https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/sensi...ovid-strategy/
A great difference indeed. For the US, from Feb 1, 2020 until Dec 2, 2020, the TOTAL number of school age children from ages 6 to 24 that have died from covid is 483. That's not a typo. For that we've shut down schools and colleges for two terms. 
More kids in that age range have died from flu than covid.
See Table 1 on the following CDC webpage:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c...ekly/index.htm
Those 483 died because of their "co-morbidities": cancer, diabetes, leukemia, or accidents, etc.
Meanwhile, during the same period, 196,843 people 65 and older have died of Covid. That's 79% of the total covid deaths. Many in that age bracket will die of old age, sick or not. About 17.5% are in the 45 to 64 age group. Many of those have co-morbidities. That accounts for almost 97% of the total deaths.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya continues:
He goes on to explain how the Covid mess created by mismanagement and denying science should be repaired in the Great Barrington Declaration – "As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. ", signed by over 43,000 doctors and scientists, and many lay people as well.
https://gbdeclaration.org/
In March, only the small fraction of infected people who got sick and went to the hospital were identified as cases. But the majority of people who are infected by COVID have very mild symptoms or no symptoms at all. These people weren’t identified in the early days, which resulted in a highly misleading fatality rate. And that is what drove public policy. Even worse, it continues to sow fear and panic, because the perception of too many people about COVID is frozen in the misleading data from March.
...
When it came out, this Santa Clara study was controversial. But science is like that, and the way science tests controversial studies is to see if they can be replicated. And indeed, there are now 82 similar seroprevalence studies from around the world, and the median result of these 82 studies is a fatality rate of about 0.2 percent—exactly what we found in Santa Clara County.
...
It still seems to be a common perception that COVID is equally dangerous to everybody, but this couldn’t be further from the truth. There is a thousand-fold difference between the mortality rate in older people, 70 and up, and the mortality rate in children.
...
When it came out, this Santa Clara study was controversial. But science is like that, and the way science tests controversial studies is to see if they can be replicated. And indeed, there are now 82 similar seroprevalence studies from around the world, and the median result of these 82 studies is a fatality rate of about 0.2 percent—exactly what we found in Santa Clara County.
...
It still seems to be a common perception that COVID is equally dangerous to everybody, but this couldn’t be further from the truth. There is a thousand-fold difference between the mortality rate in older people, 70 and up, and the mortality rate in children.
More kids in that age range have died from flu than covid.See Table 1 on the following CDC webpage:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c...ekly/index.htm
Those 483 died because of their "co-morbidities": cancer, diabetes, leukemia, or accidents, etc.
Meanwhile, during the same period, 196,843 people 65 and older have died of Covid. That's 79% of the total covid deaths. Many in that age bracket will die of old age, sick or not. About 17.5% are in the 45 to 64 age group. Many of those have co-morbidities. That accounts for almost 97% of the total deaths.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya continues:
The widespread lockdowns that have been adopted in response to COVID are unprecedented—lockdowns have never before been tried as a method of disease control. Nor were these lockdowns part of the original plan. The initial rationale for lockdowns was that slowing the spread of the disease would prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. It became clear before long that this was not a worry: in the U.S. and in most of the world, hospitals were never at risk of being overwhelmed. Yet the lockdowns were kept in place, and this is turning out to have deadly effects.
Those who dare to talk about the tremendous economic harms that have followed from the lockdowns are accused of heartlessness. Economic considerations are nothing compared to saving lives, they are told. So I’m not going to talk about the economic effects—I’m going to talk about the deadly effects on health, beginning with the fact that the U.N. has estimated that 130 million additional people will starve this year as a result of the economic damage resulting from the lockdowns.
...
In the last 20 years we’ve lifted one billion people worldwide out of poverty. This year we are reversing that progress to the extent—it bears repeating—that an estimated 130 million more people will starve.
Those who dare to talk about the tremendous economic harms that have followed from the lockdowns are accused of heartlessness. Economic considerations are nothing compared to saving lives, they are told. So I’m not going to talk about the economic effects—I’m going to talk about the deadly effects on health, beginning with the fact that the U.N. has estimated that 130 million additional people will starve this year as a result of the economic damage resulting from the lockdowns.
...
In the last 20 years we’ve lifted one billion people worldwide out of poverty. This year we are reversing that progress to the extent—it bears repeating—that an estimated 130 million more people will starve.
https://gbdeclaration.org/
, as if people can't do the same sorts of research and come to different conclusions.
Comment