principiascientificinternational--2020-06-22--Hard Facts: Studies of Covid-19 lethality

Probably the most comprehensive body of expert information on COVID-19 we have seen comes from the independent Swiss Policy Research body .
Below we are delighted to run further information from their superb website .
Stanford professor John Ioannidis published an overview of Covid-19 antibody studies .
According to his analysis , the lethality of Covid19 ( IFR ) is below 0.16 % in most countries and regions .
Ioannidis found an upper limit of 0.40 % for three hotspots .
In its latest report , the US health authority CDC reduced the Covid19 lethality ( IFR ) to 0.26 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this value may still be seen as an upper limit , since the CDC conservatively assumes 35 % asymptomatic cases , while most studies indicate 50 to 80 % asymptomatic cases .
At the end of May , however , Swiss immunologists led by Professor Onur Boyman published what is probably the most important study on Covid19 lethality to date .
This preprint study comes to the conclusion that the usual antibody tests that measure antibodies in the blood ( IgG and IgM ) can recognize at most one fifth of all Covid19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that in most people the new coronavirus is already neutralized by antibodies on the mucous membrane ( IgA ) or by cellular immunity ( T-cells ) .
In most of these cases , no symptoms or only mild symptoms develop .
This means that the new coronavirus is probably much more common than previously thought and the lethality per infection is up to five times lower than previously assumed .
The real lethality could thus be well below 0.1 % and hence in the range of strong seasonal influenza .
In fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up to 60 % of all people already have a certain cellular immunity to Covid-19 , which was acquired through contact with previous coronaviruses ( common cold viruses ) .
Children in particular often come into contact with such coronaviruses , which could help explain their insensitivity to Covid19 .
The new Swiss study may also explain why antibody studies even in hotspots like New York or Madrid found infection rates of at most about 20 % , as this would correspond to an actual rate of nearly 100 % .
In many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be well over 50 % and thus in the range of herd immunity .
Should the Swiss study be confirmed , the assessment of Oxford epidemiologist Prof. Sunetra Gupta would apply , who predicted early on that Covid-19 is very widespread and its lethality below 0.1 % .
Despite the comparatively low lethality of Covid-19 ( deaths per infection ) , the mortality ( deaths per population ) can still be increased regionally and in the short term if the virus spreads rapidly and reaches high risk groups , especially patients in nursing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hotspots ( see below ) .
Due to its rather low lethality , Covid-19 falls at most into level 2 of the five-level pandemic plan developed by US health authorities .
For this level , only the “ voluntary isolation of sick people ” is to be applied , while further measures such as face masks , school closings , distance rules , contact tracing , vaccinations and lockdowns of entire societies are not recommended .
Regarding contact tracing , a WHO study on influenza pandemics from 2019 also came to the conclusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is “ under no circumstances recommended ” , since it is not expedient for easily communicable and generally mild respiratory diseases .
It is sometimes argued that the rather low lethality was not known at the beginning of the pandemic .
This is not entirely true , as data from South Korea , the cruise ships and even from Italy already showed in March that the risk to the general population is rather low .
Many health authorities also knew this , as leaked emails from Denmark in mid-March show : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Covid-19 can not be described as a generally dangerous disease , as it does not have either a usually serious course or a high mortality rate.
” Some media nevertheless continue to calculate an allegedly much higher Covid19 lethality rate of sometimes over 1 % by simply dividing deaths by “ infections ” , without taking into account the age and risk distribution , which is absolutely crucial especially for Covid19 .
The latest data from the European mortality monitoring Euromomo shows that several countries such as France , Italy and Spain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The reason for this is that the average age of Covid19 deaths was very high and fewer people than usual are now dying in this age group .
See also : Studies on Covid-19 lethality Nursing homes played an absolute key role in the Covid 19 pandemic .
In most countries , one to two thirds of all Covid19 deaths occurred in nursing homes , and up to 80 % in Canada and some US states .
Even in Sweden , which did not impose a lockdown , 75 % of deaths occurred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the more worrying that some authorities have obliged their nursing homes to admit Covid patients from the clinics , which has almost always resulted in numerous new infections and deaths .
This happened in northern Italy , England and the heavily affected US states of New York , New Jersey and Pennsylvania .
It is also known from northern Italy that the widespread fear of the virus and the announced lockdown of the country led to the flight of the predominantly Eastern European nurses , which further accelerated the breakdown of elderly care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least 42 % of all Covid19 deaths are accounted for by 0.6 % of the population living in nursing homes .
Nursing homes require targeted protection and do not benefit from a general lockdown of society as a whole .
It is well known that even common corona viruses ( cold viruses ) can be very dangerous for people in nursing homes .
Stanford professor John Ioannidis pointed out already in mid-March that coronaviruses may have a case mortality rate of up to 8 % in nursing homes .
In addition , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really died from Covid-19 or from weeks of stress and total isolation .
For example , there were approximately 30,000 additional deaths in English nursing homes , but in only 10,000 cases , Covid19 is noted on the death certificate .
In April alone , around 10,000 additional dementia patients without corona infection died in England and Wales due to weeks of isolation .
Investigations into the situation in nursing homes have been initiated or requested in several countries .
The second central factor regarding infections and deaths , in addition to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A case study in Wuhan already showed that around 41 % of hospitalized Covid patients had in fact contracted Covid in the hospital itself .
Contagion in hospitals also played a decisive role in northern Italy , Spain , England and other regions that were severely affected , meaning that the clinics themselves became the main place of transmission of Covid19 to already weakened people ( so-called nosocomial infection ) – an issue that had already been observed during the SARS outbreak from 2003 .
Based on current knowledge , those countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in nursing homes and hospitals had comparatively few deaths .
The general lockdown of society , however , played no role or even a counterproductive role ( see below ) .
An additional factor is the sometimes fatal medical mistreatment of Covid patients with aggressive drugs or invasive ventilation , the risks of which experts have been warning about for months .
In the US , for example , there have been questionable financial incentives to connect Covid patients to ventilators , a practice that is now being investigated in several states .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the ‘ epicenter ’ in New York City ( Video ) The well-known Hamburg medical examiner Professor Klaus Püschel presented his study ( English ) on the first 12 of 190 detailed corona autopsies at a press conference ( German ) .
Professor Püschel again emphasized that Covid-19 “ is not nearly as threatening as was initially suspected ” .
The danger was “ too much influenced by media images ” .
The media had focused on severe individual cases and fueled panic with “ completely wrong messages ” .
Covid-19 is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the call for new medicine or vaccines is “ driven by fear , not facts.
” The specific cause of death of the examined cases was pneumonia , but in about 50 % of the cases there were venous thrombosis in the legs , which can lead to fatal pulmonary embolism .
The kidneys and heart muscle were also partially affected .
Professor Püschel therefore recommends the preventive administration of blood-thinning medication for serious Covid cases .
With regard to thrombosis and pulmonary embolism , Professor Püschel – like other experts before – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quarantine at home was “ exactly the wrong measure ” , since the lack of exercise itself promotes thrombosis .
Indeed , US specialists have already been warning of this risk after even Covid-negative people developed unexpected thrombosis .
Many media again misinterpreted the autopsy findings and spoke of Covid-19 as a particularly dangerous disease which , unlike influenza , is said to lead to thrombosis and pulmonary embolism .
This is not true , however : it has been known for 50 years that even severe influenza can greatly increase the risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the heart muscle and other organs .
Even the recommendation regarding preventive blood thinner for severe influenza has been around for 50 years already .
Numerous studies have now shown that children hardly get Covid19 and do not or hardly transmit the virus , which was already known from the 2003 SARS outbreak .
There was therefore no medical reason for the closure of schools at any time .
Accordingly , all those countries that reopened their schools in May saw no increase in cases of infection .
Countries like Sweden , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had no problems with this either .
A preprint study by the German virologist Christian Drosten argued that the risk of infection from children is comparable to adults and schools should therefore remain closed .
However , several researchers demonstrated methodological errors in the study .
Drosten subsequently withdrew the recommendation regarding school closures .
In some schools , for example in France and Israel , alleged “ corona outbreaks ” are said to have occurred .
However , it is likely that these are transmissions from teachers to schoolchildren that , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ although they hardly show any symptoms and are themselves hardly or not at all contagious .
The British Kawasaki Disease Foundation again criticized the dubious and lurid media coverage of Kawasaki disease .
In fact , there has been no significant increase in Kawasaki cases and no proven association with Covid-19 .
General inflammatory reactions in individual children are also known from other viral infections , but the number of cases reported so far is extremely low .
German medical associations have also given the all-clear : Covid-19 is imperceptible or very mild @ @ @ @ @ @ @ daycare centers should therefore be opened immediately and without restrictions , ie there is no need for small groups , distance rules or masks .
On the effectiveness of masks Regardless of the comparatively low lethality of Covid19 in the general population ( see above ) , there is still no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of masks in healthy and asymptomatic people in everyday life .
A cross-country study by the University of East Anglia came to the conclusion that a mask requirement was of no benefit and could even increase the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and experts in respiratory and infection protection from the University of Illinois explain in an essay that respiratory masks have no effect in everyday life , neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties ( so-called source control ) .
The widespread use of masks didn ’ t prevent the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan , either .
