instead Italy was purchasing those supplies from China - it was not out of charity, it was simple commerce.
The media has attacked Donald Trump and other conservatives for calling the virus the "China", "Chinese", or "Wuhan" virus, saying that it's racist despite the fact the virus originated in Wuhan, China and spread because of the CCP's incompetence and/or malice - many other viruses and diseases have also been named after their place of origin, and many publications such as the New York Times have referred to the coronavirus as the "Wuhan coronavirus" in the past.
The fact that the western world's economy has been thrown into disarray yet China has suffered very little financial consequence and in fact is selling those much-needed masks and ventilators, the same things they bought up from other countries en masse just months ago, just adds to the obvious questions regarding the situation, particularly given that this happened when China was getting trounced in a trade war by the US courtesy of Trump.
Hell, Justin Trudeau gave China some 16 tonnes of personal protective equipment, including masks and protective clothing, to China free of charge to help them during the outbreak, which in a bitter sense of irony Canada is now in desperate need of and will undoubtedly be purchasing such equipment from China.
But perhaps the most blatant example I've ever seen of the media gaslighting the public occurred just yesterday.
According to small trials conducted in several other countries including Australia and South Korea, chloroquine (or the very similar hydroxychloroquine) has been shown to be a highly effective treatment for people infected with the coronavirus. When combined with azithromycin (or z-pack, an effective antibiotic that has other medically helpful properties), other countries have reported a 100% recovery rate based on several hundred cases.
A doctor in New York just yesterday shared his results with the 350 patients he's used the treatment on, which consists of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc sulfate. All 350 patients recovered with their breathing restored to normal levels within 3-4 hours, with none of the 350 patients he's used the drugs on requiring hospitilization or intubation.
Of course these are small sample sizes and it's early to show exactly how effective the treatment is, but since chloroquine is already approved and regularly used worldwide for malaria (with very little risk of side effects) and azithromycin is already a common antibiotic, with both being inexpensive and already readily available, you'd think the news would be all over this miraculous discovery?
During one of the daily coronavirus briefings at the White House, Trump touted chloroquine as a potential cure and stated that supplies were being brought in and trials were set to start immediately.
Instead of writing about what is being widely referred to as a very effective and life-saving treatment, the news whipped into a frenzy stating that Trump was giving people false hope.
One couple in Arkansas heard Trump's conference and found that they had chloroquine in their house already...as the main ingredient in fish tank cleaner.
The couple, consisting of a 61-year-old woman and a 68-year-old man, despite having no symptoms or signs of being infected, thought it would be a good idea to consume the fish tank cleaner (which even has a warning for humans not to consume) to prevent them from getting coronavirus.
The 68-year-old man died, while the now-widowed woman in an emotional statement said not to believe anything the president says, blaming her own incredible stupidity on Trump.
The media ran with it and likewise blamed the president, despite him quite clearly saying the anti-malarial pharmaceutical drug showed great promise as a treatment and possible cure - instead, they seem to think he should have added "don't self medicate by ingesting fish bowl cleaner not intended for human consumption".
If you actually read the articles posted about the story, you'd see something like this, taken from NBC's coverage - "The toxic ingredient they consumed was not the medication form of chloroquine, used to treat malaria in humans. Instead, it was an ingredient listed on a parasite treatment for fish".
The media headlines instead consisted of things like "Arizona man dies after ingesting chloroquine in an attempt to prevent coronavirus" and "Arizona man dies after attempting to take Trump coronavirus 'cure'".
If you bothered to read the articles, the truth was actually in plain sight, but the media knows full well the headlines are often the only thing people see, and it worked.
People then began associating the prescription drug chloroquine and the proposed treatment for the coronavirus with a deadly toxin. Just last night my friend had told me about how the drug I had been saying since last week was saving people is actually killing people, falling hook line and sinker for fake news.
The media, along with experts in health care due to their reliance on incomplete data, is continuing to sew discord in society and instilling fear in the minds of people based off of incredibly flimsy data and asinine models and projections.
Time will tell just how much damage will be done due to the actions of those reponsible - how many lives will be ruined and how many people will die not because of a virus, but because of the world's panicked response to faulty data and projections. One can only hope enough people will realize they've been duped before we reach a point of no return.
