The world has been engulfed in COVID panic porn. Hundreds of thousands will die, and health care systems will be overrun. In the US, the death toll was projected to hit 2.2 million. Now, in some places, yes—the systems reached a breaking point, especially in Italy. Yet, most of the projections were, let’s say, way off. We can thank the Imperial College London for setting off the lockdown frenzy that spread as fast as COVID itself. The study is what led to the lockdown fever, as it noted this was the only way to stop the spread. Well, we know the study was trash. And a big part of their calculation was apparently six flights from Wuhan, where out of 689 people, only six tested positive for COVID. Are you ready to be even more infuriated about the COVID lockdowns? Well, read this lengthy thread from Graham Neary who detailed how this study came up with its infection rate. It’s not pretty.
“Taking the age of the Chinese people into account, this study estimated that the infection fatality rate in China was 0.66% (and was probably between 0.39% and 1.33%),” Neary wrote. “Covid-19 was ‘a major global health threat’ that would overwhelm ‘even the most advanced healthcare systems.’”
He elaborates further:
But how did they calculate this?
They had a number for how many people died of Covid-19 in China (mostly Wuhan) as of Feb 11th (1,023 deaths).
That's the numerator in the IFR calculation.
What they needed was an estimate for the total number of people had who been infected.
That sounds like something it would be very difficult to estimate, since you don't know how many people with the virus are asymptomatic or haven't been tested.
They came up with a solution for Wuhan: count how many people escaping the city by plane tested positive for the virus.
This clever idea gave them an estimate for the prevalence of Covid-19 in Wuhan.
To match up with the timing of the death data, they used passenger test results from flights that took place over two days in late Jan/early Feb.
How many flights, you might ask?
Six.
Let me tell you a story. It's about six passenger flights from Wuhan that led to an unprecedented global disaster.
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
These six flights help to explain why the entire world was gripped by fear, with consequences that we'll be living with for many years to come.
Thread.
Remember that in March, Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London predicted 510,000 Covid-19 deaths in Britain and 2.2 million Covid-19 deaths in the US. Healthcare systems would be overwhelmed.
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
This could only be avoided by "non-pharmaceutical interventions" (lockdown, etc.) pic.twitter.com/vW6aRauLDr
At the heart of Ferguson's predictions was the estimate that Covid-19 could kill 0.9% of the British people it infected, and could infect up to 80% of the population.
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
The source for this belief was "an analysis of a subset of cases from China".
Let's go down the rabbit hole... pic.twitter.com/JlobUKEpFs
Taking the age of the Chinese people into account, this study estimated that the infection fatality rate in China was 0.66% (and was probably between 0.39% and 1.33%).
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
Covid-19 was "a major global health threat" that would overwhelm "even the most advanced healthcare systems". pic.twitter.com/n2GBv2nCwM
That sounds like something it would be very difficult to estimate, since you don't know how many people with the virus are asymptomatic or haven't been tested.
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
They came up with a solution for Wuhan: count how many people escaping the city by plane tested positive for the virus. pic.twitter.com/PaXzAXJ95v
Extrapolating from six flights might sound questionable to you. But it gets better.
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
Out of 689 passengers, only six people tested positive for Covid.
These six people were crucial for estimating disease prevalence, the IFR, and ultimately forecasting death all around the world. pic.twitter.com/Kqcoz9SkEz
I could end the thread now, having highlighted the flimsy basis on which the entire house of cards was built, but there's more.
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
They admitted that their conclusions were inconsistent with events at the Diamond Princess cruise ship - the best real-world Covid-19 experiment. pic.twitter.com/AUGSWZyjkb
Despite all of the uncertainties, they were still pretty sure that their work would be used to influence government decisions - and they were right about that. pic.twitter.com/SQYWvI2Ay6
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
Finally, for those of you who wear tin foil hats instead of face masks, you'll appreciate the acknowledgement by Ferguson that he works for the Vaccine Alliance, a pharma company which is now making Covid-19 vaccines, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
— Graham Neary (@GrahamNeary) August 15, 2020
END pic.twitter.com/RJTgXjpZpz
Oh, it gets worse. They noted in their study’s projections and what happened on the Diamond Princess cruise line regarding COVID cases don’t add up. And “if some Chinese Covid-19 cases outside of Wuhan in the 50-59 age category had not been recorded, then the IFR [infection fatality ratio] ‘might’ be lower. They assumed the near-perfect recording of Covid-19 cases outside of Wuhan for everyone between the ages of 30 and 59,” wrote Neary.
At the end of this, I’m going to bet we’re going to see a lot of revisions regarding the data. The death toll is definitely going to be revised down, with harsh analyses of the New York and New Jersey nursing home policies that led to thousands of deaths, New York especially. Take those out—and this virus was simply not worth wrecking the economy over. Hindsight is 20/20. We didn’t know then, and there’s still a lot we don’t know now. If you don’t know, you can’t tell people to stay inside. You can’t tell them to ruin their economic lives. You just can’t. The numbers with this virus do not justify it in any way. And because these so-called experts don’t know and were undoubtedly blinded by their anti-Trump bias, they’ve made fools of the industry. There is no reason to ever trust these clowns again. They screwed up on surface spread, masks, and aerosolization. Now, pediatricians say that it’s fine to go back to school, but parents don’t know what to do. They want their kids back in the classroom, but is it truly safe? We were told to stay inside and save lives, which lasted until the officer-involved death of George Floyd sparked another wave of Black Lives Matter activism. Now, you can be outside because protesting in support of liberal causes makes the virus non-transmissible. That’s what the experts said. This whole episode has been one long train wreck. People didn’t know jack, and some definitely weaponized it to try and better Democratic chances of removing Trump from office.
A crap way to calculate the IFR was undertaken—and now we have scores of Americans out of work, kids not learning, substance abuse rising, depression and mental health issues increasing, and long-lasting damage to America’s socioeconomic fabric. The same could be said elsewhere, but at least COVID wasn’t as bad, right? Or better yet, at least you didn’t get it, right? Nope. Shredding that foundation for a little virus like this—and that’s what will be exposed in the end—should fill everyone with rage at the liberal elites. They didn’t cause the virus, but they sure did work hard to maximize its impact based of shoddy data. They did more damage than the virus ever could.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member