A study from April 2020 in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine came to the conclusion that neither fabric masks nor surgical masks can prevent the spread of the Covid19 virus by coughing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Journal of Medicine from May 2020 also comes to the conclusion that respiratory masks offer little or no protection in everyday life .
The call for a mask requirement is described as an “ irrational fear reflex ” .
A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the U.S. CDC also found that respirators had no effect .
The WHO moreover declared in June that truly “ asymptomatic transmission ” is in fact “ very rare ” , as data from numerous countries showed .
Some of the few confirmed cases were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
shaking hands or kissing .
In Austria , the mask requirement in retail and catering will be lifted again from mid-June .
A mask requirement was never introduced in Sweden because it “ does not offer additional protection for the population ” , as the health authority explained .
Numerous politicians , media people and police officers have already been caught putting on their respirators in a crowd especially for the television cameras or taking them off immediately when they believed that they were no longer being filmed .
In some cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person allegedly “ did not wear her mask properly ” .
In other cases , people with a disability who can not and do not have to wear a mask , are not allowed to enter department stores .
Despite this evidence , a group called “ masks4all ” , which was founded by a “ young leader ” of the World Economic Forum ( WEF ) Davos , is advocating worldwide mask requirements .
Several governments and the WHO appear to be responding to this campaign .
Many critics suspect that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ psychological or political function ( “ muzzle ” or “ visible sign of obedience ” ) and that wearing them frequently might even lead to additional health problems .
A study from Germany empirically showed that the introduction of face masks had no effect on infection rates ( see graph ) .
Only the city of Jena appeared to experience a strong decrease in infections , but Jena simultaneously introduced very strict quarantine regulations .
On the origin of the virus In mid-March , some researchers argued in a letter to the journal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be of natural origin and not “ from a laboratory ” .
They cited the structure of the virus and the fact that the binding to the human ACE2 cell receptor did not correspond to the theoretical maximum .
In the meantime , however , numerous renowned virologists have contradicted this argument .
An artificial origin in the context of virological functional research is “ at least as plausible ” as a natural origin .
In fact , coronaviruses of this kind have been intensively researched in several laboratories for almost 20 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2003 ) , they say .
Arguments in favour of an artificial origin include in particular that the binding to the human ACE2 cell receptor is significantly stronger than in all common source animals and that no direct source animal could be identified so far .
In addition , the virus contains some striking functional gene sequences that might have been inserted artificially ( see graphic below ) .
The initial theory of the animal market in Wuhan has since been rejected because none of the animals there tested positive and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no connection to the animal market .
The animal market is now seen as a secondary place of transmission .
It is known that the virological laboratory in Wuhan , in collaboration with the United States and France , researched coronaviruses and thereby also generated “ potentially pandemic pathogens ” ( PPP ) that are particularly easy to transmit and / or particularly dangerous .
In addition , there have been several laboratory accidents with virus releases in China and the USA .
The unbiased observer must therefore continue to consider several realistic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus ( as assumed with SARS 2003 ) , a laboratory accident as part of functional research ( probably in Wuhan ) , or even a targeted release by a geopolitically interested actor in the East or West .
Nevertheless , the Covid19 virus is not a “ biological weapon ” in the classic sense : the virus is very easily transmissible , but not particularly dangerous for the general population .
Animal studies have shown that much more deadly corona viruses can be generated .
Various politicians in Europe and the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” can only be ended by a vaccine that is currently being developed .
However , many experts have pointed out that an express vaccine against the new coronavirus is not necessary or useful due to the overall low lethality ( see above ) and the already declining spread .
The protection of risk groups , especially in nursing homes , could be much more targeted .
Some experts like the Swiss infectiologist Dr. Pietro Vernazza also pointed out that experience shows that the high-risk group in particular benefits the least from vaccination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reacts adequately to the vaccine .
Various experts have also pointed out the significant health risks of an express vaccine .
In fact , vaccination against the so-called “ swine flu ” from 2009/2010 , for example , led to sometimes severe neurological damage , particularly in children , and to claims for damages in the millions .
Nevertheless , several billion dollars of private and public funds have already been collected for the development of a vaccine .
An “ immunity certificate ” for work and travel is still being discussed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the two leading vaccine projects had some serious complications .
In the case of the Oxford University vaccine , in animal experiments all six rhesus monkeys fell ill with Covid19 despite vaccination and were as infectious as the unvaccinated monkeys .
Nevertheless , the vaccine was moved on to the human test phase .
However , the project manager explained that the coronavirus had already become so rare in the population that the clinical trial may deliver no result .
In the case of the novel RNA vaccine from Moderna , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 20 % of the participants in the high-dose group had a “ serious side effect ” , although Moderna only allowed very healthy people to try it .
One of the Moderna participants was then presented and interviewed by CNN as a “ hero ” .
However , it was agreed not to mention that the participant passed out after the vaccination and became “ as sick as never before in his life ” .
Several experts also criticized Moderna for not disclosing their clinical data sufficiently .
The director of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself previously a director at Moderna .
President Trump also announced that the vaccine might be distributed nationwide with the U.S. military .
Some countries , such as Denmark , have already created the legal basis for mandatory vaccination of the entire population .
In Germany , too , various politicians have spoken out in favor of compulsory vaccination .
Proponents of compulsory vaccination , such as World Medical President Frank Montgomery , argue that the population must be vaccinated to protect those who can not be vaccinated for health reasons .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid19 and the already wide prevalence , this argumentation seems rahter questionable , however .
In addition , there are the serious vaccine risks outlined above .
Nevertheless , the head of the largest European ticket portal Eventim said that “ major events may not return until there is a vaccine or a correspondingly effective medication.
” British Prime Minister Boris Johnson , who co-chaired the vaccine summit in early June with US billionaire Bill Gates , described the GAVI vaccine alliance as a kind of “ health NATO ” .
Nevertheless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fail since even antibody tests can only detect about 20 % of all infections , as the study by Professor Boyman ’ s group has shown ( see above ) .
The situation regarding helpful medication for severe Covid19 cases remains very unclear .
The only consensus is that blood thinners are helpful in preventing life-threatening thrombosis and embolism ( as with severe influenza ) .
There have been fierce discussions about the malaria drug hydroxychloroquin ( HCQ ) for months .
The journal Lancet published a study at the end of May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems .
The WHO then ceased all of its HCQ studies .
Shortly thereafter , however , it became known that the Lancet study was based on a manipulated data set .
The Lancet study and another study in the New England Journal of Medicine ( NEJM ) had to be withdrawn , which is one of the biggest medical scandals in recent years .
The reason for the manipulated study is not clear , however , the lead author seems to be involved in a study of competing drug Remdesivir at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the pharmaceutical company Gilead came itself under pressure after a first study showed that the drug could not reduce the risk of death .
However , many media ignored this and still reported positive about the drug .
A former French Minister of Health revealed in an interview that the editors of Lancet and NEJM stated in a confidential discussion panel that the pressure and influence of pharmaceutical companies had become so great , indeed “ criminal ” , that one could no longer speak of science .
Various clinics use or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in combination with zinc , vitamins or other medications .
However , it is known that HCQ can lead to fatal complications in people from Africa and the Mediterranean region that have a metabolic pecularity called favism .
Unfortunately , it must be assumed that incorrect or too aggressive medication with HCQ , steroids , antibiotics and antiviral agents as well as invasive ventilation has led to numerous additional and avoidable deaths during the corona pandemic .
• The British chief medical officer Dr. Chris Whitty explained in a lecture that Covid19 posed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the population ” .
Most people do not or only mildly fall ill with it , and even with those who are seriously ill , the chances of recovery are good .
• Stanford professor and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Michael Levitt explains in a new article that the lockdowns did not save lives but cost many .
A “ panic virus ” has spread among politicians worldwide , professor Levitt said .
• Professor Karel Sikora of the Note : The video with Professor Sikora was temporarily deleted by YouTube and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Buckingham argued in an interview that ultimately , fear will “ kill a lot more people than the virus , ” including untreated heart and cancer patients .
Schools should be opened quickly and masks should remain an individual decision because their benefits have not been proven .
One should go back to an “ old normal ” and not a “ new normal ” .
( : The video with Professor Sikora was temporarily deleted by YouTube and only restored after protests ) .
• Professor Yoram Lass , former director-general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , argues that the lockdown measures have been “ totally disproportionate ” and are an acute threat to hundreds of millions of people .
Covid19 is “ comparable to a flu epidemic ” and would never have justified such political destruction of livelihoods .
People have been intimidated and “ brainwashed ” .
• The Oxford professor of epidemiology , Sunetra Gupta , argues in a new interview that the lethality of Covid19 is likely to be below 0.1 % and that a large number of people have already come into contact with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prof. Hendrik Streeck criticized the lockdown and explained that “ all experts are returning to the assessment of the early days ” that Covid-19 “ should not be trivialized , but also should not be dramatized ” .
The reason for the declining risk assessment was the “ enormous number of infections that remained without symptoms ” .
Streeck does not expect any excess mortality in Germany by the end of the year , as the average age of death is “ rather above life expectancy ” , and he doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corona tests to be useful .
He also criticized the general use of masks , saying that these are a “ wonderful breeding ground for bacteria and fungi ” .
Schools should be reopened as soon as possible .