Neil Ferguson, the professor whose computer model for the Imperial College London's "Plague of the Century" predictions, has now admitted his projections were off. Like, way off. Possibly 2500% or more off on some measures. No, that's not a typo.
After more and more studies have been released over the past few days that contradict early findings and other scientists have come to find massive flaws in the widely disseminated doomsday predictions, the Imperial College is changing their tune.
Of course they aren't admitting they were wrong, despite the fact they clearly were. Instead, they announced that they're "downgrading their projections" based on new data and current mitigation steps - considering the new estimate focuses on the UK who only initiated a lockdown a day before the revised projection, it's pretty easy to see they were simply wrong.
The man whose projections claimed some 2.2 million people would die in the US and 500,000 in the UK has revised his model (which is generated by methods he has still not made public) to say that 20,000 or less people will die in the UK from the novel coronavirus or its agitation of other ailments. Of that 20,000, at least half are estimated by the Imperial College to have died by the end of the year anyway because they are already so old and sick with other ailments.
To put some perspective on that new number, estimates for deaths from the flu in the UK are about 17,000 a year on average from 2014-2019.
So all of those people that have been stating the coronavirus is comparable to the flu and have been being blasted by morally outraged social media mobs? Now the man who helped ignite the entire panic response agrees with them.
The backtracking comes just a day after the UK finally caved to public and political pressure to force massive lockdowns - the updated report makes sure to tout the social distancing and lockdown measures despite the fact they haven't had any time to affect statistics in the UK, a clear attempt to excuse the massive flaws in their earlier projections that have led to the current hysteria.
As had been pointed out in other studies, the actual transmission rates and number of those infected are vastly higher than the Imperial College's projections assumed, and the lethality of the virus is nowhere remotely close to their initial figures nor the ones being touted by the media thanks to targeted testing numbers.
To get a real sense of just how wrong those fear-spreading reports really were, widespread antibody testing for those without symptoms would show a more accurate number of people who have had the virus by counting those who had COVID-19 and recovered, often without even knowing they were ill in the first place.
Who knows when those tests will roll out; surely they'll be demanded by the righteous media with the same veracity as their calls for regular COVID-19 tests and ventilators, right?
In addition to the Imperial College's 180 and the unsurprisingly quiet response to it by the media compared to the damning initial report, "journalists" and "reporters" are continuing to distort the truth and invoke fear at every turn.
As pointed out by some good samaritans with solid reading comprehension, this New York Times article is as blatant as it gets when it comes to misusing or misunderstanding statistics in order to instill fear.
The major talking point of the article plays up the ventilators required during the crisis by completely misrepresenting the findings of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. "There are at most 200K ventilators in the US. One million are expected to be needed." is what's reported in the piece, implying that some 800,000 people who need ventilators will go without and suffer the consequences.
The problem?
The actual report's estimates of 960,000 patients requiring ventilator support is over the duration of entire crisis, not at one time. That's quite a big difference than stating one million ventilators are needed - you can be the judge as to whether the journalist is truly that stupid or intentionally spreading completely inaccurate information.
Not to mention that the paper concludes the real bottleneck on adding more ventilators is not the production or acquisition of the ventilators themselves, but on having trained professionals capable of using them.
In fact, the paper states that "U.S. hospitals could absorb a maximum of 26,000 to 56,000 additional ventilators at the peak of a national pandemic, as safe use of ventilators requires trained personnel."
In other words, even if the government was able to build or acquire an additional 800,000 ventilators immediately, roughly 750,000+ of them wouldn't be put in use for this pandemic.
In addition to attacking the current administration in the US for a lack of ventilators (which compared to other countries, the US is far ahead in terms of numbers per capita), there's also been a widely spread myth that the US has less critical care beds per capita than other countries with socialized medicine - the same paper the NYT cited and misquoted includes the finding that "the US already has far more critical care beds per-capita than other nations: 35 per 100,000, compared to 12 in Italy and 7 in the UK".
That finding is of course not mentioned in the Times article. But it's much easier to bash the Trump administration for not nationalizing ventilator production instead of facing reality, isn't it?
As more continues to come out, the incredible misinformation and fearmongering campaign spread by the media and public officials is being exposed as the hoax that it was. Now the question becomes: is anyone going to face justice for the damage they have caused?
Story from TheRant; Here is the original post. Post payout declined, just trying to share a great write-up.
