What is the Real Risk of Death from Coronavirus?

Prolonged Panic and Hysteria Around the World, and Over What?

Seroprevalence studies from the coronavirus pandemic in the Netherlands provide important information that the US CDC and the US media apparently choose not to divulge.

Why has our government not put out a similar chart? How many Americans even know that children have near-zero threat and anyone under 60 has next to no risk of dying from the virus? Even those between 60 and 69 are at much lower risk than anything the government has suggested and that the level of panic indicates. The World Health Organization wrongly pegged the overall death rate for all ages at 3.4% on average. This simple fact makes a world of difference both to our targeted response to the virus and also to the degree of panic that should and should not be infused into society so as not to keep people away from hospitals when they are experiencing other potentially dangerous medical conditions.

But even this chart doesn’t tell the full story. The virus lopsidedly targets people with particular underlying conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes. It is simply criminal that, with the tens of billions of dollars in “emergency” funding, the CDC has not conducted or published the results of a survey of 20,000 or so Americans to determine the exact number of infections and the fatality rate broken down by each health and age status. To most Americans, based on what the government and media have been putting out, it’s all the same and even babies will all die, as if there is a 50% fatality rate. Most people I know think their infants are in danger from COVID-19, even though the threat of flu and SIDS is much more pervasive in infants than that of coronavirus. __ https://www.conservativereview.com/news/horowitz-one-chart-exposes-lie-behind-universal-lockdowns/

Meanwhile, China has lost credibility around the world. In Europe and the Anglosphere, former friends of China are beginning to reconsider. Neighbors of China in all directions feel even more antagonistic toward Beijing as a result of the coronavirus scandal.

Tensions also extend to Beijing’s supposed allies. Russia and Iran may see themselves as close to China at a strategic level, but it takes very little to get beneath the surface to find unhappiness towards Beijing
. __ South China Morning Post

Why is China facing so much antagonism and suspicion?

A Chinese virus made in a Chinese lab???

The author of the above piece takes a deep and technical excursion into the history of gain of function research on coronaviruses, including the work in Wuhan. His conclusion is that the Wuhan CoV-19 could very well have been made in a Chinese lab — but not likely for biowarfare purposes, but rather for purposes of testing anti-virals and vaccines.

Basically, a good genetic engineer can create a synthetic virus that would be indistinguishable from a natural one. Moreover, often researchers deliberately introduce some synonymous mutations into their designs so that later they can discern their strain from natural ones. But if the creators choose not to reveal these markers, it is impossible to distinguish them from natural mutations. __ https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748

Scenario: They were doing complex “gain of function” work on different strains of viruses, looking for something to explain how viruses can hop from one species to another (to humans). They found something and they did something, but they kept it quiet. And then something unintentional happened, perhaps in October of 2019 … and lab personnel and administrators crossed their fingers, hoping that there would be no aftermath.

At the moment in December of 2019 that Chinese researchers and lab administrators realized that something had gone wrong, they could have set off the global public health alarm that would have allowed other nations to both assist China in containing the outbreak to the Hubei area, and to prepare themselves for what was coming despite all their best efforts. Instead China covered it all up, destroyed the virus samples, deleted large portions of the WIV viral database, bribed the WHO to publicly deny human to human spread as long as possible, and allowed tens of thousands of travelers to fly to Europe and the Anglosphere from the virus-ravaged Wuhan City (while they prevented such travelers from flying elsewhere in China).

At the end of 2014, the United States introduced a moratorium on state financing of such gain-of-function studies, but it was shortly canceled (in 2017). In China, no moratorium on such studies was introduced, on the contrary, they went full steam ahead with creating new “super labs” of the highest biosafety level (BSL-4), as in 2017 in Wuhan… __ Gain of Function Detailed Analysis

The timeline is suspicious, with China being indicted just as much by what it did not do, as by what it actually did. The entire matter demands a thorough international investigation, with China being required to answer some extremely probing questions.

China attempts to spin its decision to destroy virus samples

Actual coronavirus case numbers from China are suspect

This entry was posted in Biomedicine, China, Pandemic and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to What is the Real Risk of Death from Coronavirus?

  1. Jim says:

    According to the table the chance of
    death goes above .1% over age 55 not

  2. alfin2101 says:

    I suspect the decimal point was put there by mistake in the body of the article. If he had truly meant 0.1% he would have put a zero in front of the decimal point, as he did in the table. It is important to remember that the WHO claimed the death rate was over 3% without specifying age risk. It is those higher death rates which the press has used to clamor for lockdowns of indefinite duration.

  3. Jim says:

    You are probably correct that the “.1%” is a typo since Horowitz elsewhere states the fatality rate for ages 50-59 is .1%. He then also compares this to a total death probability of .5% for age 55. But this comparison is misleading since .5% is an annual rate whereas
    the .1% is for time period of 2-3 weeks.

  4. Gavin Longmuir says:

    “The entire matter demands a thorough international investigation, with China being required to answer some extremely probing questions.”

    And if China’s rulers ignore those questions, what’s next? A strongly worded letter — in French! — from the EU?

    We need to be realistic. China is not only the Workshop of the World and the sole source of many essential imports for most Western countries, China’s rulers have bought politicians, academics, and media types around the world. China will answer only those questions it wishes to answer — and no-one in authority in the West will object.

    The only thing that would give China’s rulers pause for thought would be if the Davoise came out against today’s lopsided “Free Trade” and if Western governments started strongly encouraging re-shoring of industry by rolling back excessive regulation and putting limits on excessive litigation risk. But so far, Western politicians have not even talked about any serious response like that.

    • alfin2101 says:

      Yes, China’s CCP is in a defiant mood, and is not likely to change quickly. But this is not about how China responds to the questions, it is about how the rest of the world perceives China’s overall trustworthiness. It is about whether the rest of the world can honestly live with China the way it currently is acting.

      If most of the world decides that China should be forthright and honest about the origins of the virus and the early days of the pandemic, such a global stance would make a difference in terms of how the rest of the world chose to proceed. Perhaps a clearer picture of what China’s belligerence is costing them would help more of the world’s nations make the decision to shift supply chains outside of China, if they believed that China was being dishonest and defiant at the cost of tens of thousands or more of their citizens? Intelligent persons will be increasingly aware that there is an unlimited number of lethal viruses that could be engineered and released in the future. How long do they wish to be vulnerable to China for their most critical supplies? They may be idiots but if they want to have any choice in the quality of their futures, they will have to begin stepping up.

      It all starts with acknowledging that China is covering up crucial information which should rightfully be disclosed, if China is to be a trusted international partner.

      COVID-19 is the least of our problems, but it is easily costing several $trillions due to political panic. Consider how that much money could have been spent to make countries less dependent upon China in the first place.

Comments are closed.