• An employee of the German Ministry of the Interior , responsible for disaster protection , together with external experts wrote a 100-page analysis paper on corona crisis management , which was leaked to the press at the beginning of May and created strong reactions .
In the paper , Covid-19 is described as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ there was probably at no time a risk beyond the normal level ” for the general population .
The collateral damage caused by the lockdown is now significantly higher than the recognizable benefit and far exceeds the risk potential of the corona virus .
In March and April alone , over a million operations were not carried out in Germany .
Crisis management and threat analysis mostly failed and data supplied by health authorities were “ inadequate ” as the basis for decision-making .
The official was subsequently fired because he had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• A group led by Professor Sucharit Bhakdi founded the Association of Physicians and Scientists for Health , Freedom and Democracy ( MWGFD ) , which has already been joined by over 16,000 supporters .
At the beginning of June , the group published a call to the federal government and all state governments to immediately and completely lift the Corona measures .
Professor Bhakdi ’ s book , Corona : A False Alarm ?
, appearing at the end of June , is already an Amazon bestseller solely due to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intensive medicine at the University Hospital Zurich , who cared for critical Covid 19 patients , criticized in a widely shared video the “ scaremongering ” associated with the disease .
For the vast majority of all people there is no significant risk of death , the numbers are comparable overall to earlier flu waves .
Risk groups could be protected in a targeted manner , while the lockdown only prevents the immunization of the general population .
In addition , people die due to the medical undersupply in other areas .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ greater than the benefits .
The partially mandatory mouth protection for schoolchildren also has “ no medical sense and benefit ” and places a heavy burden on the children .
The “ daily counting ” of the cases is nonsensical and only spreads fear .
The counterproductive measures must be stopped quickly.Swiss media tried to put pressure on the Zurich University Hospital after the video had been widely distributed .
The doctor has since removed the original video .
• The Swiss chief physician for infectiology , Dr. Pietro Vernazza , using current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that fever measurements and contact tracing are not useful due to the often symptom-free course and easy transmission of Covid19 .
• The well-known Swiss immunologist Dr. Beda Stadler explains in an article that Covid19 is a “ very selective disease ” and only poses a real risk for very few people .
The media , on the other hand , focused on the few atypical individual cases that exist with every illness .
Many scientists had focused too much on their models and too little on reality .
The planned contact tracing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ only panic ” .
Sweden : Sweden had no lockdown , no mask requirement and no primary school closures , but instead mainly relied on the personal responsibility and cooperation of the population .
This approach worked well and Sweden saw only a low mortality rate in the general population , comparable to a seasonal flu wave .
Nevertheless , the overall mortality rate in Sweden was indeed higher than in the neighboring Scandinavian countries or in Germany , which was portrayed by many international media as an alleged “ failure of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , most media didn ’ t mention that three quarters of Swedish deaths occured in nursing facilities , which require targeted protection and do not benefit from a general lockdown of society .
Indeed , at 86 years , the median age of Swedish Covid deaths is likely the highest in the world .
The Swedish government has also been one of the few to apologize for the insufficient protection of nursing patients and to announce an investigation , but this has again been portrayed by many media as an alleged “ failure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yet even total mortality in Sweden remained below the strongest seasonal flu waves of the past thirty years .
Moreover , Sweden may now benefit from a very high natural immunity , especially in view of the latest immunological studies on the actual range of antibody tests ( see above ) .
Florida : Despite being home to many senior citizens , Florida introduced rather few restrictions and even the popular beaches were reopened early , which was heavily criticized by many US media .
Nevertheless , Florida did very well compared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths in a population of 21 million , which corresponds to Germany ’ s low mortality .
In an interview , the governor explained that contrary to the media , he realized early on based on the figures from South Korea and Italy that Covid19 was only dangerous for a very small risk group and he therefore protected the nursing homes as best as possible .
In terms of prevention , nursing homes were even more important than the clinics themselves , and this strategy had proven itself .
At the end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ camps and youth activities could be carried out without restrictions .
Japan : Japan registered some of the first Covid19 cases outside of China , but did not introduce a lockdown .
At the end of March , the Japan Times asked , “ Where ’ s the coronavirus explosion ?
” Bloomberg now reports that a corona crisis never materialized : there were no restrictions on movement , restaurants and hairdressers remained open , there were no “ tracking apps ” and no mass tests of the general population .
Nevertheless – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has by far the least deaths compared to the G7 industrialized countries .
It is sometimes argued that the respirators were decisive for Japan ’ s success .
However , respirators are voluntary in Japan and did not stop the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan , while Sweden , Florida and other successful regions did not use masks in the general population .
Belarus : Belarus has probably implemented the least restrictions of all industrialized nations and carried out even major events such as the 75-year celebrations of the end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officially counts fewer than 300 Covid deaths even after more than three months .
Long-term President Lukashenko , who has repeatedly referred to Corona as a “ psychosis , ” said in mid-May that the capital , Minsk , had already passed the peak .
The decision to treat Covid19 cases like normal pneumonia was correct .
Ultimately , however , only statistics on overall mortality will be able to show whether the Belarusian numbers are really correct .
• Transmission routes : A new report by the US health agency CDC comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transmitted primarily through direct contact with people and “ can not spread easily on surfaces.
” The German virologist Hendrik Streeck was already able to demonstrate that the new corona virus does not or hardly spread through objects or through aerosols floating in the air .
• Distance rules : Iceland declared the distance rules optional at the end of May and reopened bars and clubs .
Switzerland converted the distance regulations into a voluntary recommendation .
A Cochrane study from 2011 already showed that there is so far hardly any evidence for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measures .
• Surgeries : According to an article in the British Journal of Surgery , around 28 million surgeries , including many cancer surgeries , have been canceled or postponed worldwide over 12 weeks due to corona measures .
• Years of life : An evaluation by four US professors comes to the conclusion that the lockdown in the USA will cost about twice as many years of life as Covid-19 and was therefore a very counterproductive measure even from a purely medical point of view .
• Coronavirus season : A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Diseases shows that coronaviruses occur “ sharply seasonal ” between December and April / May .
• Virus test : A German mathematician explains why the low remaining infection numbers in many countries consist largely of false positive results , even with fairly accurate PCR tests , and the pandemic thus “ never seems to end ” .
• “ Second wave ” : Studies on a “ second wave ” sometimes make completely unrealistic assumptions , such as a constant risk of infection and death across all age groups .
Nevertheless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flu shows that the global spread of pandemics can indeed extend over several seasons .
• Italy : Almost 5 % of the population in Milan already had antibodies against Covid19 in mid-February , ie before the outbreak of the epidemic in Italy .
This again indicates that the virus was already circulating in Europe earlier than previously thought .
• Unemployment : The International Labor Agency ILO expects that due to the political corona measures , half of the world ’ s employees or 1.6 billion people are at risk of losing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 13 misleading and false claims about the corona epidemic ( German ) • Review : Why life went on as normal during the global flu pandemics of 1968/1969 ( Hong Kong flu , and the Woodstock music festival ) and of 1957 ( Asian flu ) .
Many media reported on a study by Imperial College London , according to which the lockdowns in Europe allegedly “ saved 3 million lives ” .
In reality , Imperial College London simply compared the unrealistic predictions of its own model with actual developments .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sweden , which even without a lockdown had only a fraction of the deaths predicted by the Imperial College model ( see graph ) .
The role of the media Most traditional media , almost all of which are part of elite geopolitical networks , decided to run a campaign of fear during the coronavirus period , a behavior that is usually observed in connection with wars of aggression or alleged terrorist attacks .
The risk to the general population was greatly exaggerated , official policies were hardly questioned , the situation in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used , campaigns were staged , and protesters were systematically defamed as “ idiots ” .
It is true that some conservative media criticized the economically harmful lockdown measures .
The real question , however , is whether they will also criticize the surveillance measures now planned , such as the extensive societal contact tracing ( see below ) .
Most independent media sooner or later realized that the risk of the corona virus was exaggerated and politically exploited .
Only a few independent media outlets did not realize this , perhaps because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the official campaign of fear .
Some analysts compared Covid-19 to a psychological operation that uses the media-induced fear of the virus to bring about political and social change .
US platforms such as Google , Youtube , Facebook and Twitter censored corona issues extensively by deleting critical ( i.e .
non WHO compliant ) points of view even from doctors or restricting their distribution , a procedure that has long been the norm for geopolitical issues .
However , modern media users have the option of using manipulation-free search engines such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Bitchute , as well as generally using an advertising and tracking blocker on certain media sites .
The above information may be accessed in many languages .
See here : Languages : CZ , DE , EN , EO , ES , FI , FR , GR , HBS , HE , HU , IT , JP , KO , NO , PL , PT , RO , RU , SE , SI , SK , TR PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Hard Facts: Studies of Covid-19 lethality
Written by Swiss Policy Research
Probably the most comprehensive body of expert information on COVID-19 we have seen comes from the independent Swiss Policy Research body. Below we are delighted to run further information from their superb website.
Stanford professor John Ioannidis published an overview of Covid-19 antibody studies. According to his analysis, the lethality of Covid19 (IFR) is below 0.16{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} in most countries and regions. Ioannidis found an upper limit of 0.40{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} for three hotspots.
In its latest report, the US health authority CDC reduced the Covid19 lethality (IFR) to 0.26{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} (best estimate). Even this value may still be seen as an upper limit, since the CDC conservatively assumes 35{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} asymptomatic cases, while most studies indicate 50 to 80{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} asymptomatic cases.
At the end of May, however, Swiss immunologists led by Professor Onur Boyman published what is probably the most important study on Covid19 lethality to date. This preprint study comes to the conclusion that the usual antibody tests that measure antibodies in the blood (IgG and IgM) can recognize at most one fifth of all Covid19 infections.
The reason for this discrepancy is that in most people the new coronavirus is already neutralized by antibodies on the mucous membrane (IgA) or by cellular immunity (T-cells). In most of these cases, no symptoms or only mild symptoms develop.
This means that the new coronavirus is probably much more common than previously thought and the lethality per infection is up to five times lower than previously assumed. The real lethality could thus be well below 0.1{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} and hence in the range of strong seasonal influenza.
In fact, several studies have now shown that up to 60{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of all people already have a certain cellular immunity to Covid-19, which was acquired through contact with previous coronaviruses (common cold viruses). Children in particular often come into contact with such coronaviruses, which could help explain their insensitivity to Covid19.
The new Swiss study may also explain why antibody studies even in hotspots like New York or Madrid found infection rates of at most about 20{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}, as this would correspond to an actual rate of nearly 100{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}. In many regions, the actual prevalence might already be well over 50{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} and thus in the range of herd immunity.
Should the Swiss study be confirmed, the assessment of Oxford epidemiologist Prof. Sunetra Gupta would apply, who predicted early on that Covid-19 is very widespread and its lethality below 0.1{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}.
Despite the comparatively low lethality of Covid-19 (deaths per infection), the mortality (deaths per population) can still be increased regionally and in the short term if the virus spreads rapidly and reaches high risk groups, especially patients in nursing homes, as indeed happened in several hotspots (see below).
Due to its rather low lethality, Covid-19 falls at most into level 2 of the five-level pandemic plan developed by US health authorities. For this level, only the “voluntary isolation of sick people” is to be applied, while further measures such as face masks, school closings, distance rules, contact tracing, vaccinations and lockdowns of entire societies are not recommended.
Regarding contact tracing, a WHO study on influenza pandemics from 2019 also came to the conclusion that from a medical point of view this is “under no circumstances recommended”, since it is not expedient for easily communicable and generally mild respiratory diseases.
It is sometimes argued that the rather low lethality was not known at the beginning of the pandemic. This is not entirely true, as data from South Korea, the cruise ships and even from Italy already showed in March that the risk to the general population is rather low.
Many health authorities also knew this, as leaked emails from Denmark in mid-March show: “The Danish Health Authority continues to consider that Covid-19 cannot be described as a generally dangerous disease, as it does not have either a usually serious course or a high mortality rate.”
Some media nevertheless continue to calculate an allegedly much higher Covid19 lethality rate of sometimes over 1{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} by simply dividing deaths by “infections”, without taking into account the age and risk distribution, which is absolutely crucial especially for Covid19.
The latest data from the European mortality monitoring Euromomo shows that several countries such as France, Italy and Spain are already entering a below-average mortality. The reason for this is that the average age of Covid19 deaths was very high and fewer people than usual are now dying in this age group.
See also: Studies on Covid-19 lethality
The role of nursing homes
Nursing homes played an absolute key role in the Covid 19 pandemic. In most countries, one to two thirds of all Covid19 deaths occurred in nursing homes, and up to 80{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} in Canada and some US states. Even in Sweden, which did not impose a lockdown, 75{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of deaths occurred in nursing facilities.
It is all the more worrying that some authorities have obliged their nursing homes to admit Covid patients from the clinics, which has almost always resulted in numerous new infections and deaths. This happened in northern Italy, England and the heavily affected US states of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
It is also known from northern Italy that the widespread fear of the virus and the announced lockdown of the country led to the flight of the predominantly Eastern European nurses, which further accelerated the breakdown of elderly care.
In the United States, at least 42{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of all Covid19 deaths are accounted for by 0.6{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of the population living in nursing homes. Nursing homes require targeted protection and do not benefit from a general lockdown of society as a whole.
It is well known that even common corona viruses (cold viruses) can be very dangerous for people in nursing homes. Stanford professor John Ioannidis pointed out already in mid-March that coronaviruses may have a case mortality rate of up to 8{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} in nursing homes.
In addition, it is often not clear whether these people really died from Covid-19 or from weeks of stress and total isolation. For example, there were approximately 30,000 additional deaths in English nursing homes, but in only 10,000 cases, Covid19 is noted on the death certificate.
In April alone, around 10,000 additional dementia patients without corona infection died in England and Wales due to weeks of isolation. Investigations into the situation in nursing homes have been initiated or requested in several countries.
The role of hospitals
The second central factor regarding infections and deaths, in addition to the nursing homes, are the hospitals themselves. A case study in Wuhan already showed that around 41{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of hospitalized Covid patients had in fact contracted Covid in the hospital itself.
Contagion in hospitals also played a decisive role in northern Italy, Spain, England and other regions that were severely affected, meaning that the clinics themselves became the main place of transmission of Covid19 to already weakened people (so-called nosocomial infection) – an issue that had already been observed during the SARS outbreak from 2003.
Based on current knowledge, those countries that managed to avoid outbreaks of infection in nursing homes and hospitals had comparatively few deaths. The general lockdown of society, however, played no role or even a counterproductive role (see below).
An additional factor is the sometimes fatal medical mistreatment of Covid patients with aggressive drugs or invasive ventilation, the risks of which experts have been warning about for months. In the US, for example, there have been questionable financial incentives to connect Covid patients to ventilators, a practice that is now being investigated in several states.
See also: An undercover nurse reporting from the ‘epicenter’ in New York City (Video)
The clinical picture of Covid-19
The well-known Hamburg medical examiner Professor Klaus Püschel presented his study (English) on the first 12 of 190 detailed corona autopsies at a press conference (German).
Professor Püschel again emphasized that Covid-19 “is not nearly as threatening as was initially suspected”. The danger was “too much influenced by media images”. The media had focused on severe individual cases and fueled panic with “completely wrong messages”. Covid-19 is not a “killer virus” and the call for new medicine or vaccines is “driven by fear, not facts.”
The specific cause of death of the examined cases was pneumonia, but in about 50{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of the cases there were venous thrombosis in the legs, which can lead to fatal pulmonary embolism. The kidneys and heart muscle were also partially affected. Professor Püschel therefore recommends the preventive administration of blood-thinning medication for serious Covid cases.
With regard to thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, Professor Püschel – like other experts before – emphasized that a “lockdown” with quarantine at home was “exactly the wrong measure”, since the lack of exercise itself promotes thrombosis. Indeed, US specialists have already been warning of this risk after even Covid-negative people developed unexpected thrombosis.
Many media again misinterpreted the autopsy findings and spoke of Covid-19 as a particularly dangerous disease which, unlike influenza, is said to lead to thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. This is not true, however: it has been known for 50 years that even severe influenza can greatly increase the risk of thrombosis and embolism and can affect the heart muscle and other organs. Even the recommendation regarding preventive blood thinner for severe influenza has been around for 50 years already.
Children and schools
Numerous studies have now shown that children hardly get Covid19 and do not or hardly transmit the virus, which was already known from the 2003 SARS outbreak. There was therefore no medical reason for the closure of schools at any time.
Accordingly, all those countries that reopened their schools in May saw no increase in cases of infection. Countries like Sweden, which never closed their primary schools anyway, had no problems with this either.
A preprint study by the German virologist Christian Drosten argued that the risk of infection from children is comparable to adults and schools should therefore remain closed. However, several researchers demonstrated methodological errors in the study. Drosten subsequently withdrew the recommendation regarding school closures.
In some schools, for example in France and Israel, alleged “corona outbreaks” are said to have occurred. However, it is likely that these are transmissions from teachers to schoolchildren that, to their dismay, are regularly tested, although they hardly show any symptoms and are themselves hardly or not at all contagious.
The British Kawasaki Disease Foundation again criticized the dubious and lurid media coverage of Kawasaki disease. In fact, there has been no significant increase in Kawasaki cases and no proven association with Covid-19. General inflammatory reactions in individual children are also known from other viral infections, but the number of cases reported so far is extremely low.
German medical associations have also given the all-clear: Covid-19 is imperceptible or very mild in almost all children. Schools and daycare centers should therefore be opened immediately and without restrictions, ie there is no need for small groups, distance rules or masks.
On the effectiveness of masks
Regardless of the comparatively low lethality of Covid19 in the general population (see above), there is still no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of masks in healthy and asymptomatic people in everyday life.
A cross-country study by the University of East Anglia came to the conclusion that a mask requirement was of no benefit and could even increase the risk of infection.
Two US professors and experts in respiratory and infection protection from the University of Illinois explain in an essay that respiratory masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). The widespread use of masks didn’t prevent the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan, either.
A study from April 2020 in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine came to the conclusion that neither fabric masks nor surgical masks can prevent the spread of the Covid19 virus by coughing.
An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 also comes to the conclusion that respiratory masks offer little or no protection in everyday life. The call for a mask requirement is described as an “irrational fear reflex”.
A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the U.S. CDC also found that respirators had no effect.
The WHO moreover declared in June that truly “asymptomatic transmission” is in fact “very rare”, as data from numerous countries showed. Some of the few confirmed cases were due to direct body contact, i.e. shaking hands or kissing.
In Austria, the mask requirement in retail and catering will be lifted again from mid-June. A mask requirement was never introduced in Sweden because it “does not offer additional protection for the population”, as the health authority explained.
Numerous politicians, media people and police officers have already been caught putting on their respirators in a crowd especially for the television cameras or taking them off immediately when they believed that they were no longer being filmed.
In some cases there were brutal police attacks because a person allegedly “did not wear her mask properly”. In other cases, people with a disability who cannot and do not have to wear a mask, are not allowed to enter department stores .
Despite this evidence, a group called “masks4all”, which was founded by a “young leader” of the World Economic Forum (WEF) Davos, is advocating worldwide mask requirements. Several governments and the WHO appear to be responding to this campaign.
Many critics suspect that the masks are more likely to have a psychological or political function (“muzzle” or “visible sign of obedience”) and that wearing them frequently might even lead to additional health problems.
A study from Germany empirically showed that the introduction of face masks had no effect on infection rates (see graph). Only the city of Jena appeared to experience a strong decrease in infections, but Jena simultaneously introduced very strict quarantine regulations.
On the origin of the virus
In mid-March, some researchers argued in a letter to the journal Nature Medicine that the Covid19 virus must be of natural origin and not “from a laboratory”. They cited the structure of the virus and the fact that the binding to the human ACE2 cell receptor did not correspond to the theoretical maximum.
In the meantime, however, numerous renowned virologists have contradicted this argument. An artificial origin in the context of virological functional research is “at least as plausible” as a natural origin. In fact, coronaviruses of this kind have been intensively researched in several laboratories for almost 20 years (i.e. since the SARS outbreak in 2003), they say.
Arguments in favour of an artificial origin include in particular that the binding to the human ACE2 cell receptor is significantly stronger than in all common source animals and that no direct source animal could be identified so far. In addition, the virus contains some striking functional gene sequences that might have been inserted artificially (see graphic below).
The initial theory of the animal market in Wuhan has since been rejected because none of the animals there tested positive and a third of the very first patients had no connection to the animal market. The animal market is now seen as a secondary place of transmission.
It is known that the virological laboratory in Wuhan, in collaboration with the United States and France, researched coronaviruses and thereby also generated “potentially pandemic pathogens” (PPP) that are particularly easy to transmit and / or particularly dangerous. In addition, there have been several laboratory accidents with virus releases in China and the USA.
The unbiased observer must therefore continue to consider several realistic options: a natural origin of the virus (as assumed with SARS 2003), a laboratory accident as part of functional research (probably in Wuhan), or even a targeted release by a geopolitically interested actor in the East or West.
Nevertheless, the Covid19 virus is not a “biological weapon” in the classic sense: the virus is very easily transmissible, but not particularly dangerous for the general population. Animal studies have shown that much more deadly corona viruses can be generated.
Vaccines against Covid-19
Various politicians in Europe and the US have declared that the “corona crisis” can only be ended by a vaccine that is currently being developed.
However, many experts have pointed out that an express vaccine against the new coronavirus is not necessary or useful due to the overall low lethality (see above) and the already declining spread. The protection of risk groups, especially in nursing homes, could be much more targeted.
Some experts like the Swiss infectiologist Dr. Pietro Vernazza also pointed out that experience shows that the high-risk group in particular benefits the least from vaccination, since their immune system no longer reacts adequately to the vaccine.
Various experts have also pointed out the significant health risks of an express vaccine. In fact, vaccination against the so-called “swine flu” from 2009/2010, for example, led to sometimes severe neurological damage, particularly in children, and to claims for damages in the millions.
Nevertheless, several billion dollars of private and public funds have already been collected for the development of a vaccine. An “immunity certificate” for work and travel is still being discussed. However, contrary to most media reports, the two leading vaccine projects had some serious complications.
In the case of the Oxford University vaccine, in animal experiments all six rhesus monkeys fell ill with Covid19 despite vaccination and were as infectious as the unvaccinated monkeys. Nevertheless, the vaccine was moved on to the human test phase. However, the project manager explained that the coronavirus had already become so rare in the population that the clinical trial may deliver no result.
In the case of the novel RNA vaccine from Moderna, which was unusually tested directly in human experiments, 20{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of the participants in the high-dose group had a “serious side effect”, although Moderna only allowed very healthy people to try it.
One of the Moderna participants was then presented and interviewed by CNN as a “hero”. However, it was agreed not to mention that the participant passed out after the vaccination and became “as sick as never before in his life”. Several experts also criticized Moderna for not disclosing their clinical data sufficiently.
The director of the US Corona Vaccine Rapid Development Program was himself previously a director at Moderna. President Trump also announced that the vaccine might be distributed nationwide with the U.S. military. Some countries, such as Denmark, have already created the legal basis for mandatory vaccination of the entire population. In Germany, too, various politicians have spoken out in favor of compulsory vaccination.
Proponents of compulsory vaccination, such as World Medical President Frank Montgomery, argue that the population must be vaccinated to protect those who cannot be vaccinated for health reasons. In view of the rather low lethality of Covid19 and the already wide prevalence, this argumentation seems rahter questionable, however. In addition, there are the serious vaccine risks outlined above.
Nevertheless, the head of the largest European ticket portal Eventim said that “major events may not return until there is a vaccine or a correspondingly effective medication.”
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who co-chaired the vaccine summit in early June with US billionaire Bill Gates, described the GAVI vaccine alliance as a kind of “health NATO”. Nevertheless, “immunity passports” are likely to fail since even antibody tests can only detect about 20{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of all infections, as the study by Professor Boyman’s group has shown (see above).
Medication against Covid-19
The situation regarding helpful medication for severe Covid19 cases remains very unclear. The only consensus is that blood thinners are helpful in preventing life-threatening thrombosis and embolism (as with severe influenza).
There have been fierce discussions about the malaria drug hydroxychloroquin (HCQ) for months. The journal Lancet published a study at the end of May according to which HCQ leads to heart problems. The WHO then ceased all of its HCQ studies. Shortly thereafter, however, it became known that the Lancet study was based on a manipulated data set.
The Lancet study and another study in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) had to be withdrawn, which is one of the biggest medical scandals in recent years. The reason for the manipulated study is not clear, however, the lead author seems to be involved in a study of competing drug Remdesivir at the same time.
The use of remdesivir by the pharmaceutical company Gilead came itself under pressure after a first study showed that the drug could not reduce the risk of death. However, many media ignored this and still reported positive about the drug.
A former French Minister of Health revealed in an interview that the editors of Lancet and NEJM stated in a confidential discussion panel that the pressure and influence of pharmaceutical companies had become so great, indeed “criminal”, that one could no longer speak of science.
Various clinics use or study HCQ in Covid19 patients, sometimes in combination with zinc, vitamins or other medications. However, it is known that HCQ can lead to fatal complications in people from Africa and the Mediterranean region that have a metabolic pecularity called favism.
Unfortunately, it must be assumed that incorrect or too aggressive medication with HCQ, steroids, antibiotics and antiviral agents as well as invasive ventilation has led to numerous additional and avoidable deaths during the corona pandemic.
Expert opinions (selection)
Success stories
Sweden: Sweden had no lockdown, no mask requirement and no primary school closures, but instead mainly relied on the personal responsibility and cooperation of the population. This approach worked well and Sweden saw only a low mortality rate in the general population, comparable to a seasonal flu wave.
Nevertheless, the overall mortality rate in Sweden was indeed higher than in the neighboring Scandinavian countries or in Germany, which was portrayed by many international media as an alleged “failure of the Swedish no-lockdown strategy”.
However, most media didn’t mention that three quarters of Swedish deaths occured in nursing facilities, which require targeted protection and do not benefit from a general lockdown of society. Indeed, at 86 years, the median age of Swedish Covid deaths is likely the highest in the world.
The Swedish government has also been one of the few to apologize for the insufficient protection of nursing patients and to announce an investigation, but this has again been portrayed by many media as an alleged “failure of the Swedish no-lockdown strategy”.
Yet even total mortality in Sweden remained below the strongest seasonal flu waves of the past thirty years. Moreover, Sweden may now benefit from a very high natural immunity, especially in view of the latest immunological studies on the actual range of antibody tests (see above).
Florida: Despite being home to many senior citizens, Florida introduced rather few restrictions and even the popular beaches were reopened early, which was heavily criticized by many US media. Nevertheless, Florida did very well compared to other states and recently had around 2300 deaths in a population of 21 million, which corresponds to Germany’s low mortality.
In an interview, the governor explained that contrary to the media, he realized early on based on the figures from South Korea and Italy that Covid19 was only dangerous for a very small risk group and he therefore protected the nursing homes as best as possible. In terms of prevention, nursing homes were even more important than the clinics themselves, and this strategy had proven itself. At the end of May, the governor announced that summer camps and youth activities could be carried out without restrictions.
Japan: Japan registered some of the first Covid19 cases outside of China, but did not introduce a lockdown. At the end of March, the Japan Times asked, “Where’s the coronavirus explosion?” Bloomberg now reports that a corona crisis never materialized: there were no restrictions on movement, restaurants and hairdressers remained open, there were no “tracking apps” and no mass tests of the general population. Nevertheless – or because of this – Japan now has by far the least deaths compared to the G7 industrialized countries.
It is sometimes argued that the respirators were decisive for Japan’s success. However, respirators are voluntary in Japan and did not stop the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan, while Sweden, Florida and other successful regions did not use masks in the general population.
Belarus: Belarus has probably implemented the least restrictions of all industrialized nations and carried out even major events such as the 75-year celebrations of the end of World War II. Nevertheless, Belarus officially counts fewer than 300 Covid deaths even after more than three months. Long-term President Lukashenko, who has repeatedly referred to Corona as a “psychosis,” said in mid-May that the capital, Minsk, had already passed the peak. The decision to treat Covid19 cases like normal pneumonia was correct. Ultimately, however, only statistics on overall mortality will be able to show whether the Belarusian numbers are really correct.
Additional Notes
Did the lockdowns save lives?
Many media reported on a study by Imperial College London, according to which the lockdowns in Europe allegedly “saved 3 million lives”. In reality, Imperial College London simply compared the unrealistic predictions of its own model with actual developments. This is particularly evident in the case of Sweden, which even without a lockdown had only a fraction of the deaths predicted by the Imperial College model (see graph).
The role of the media
Most traditional media, almost all of which are part of elite geopolitical networks, decided to run a campaign of fear during the coronavirus period, a behavior that is usually observed in connection with wars of aggression or alleged terrorist attacks.
The risk to the general population was greatly exaggerated, official policies were hardly questioned, the situation in hospitals was dramatized, manipulative images were used, campaigns were staged, and protesters were systematically defamed as “idiots”.
It is true that some conservative media criticized the economically harmful lockdown measures. The real question, however, is whether they will also criticize the surveillance measures now planned, such as the extensive societal contact tracing (see below).
Most independent media sooner or later realized that the risk of the corona virus was exaggerated and politically exploited. Only a few independent media outlets did not realize this, perhaps because they lacked a medical background or fell for the official campaign of fear.
Some analysts compared Covid-19 to a psychological operation that uses the media-induced fear of the virus to bring about political and social change.
US platforms such as Google, Youtube, Facebook and Twitter censored corona issues extensively by deleting critical (i.e. non WHO compliant) points of view even from doctors or restricting their distribution, a procedure that has long been the norm for geopolitical issues.
However, modern media users have the option of using manipulation-free search engines such as DuckDuckGo and independent video platforms such as Bitchute, as well as generally using an advertising and tracking blocker on certain media sites.
The above information may be accessed in many languages. See here: Languages: CZ, DE, EN, EO, ES, FI, FR, GR, HBS, HE, HU, IT, JP, KO, NO, PL, PT, RO, RU, SE, SI, SK, TR
Read more at swprs.org
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-22--#FluorideTrial: Judge Seeks Discussion on New Evidence

The historic trial examining the dangers of water fluoridation reached a temporary conclusion on Wednesday after the judge delayed the ruling so the parties may consider new evidence on fluoride .
On Wednesday , U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen delayed a ruling in the case between the Fluoride Action Network ( FAN ) and the U.S Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) .
The FAN is aiming to prove the harms caused by community water fluoridation .
The government is defending water fluoridation and seeking a dismissal of the petition by the plaintiffs .
Over the last two weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ witnesses with the FAN and EPA .
Attorneys with FAN argue that water fluoridation violates the 1970 Toxic Substances Control Act provisions which prohibit the “ particular use ” of a chemical which has been found to present an unreasonable risk to the general public .
Under section 21 of the TSCA citizens are allowed to petition the EPA to regulate or ban individual chemicals .
Judge Chen suggested the FAN file a new petition with the EPA , a suggestion which plaintiffs attorney Michael Connett was not eager to accept given the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get the lawsuit to court .
Connett told the court that the plaintiffs might not have the resources to continue this fight for another couple of years and cautioned against delaying a ruling because it would continue to endanger Americans due to ongoing fluoride exposure .
The EPA ’ s attorneys were equally disinterested in a delayed ruling , stating that there is “ no way ” the EPA could conduct a review within the required 90 days .
Judge Chen said he was only discussing delaying the ruling for another couple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also noted that the evidence presented by both sides went “ well beyond administrative record , because so much has changed since that petition was filed ” in 2016 .
“ Doesn ’ t it make sense to have the agency take a second look ?
” Judge Chen asked the attorneys for the EPA and FAN .
Judge Chen noted that the National Academy of Science is expected to publish a study later this year and the National Toxicology Program is working on a review of the literature on fluoride .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be considered by the EPA .
The judge did acknowledge it is undisputed that fluoride can cause harm to the human brain and is a neurological hazard .
The disagreement between EPA and FAN hinges on arguments over the levels at which fluoride causes neurological damage .
Ultimately , Judge Chen , the EPA , and the FAN agreed to delay a ruling until both parties have time to discuss whether the EPA will revisit the original petition , FAN will file a new petition , or the judge will rule on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sides is scheduled for August 6 .
During the discussions about the potential ruling , Judge Chen admitted that the EPA held the FAN petition on water fluoridation to a standard which is not typical of petitions under TSCA .
“ The EPA appears to have applied a standard of causation , which from my read of TSCA is not accurate , is not a proper application , not the proper standard , ” Chen said to the EPA .
This fact was acknowledged by FAN attorney Michael Connett on Tuesday during cross @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Under standard TSCA procedure , parties must show an association — not causation — to prove the harm of water fluoridation .
Connett also spent much of his cross examination of EPA expert witnesses drawing attention to their previous testimony in defense of chemical companies and chemicals known to be hazardous to humans .
Two of the EPA ’ s witnesses are employed by the corporate firm Exponent Inc .
While cross examining EPA witness Dr. Ellen Chang , Connett asked how much biotech/pesticide company Syngenta paid her for a presentation she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chang about how much she was being paid to defend water fluoridation .
Chang stated that Exponent Inc was paying her an estimated $ 149,000 .
Dr. Chang was also questioned by Connett about her previous work for Monsanto , Dow Chemical , and other chemical companies and associations .
Specifically , Connett called attention to the fact that Dr. Chang had previously stated that despite an association between Monsanto/Bayer ’ s glyphosate and cancer , she concluded there was no risk .
Chang admitted that one peer-reviewer of her study on glyphosate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laundry list of every possible cause of bias.
” Despite arguments from the EPA ’ s attorneys that the EPA would never fail to act to protect Americans from harm , the fact remains that the U.S. government hired corporate scientists to defend water fluoridation .
The EPA attempted to diminish the concerns brought by the plaintiffs and their experts , while simultaneously attempting to present last-minute evidence which had not been peer-reviewed .
If the EPA wants to protect the American people they should accept the plaintiffs petition and end water fluoridation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Judge Chen should see clearly that fluoride is a neurotoxin which poses an unreasonable risk to human health .
Stay tuned to Derrick Broze at The Last American Vagabond for updates on this ongoing case .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

#FluorideTrial: Judge Seeks Discussion on New Evidence
Written by Derrick Broze
The historic trial examining the dangers of water fluoridation reached a temporary conclusion on Wednesday after the judge delayed the ruling so the parties may consider new evidence on fluoride.
(To read about week 1 of the trial, please see this)
On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen delayed a ruling in the case between the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The FAN is aiming to prove the harms caused by community water fluoridation. The government is defending water fluoridation and seeking a dismissal of the petition by the plaintiffs.
Over the last two weeks, Judge Chen has heard arguments from witnesses with the FAN and EPA. Attorneys with FAN argue that water fluoridation violates the 1970 Toxic Substances Control Act provisions which prohibit the “particular use” of a chemical which has been found to present an unreasonable risk to the general public. Under section 21 of the TSCA citizens are allowed to petition the EPA to regulate or ban individual chemicals.
Judge Chen suggested the FAN file a new petition with the EPA, a suggestion which plaintiffs attorney Michael Connett was not eager to accept given the fact that it has taken four years to get the lawsuit to court. Connett told the court that the plaintiffs might not have the resources to continue this fight for another couple of years and cautioned against delaying a ruling because it would continue to endanger Americans due to ongoing fluoride exposure. The EPA’s attorneys were equally disinterested in a delayed ruling, stating that there is “no way” the EPA could conduct a review within the required 90 days.
Judge Chen said he was only discussing delaying the ruling for another couple of months, not years. Chen also noted that the evidence presented by both sides went “well beyond administrative record, because so much has changed since that petition was filed” in 2016. “Doesn’t it make sense to have the agency take a second look?” Judge Chen asked the attorneys for the EPA and FAN.
Judge Chen noted that the National Academy of Science is expected to publish a study later this year and the National Toxicology Program is working on a review of the literature on fluoride. These new studies, he said, should be considered by the EPA. The judge did acknowledge it is undisputed that fluoride can cause harm to the human brain and is a neurological hazard. The disagreement between EPA and FAN hinges on arguments over the levels at which fluoride causes neurological damage.
#FluorideTrial FAN Connett says it is undisputed that fluoride passes through the placenta and into the fetal brain, due to the absence of a fully developed blood-brain barrier — Derrick Broze (@DBrozeLiveFree) June 17, 2020
Ultimately, Judge Chen, the EPA, and the FAN agreed to delay a ruling until both parties have time to discuss whether the EPA will revisit the original petition, FAN will file a new petition, or the judge will rule on the current case. A briefing between both sides is scheduled for August 6.
During the discussions about the potential ruling, Judge Chen admitted that the EPA held the FAN petition on water fluoridation to a standard which is not typical of petitions under TSCA. “The EPA appears to have applied a standard of causation, which from my read of TSCA is not accurate, is not a proper application, not the proper standard,” Chen said to the EPA. This fact was acknowledged by FAN attorney Michael Connett on Tuesday during cross examination of EPA witness Dr. Tala Henry. Under standard TSCA procedure, parties must show an association — not causation — to prove the harm of water fluoridation.
#FluorideTrial FAN Connett asks EPA witness Dr. Henry if its true that the EPA held the plaintiffs to a burden of proof that the EPA has not held single chemical before? Henry, I guess thats true. The EPA has apparently never before held a chemical to a standard of causation — Derrick Broze (@DBrozeLiveFree) June 16, 2020
Connett also spent much of his cross examination of EPA expert witnesses drawing attention to their previous testimony in defense of chemical companies and chemicals known to be hazardous to humans. Two of the EPA’s witnesses are employed by the corporate firm Exponent Inc. While cross examining EPA witness Dr. Ellen Chang, Connett asked how much biotech/pesticide company Syngenta paid her for a presentation she had given.
#FluorideTrial FAN Connett asks witness Dr. Chang if she was paid by pesticide company Syngenta to give a presentation, Chang says it is correct that she was retained by Syngenta to testify at an EPA committee — Derrick Broze (@DBrozeLiveFree) June 15, 2020
Connett also questioned Dr. Chang about how much she was being paid to defend water fluoridation. Chang stated that Exponent Inc was paying her an estimated $149,000. Dr. Chang was also questioned by Connett about her previous work for Monsanto, Dow Chemical, and other chemical companies and associations. Specifically, Connett called attention to the fact that Dr. Chang had previously stated that despite an association between Monsanto/Bayer’s glyphosate and cancer, she concluded there was no risk. Chang admitted that one peer-reviewer of her study on glyphosate found her analysis “devolved into a laundry list of every possible cause of bias.”
#FluorideTrial FAN Connett asks Dr. Chang how much she billed Exponent Inc for her work. Chang gives a long winded answer, eventually says $149,000 — Derrick Broze (@DBrozeLiveFree) June 15, 2020
#FluorideTrial FAN Connett asks EPA witness Dr. Chang about her systematic review of agent orange/dioxin, funded by Monsanto. Connett asks Chang if her reviews found that there was insufficient evidence for harm, Chang carefully answers, says the conclusions were more nuanced — Derrick Broze (@DBrozeLiveFree) June 15, 2020
#FluorideTrial FAN Connett confirms with witness Chang about the funders of her reviews of chemical hazards in humans while employed by Exponent Inc – Monsanto, Dow Chemical, CropLife, Syngenta, American Chemistry Council, American Petro Institute, Manganese Interest Group — Derrick Broze (@DBrozeLiveFree) June 15, 2020
Despite arguments from the EPA’s attorneys that the EPA would never fail to act to protect Americans from harm, the fact remains that the U.S. government hired corporate scientists to defend water fluoridation. The EPA attempted to diminish the concerns brought by the plaintiffs and their experts, while simultaneously attempting to present last-minute evidence which had not been peer-reviewed. If the EPA wants to protect the American people they should accept the plaintiffs petition and end water fluoridation. If they refuse to do so, Judge Chen should see clearly that fluoride is a neurotoxin which poses an unreasonable risk to human health.
Stay tuned to Derrick Broze at The Last American Vagabond for updates on this ongoing case.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-22--If Only Governments Were REALLY ‘Guided by the Science’

If Only Governments Were REALLY ‘ Guided by the Science ’ In 2010 , The Atlantic said that Dr. John Ioannidis “ may be one of the most influential scientists alive.
” The article , written by David H. Freedman , made it clear the Greek-American physician-scientist ’ s rising star stemmed in part from the fearlessness he demonstrated in challenging bad science in the medical research field .
“ [ Ioannidis is ] what ’ s known as a meta-researcher , and he ’ s become one of the world ’ s foremost experts on the credibility of medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He and his team have shown , again and again , and in many different ways , that much of what biomedical researchers conclude in published studies—conclusions that doctors keep in mind when they prescribe antibiotics or blood-pressure medication , or when they advise us to consume more fiber or less meat , or when they recommend surgery for heart disease or back pain—is misleading , exaggerated , and often flat-out wrong.
” Today , Ioannidis is the C.F .
Rehnborg Chair in Disease Prevention at Stanford University .
He has authored some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in history .
Ten years after his glowing profile in The Atlantic , however , Ioannidis finds himself in the crosshairs of media and medical professionals for doing what he ’ s always done : challenging science he believes is flawed .
This time , however , Ioannidis is challenging medical findings of a virus that isn ’ t just deadly , but deeply controversial .
Ioannidis has become perhaps the leading medical voice against COVID-19 alarmism and government lockdowns .
It began with a March 17 article in Stat that suggested governments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potentially harmful actions to limit the spread of COVID-19 without sufficient data .
Then came a May 5 white paper he authored which suggested COVID-19 was not nearly as deadly as initially feared , a claim later supported by an NPR report that cited research from Johns Hopkins University showing a fatality risk as low as 0.5 percent .
Ioannidis ’ s latest research on the COVID fatality rate pegs the median COVID-19 fatality risk at 0.25 percent , much lower than previous estimates but still about two and a half times higher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s credentials might be impeccable , but his findings have not been without controversy .
In an impressive piece of medical journalism published at Undark.org , investigative journalist Jeanne Lenzer and Shannon Brownlee of the Lown Institute detail the withering criticism Ioannidis has received from media and medical professionals alike .
Ioannidis appears unfazed by the attacks , which include ( very thin ) accusations that his study suffered from an undisclosed conflict of interest .
In the medical journal BMJ , Ioannidis recently explained why he believes government lockdowns should be lifted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Edward R. Melnick of the Yale Medical School . )
Even if covid-19 is far milder than feared , it can still devastate in specific settings .
Massacres in overwhelmed hospitals with contaminated personnel and in nursing homes represent the lion ’ s share of deaths .
Hospital preparedness , universal personnel screening , draconian infection control , and social distancing in these locations are indispensable .
However , blind lockdown of entire populations has questionable added benefits .
Locking down healthy , no-risk people and transferring covid-19 patients to nursing homes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to flatten the curve ” should acknowledge that this gains time for hospital preparedness but that most , if not all , covid-19 deaths will still happen when measures are relaxed—unless effective treatments and/or vaccines emerge .
Moreover , the lockdown-to-flatten-the-curve rationale ignores seasonality and espouses 100 year old observational data from a 1918 pandemic with an infection fatality rate 100 times higher than covid-19 .
Lockdowns have multiple components .
Some , such as avoiding mass gatherings , may work ; others may not .
Some may even increase the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increase frail relatives ’ exposure to children .
But , regardless of the combination , lockdowns bring multifarious harms beyond those related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus , such as the consequences of health system dysfunction and extended harms eroding health , the economy , and society at large .
Lockdowns implemented during high infectious activity will force infective people to spend more time with frail relatives in cramped spaces .
Low wage , essential workers adopt higher risks , and shelters for vulnerable homeless people become infection hotspots , while wealthy , healthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stress may also affect our immune responses to respiratory infections .
And , with the added horror spread by various media sources , lockdowns represent uniquely stressful experiences .
Under lockdown conditions many patients with acute , treatable conditions ( such as coronary syndromes ) avoid seeking care .
This disruption may be seen in the excess deaths accruing so far in the covid-19 lockdown .
Patients with cancer whose treatment is delayed have worse outcomes .
And when patients avoid hospitals many health systems suffer financially , furlough personnel , and cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospitals , but covid-19 countermeasures have already jeopardized thousands of them .
Prolonged lockdowns fuel economic depression , creating mass unemployment .
Jobless people may lose health insurance .
Entire populations may witness decreased quality of life and mental health .
Gun sales in the US have increased sharply since the lockdown began , with unpredictable consequences .
Underprivileged populations and those in need are hit harder by crises .
People at risk of starvation worldwide have already exceeded one billion .
We are risking increased suicides , domestic violence , and child @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also advance , with chaotic consequences such as riots and wars .
And how long a lockdown is enough ?
If we open now , will lockdown recur in autumn ?
Next year ?
Whenever authoritarianism so wishes ?
No dictatorship could imagine a better precedent for absolute control .
Lockdowns were desperate , defendable choices when we knew little about covid-19 .
But , now that we know more , we should avoid exaggeration .
We should carefully and gradually remove lockdown measures , with data driven feedback on bed capacity and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may become mass suicide .
As Undark points out , Ioannidis ’ s opposition to lockdowns do not stem from libertarianism or a “ Trumpian desire to benefit Wall Street , ” but a longstanding skepticism of medical interventionism generally , which he says tends to be missed or downplayed by medical researchers .
Ioannidis may be no libertarian , but many of the lockdown themes he touches will sound familiar to FEE readers—deadly government policies that prohibited nursing homes from screening for COVID-19 , soaring suicide , and widespread economic destruction resulting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 40 million jobs lost .
While the costs of the lockdowns are apparent to all , less clear is how effective they have been in limiting the spread of the virus .
A recent Bloomberg found “ little correlation between the severity of a nation ’ s restrictions and whether it managed to curb excess fatalities.
” Norway ’ s top health official recently stated the lockdowns probably were not necessary .
Evidence from a recent JP Morgan report suggests most nations saw COVID infection rates fall after lockdowns were lifted .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as studies have shown , that Americans were social distancing before lockdown orders were enforced .
This fact brings to mind a quote from Nobel laureate economist F.A .
Hayek .
“ This is not a dispute about whether planning is to be done or not , ” Hayek wrote in The Use of Knowledge in Society .
“ It is a dispute as to whether planning is to be done centrally , by one authority for the whole economic system , or is to be divided among many individuals.
” Hayek ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be irrational because central planners lack the knowledge to make rational decisions .
We mustn ’ t forget that human beings by nature and self-interest will take reasonable steps to protect themselves from a deadly virus .
Humans manage risk every single day , and each does so possessing and processing more local knowledge than any central planner can possess .
Government officials no doubt were acting in good faith when they ordered lockdowns , but by removing choices from individuals , businesses , and other organizations they committed what appears to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ultimately lethal blunders in modern history .
It ’ s not too late to learn from the mistake .
A first step toward that end would be to admit that John Ioannidis is right : The government lockdowns must end .
Watch this research summary by Dr John Ioannidis , uploaded on April 30 , 2020 : Author Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org .
His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine , The Wall Street Journal , CNN , Forbes , Fox News , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ published at Foundation for Economic Education .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

If Only Governments Were REALLY ‘Guided by the Science’
Written by John Miltimore
In 2010, The Atlantic said that Dr. John Ioannidis “may be one of the most influential scientists alive.”
The article, written by David H. Freedman, made it clear the Greek-American physician-scientist’s rising star stemmed in part from the fearlessness he demonstrated in challenging bad science in the medical research field.
“[Ioannidis is] what’s known as a meta-researcher, and he’s become one of the world’s foremost experts on the credibility of medical research,” Freedman wrote. “He and his team have shown, again and again, and in many different ways, that much of what biomedical researchers conclude in published studies—conclusions that doctors keep in mind when they prescribe antibiotics or blood-pressure medication, or when they advise us to consume more fiber or less meat, or when they recommend surgery for heart disease or back pain—is misleading, exaggerated, and often flat-out wrong.”
Today, Ioannidis is the C.F. Rehnborg Chair in Disease Prevention at Stanford University. He has authored some of the most cited medical journal articles in history.
Ten years after his glowing profile in The Atlantic, however, Ioannidis finds himself in the crosshairs of media and medical professionals for doing what he’s always done: challenging science he believes is flawed. This time, however, Ioannidis is challenging medical findings of a virus that isn’t just deadly, but deeply controversial.
Ioannidis has become perhaps the leading medical voice against COVID-19 alarmism and government lockdowns.
It began with a March 17 article in Stat that suggested governments around the world were taking sweeping and potentially harmful actions to limit the spread of COVID-19 without sufficient data. Then came a May 5 white paper he authored which suggested COVID-19 was not nearly as deadly as initially feared, a claim later supported by an NPR report that cited research from Johns Hopkins University showing a fatality risk as low as 0.5 percent. Ioannidis’s latest research on the COVID fatality rate pegs the median COVID-19 fatality risk at 0.25 percent, much lower than previous estimates but still about two and a half times higher than the seasonal flu.
Ioannidis’s credentials might be impeccable, but his findings have not been without controversy.
In an impressive piece of medical journalism published at Undark.org, investigative journalist Jeanne Lenzer and Shannon Brownlee of the Lown Institute detail the withering criticism Ioannidis has received from media and medical professionals alike.
Ioannidis appears unfazed by the attacks, which include (very thin) accusations that his study suffered from an undisclosed conflict of interest.
In the medical journal BMJ, Ioannidis recently explained why he believes government lockdowns should be lifted. (An opposing view is offered by Edward R. Melnick of the Yale Medical School.)
Even if covid-19 is far milder than feared, it can still devastate in specific settings. Massacres in overwhelmed hospitals with contaminated personnel and in nursing homes represent the lion’s share of deaths. Hospital preparedness, universal personnel screening, draconian infection control, and social distancing in these locations are indispensable. However, blind lockdown of entire populations has questionable added benefits. Locking down healthy, no-risk people and transferring covid-19 patients to nursing homes was absurd. Proponents of “lockdown to flatten the curve” should acknowledge that this gains time for hospital preparedness but that most, if not all, covid-19 deaths will still happen when measures are relaxed—unless effective treatments and/or vaccines emerge. Moreover, the lockdown-to-flatten-the-curve rationale ignores seasonality and espouses 100 year old observational data from a 1918 pandemic with an infection fatality rate 100 times higher than covid-19. Lockdowns have multiple components. Some, such as avoiding mass gatherings, may work; others may not. Some may even increase the number of covid-19 deaths—for instance, school closures may increase frail relatives’ exposure to children. But, regardless of the combination, lockdowns bring multifarious harms beyond those related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, such as the consequences of health system dysfunction and extended harms eroding health, the economy, and society at large. Lockdowns implemented during high infectious activity will force infective people to spend more time with frail relatives in cramped spaces. Low wage, essential workers adopt higher risks, and shelters for vulnerable homeless people become infection hotspots, while wealthy, healthy citizens get to stay at home. Stress may also affect our immune responses to respiratory infections. And, with the added horror spread by various media sources, lockdowns represent uniquely stressful experiences. Under lockdown conditions many patients with acute, treatable conditions (such as coronary syndromes) avoid seeking care. This disruption may be seen in the excess deaths accruing so far in the covid-19 lockdown. Patients with cancer whose treatment is delayed have worse outcomes. And when patients avoid hospitals many health systems suffer financially, furlough personnel, and cut services. Covid-19 overwhelmed a few dozen hospitals, but covid-19 countermeasures have already jeopardized thousands of them. Prolonged lockdowns fuel economic depression, creating mass unemployment. Jobless people may lose health insurance. Entire populations may witness decreased quality of life and mental health. Gun sales in the US have increased sharply since the lockdown began, with unpredictable consequences. Underprivileged populations and those in need are hit harder by crises. People at risk of starvation worldwide have already exceeded one billion. We are risking increased suicides, domestic violence, and child abuse. Malaise and societal disintegration may also advance, with chaotic consequences such as riots and wars. And how long a lockdown is enough? If we open now, will lockdown recur in autumn? Next year? Whenever authoritarianism so wishes? No dictatorship could imagine a better precedent for absolute control. Lockdowns were desperate, defendable choices when we knew little about covid-19. But, now that we know more, we should avoid exaggeration. We should carefully and gradually remove lockdown measures, with data driven feedback on bed capacity and prevalence/incidence indicators. Otherwise, prolonged lockdowns may become mass suicide.
As Undark points out, Ioannidis’s opposition to lockdowns do not stem from libertarianism or a “Trumpian desire to benefit Wall Street,” but a longstanding skepticism of medical interventionism generally, which he says tends to be missed or downplayed by medical researchers.
Ioannidis may be no libertarian, but many of the lockdown themes he touches will sound familiar to FEE readers—deadly government policies that prohibited nursing homes from screening for COVID-19, soaring suicide, and widespread economic destruction resulting in millions of businesses wiped out and 40 million jobs lost.
While the costs of the lockdowns are apparent to all, less clear is how effective they have been in limiting the spread of the virus. A recent Bloomberg found “little correlation between the severity of a nation’s restrictions and whether it managed to curb excess fatalities.” Norway’s top health official recently stated the lockdowns probably were not necessary. Evidence from a recent JP Morgan report suggests most nations saw COVID infection rates fall after lockdowns were lifted.
These results make sense when one realizes, as studies have shown, that Americans were social distancing before lockdown orders were enforced. This fact brings to mind a quote from Nobel laureate economist F.A. Hayek.
“This is not a dispute about whether planning is to be done or not,” Hayek wrote in The Use of Knowledge in Society. “It is a dispute as to whether planning is to be done centrally, by one authority for the whole economic system, or is to be divided among many individuals.”
Hayek’s point was that centralized planning tends to be irrational because central planners lack the knowledge to make rational decisions. We mustn’t forget that human beings by nature and self-interest will take reasonable steps to protect themselves from a deadly virus. Humans manage risk every single day, and each does so possessing and processing more local knowledge than any central planner can possess.
Government officials no doubt were acting in good faith when they ordered lockdowns, but by removing choices from individuals, businesses, and other organizations they committed what appears to be one of the most costly and ultimately lethal blunders in modern history.
It’s not too late to learn from the mistake. A first step toward that end would be to admit that John Ioannidis is right: The government lockdowns must end.
Watch this research summary by Dr John Ioannidis, uploaded on April 30, 2020:
Author Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. This article was originally published at Foundation for Economic Education.
Read more at 21stcenturywire.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print