Study Suggests Fatality Rate Of Covid 19 In La County Is 'much Lower' Than Previously Thought

Study Suggests Fatality Rate of COVID-19 In LA County Is ‘Much Lower’ Than Previously Thought

The University of Southern California (USC) and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health recently released early results from an ongoing study they are conducting on COVID-19.

The early results of their study “suggests infections from the new coronavirus are far more widespread and the fatality rate much lower – in L.A. County than previously thought.” The researchers will be conducting more antibody testing over time “on a series of representative samples of adults to determine the scope and spread of the pandemic across the county.” (source)

Based on their results the researchers estimate that approximately 4.1% of LA county’s adult population has an antibody to the virus.

Study Suggests Fatality Rate Of Covid 19 In La County Is 'much Lower' Than Previously Thought

From here, they estimate that approximately 2.8% to 5.6% of the county’s adult population has an antibody to the virus, which means that up to approximately 442,000 adults in the county have been infected. This means that the number of those infected is potentially up to 55 times higher than the current approximate 8000 cases that have been reported to the county at the time of the study.

Ultimately, this means the infection mortality rate of the virus in LA county would be far lower than what the current numbers are showing, more within the ballpark of the seasonal flu.

Stanford Study: COVID-19 Has The Same Infection Fatality Rate As Seasonal Influenza

This study also compliments another recent study published by 17 researchers, several of them representing the Stanford School of Medicine, titled “COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California.” In the study the authors point out that “many epidemic projections and policies addressing COVD-19 have been designed without seroprevalence data to inform epidemic parameters.”

John P.A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford was one of the authors of that study, and the conclusions of the study were expressed by Ioannidis in a recent interview:

If you compare the numbers that we estimate to have been infected, which vary from 48,000 to 81,000 versus the number of documented cases that would correspond to the same time horizon, around April 1st, when we had 956 cases documented in Santa Clara County, we realize that the number of infected people is somewhere between 50 and 85 times more compared to what we thought, compared to what had been documented.

Immediately that means the infection fatality rate, the chance of dying, the probably of dying if you are infected diminishes by 50 to 85 fold because the denominator in the calculation becomes 50 to 85 fold bigger.

Our data suggests that COVID-19 has an infection fatality rate that is in the same ball park as seasonal influenza. It suggests that even though this is a very serious problem, we should not fear. It suggests that we  have solid ground to have optimism about the possibility of eventually re-opening our society and gaining back our lives…Sooner rather than later with full control and a data driven approach.

According to  Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, one of the professors from Stanford involved in study on Santa Clara, “It seems very likely that the disease is more widespread than people believe, everywhere. – Bhattacharya (source). He was referring to a global scale, but we don’t have the data yet.

The findings are not that big of a surprise. Respiratory viruses are very infections, already existing coronaviruses infect several million people every single year. Just imagine the hysteria that would ensue if the numbers of infections and deaths they cause were constantly put up on a live dashboard for everybody to see.

Did you know that metapneumovirus has been shown to have worldwide circulation with nearly universal infection by age 5? Did you know that Outbreaks of metapneumovirus have been well documented every single year, especially in long term care facilities with mortality rates of up to 50%? (source)

There are many examples to choose from. Millions of people, and millions of children die every single year of respiratory viruses. One may perceive the new coronavirus to be far less dangerous than others based on these numbers.

Not Only Are Infection Rates Higher, The Number of Calculated Deaths May Be Lower

With the projections taking into account a potentially higher infection rate of COVID-19, this drives the infection fatality rate down to seasonal flu levels. That does not mean it’s not more dangerous than the flu and we are clearly seeing this among the elderly and those with compromised immune systems and other pre-existing conditions.

This should make one question the lockdown measures, the push for mass vaccination, and the lack of attention and ridicule of other therapies that are already showing promise. Here’s one example, here’s another.

Are lockdown measures really for our own good? Are we preventing herd immunity? Should we only be taking quarantine measures into account for the elderly, while encouraging herd immunity to ‘kill’ the virus amongst the healthy population?

When it comes to death rates, New York State for example recently added approximately 4000 people to the death toll who were “presumed to have died of the coronavirus but had never tested positive.” (source)

Professor Walter Ricciardi, an advisor to the Italian Health Ministry, recently pointed out that high death rates there may reflect the way that deaths are recorded.

“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die … with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus,” he has said.

“On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 percent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 percent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity — many had two or three” (Newey, 2020). Pre-morbidity refers to having serious health issues prior to the onset of a disease.

According to another study out of Italy, 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities that were examined specifically for this study were people who suffered from previous medical conditions. More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease.

If someone dies of a heart attack, but also has tested positive for coronavirus, it seems that their death has been added to the coronavirus death toll. Does this happen with the flu? Or other coronaviruses? What if someone dies of a heart attack with the flu? It’ s not counted as a flu death…

An article written by John Lee, a recently retired professor of pathology and a former NHS consultant pathologist raises some interesting questions. He published  it in The Spectatorand in it he writes:

“If someone dies of a respiratory infection in the UK, the specific cause of the infection is not usually recorded, unless the illness is a rare ‘notifiable disease’. So the vast majority of respiratory deaths in the UK are recorded as bronchopneumonia, pneumonia, old age or a similar designation.

We don’t really test for flu, or other seasonal infections. If the patient has, say, cancer, motor neurone disease or another serious disease, this will be recorded as the cause of death, even if the final illness was a respiratory infection. This means UK certifications normally under-record deaths due to respiratory infections.

Now look at what has happened since the emergence of Covid-19. The list of notifiable diseases has been updated. This list — as well as containing smallpox (which has been extinct for many years) and conditions such as anthrax, brucellosis, plague and rabies (which most UK doctors will never see in their entire careers) — has now been amended to include Covid-19. But not flu. That means every positive test for Covid-19 must be notified, in a way that it just would not be for flu or most other infections.

In the current climate, anyone with a positive test for Covid-19 will certainly be known to clinical staff looking after them: if any of these patients dies, staff will have to record the Covid-19 designation on the death certificate — contrary to usual practice for most infections of this kind.

There is a big difference between Covid-19 causing death, and Covid-19 being found in someone who died of other causes. Making Covid-19 notifiable might give the appearance of it causing increasing numbers of deaths, whether this is true or not. It might appear far more of a killer than flu, simply because of the way deaths are recorded.”

I’ve written about why the death count seems suspicious, some of the information above comes from that specific previous article. If interested, you can read more about why COVID-19 deaths may be miscalculated, here.

Scientist Predicts: Second Wave of COVID-19 Because ‘Social Distancing’ Has Prevented ‘Herd Immunity’

Leading Scientist on COVID-19 Pandemic: “We Will See More Deaths Because of Social Distancing”

The point is, if infection rates are much higher, that already drives the fatality rate down, significantly. But if deaths are also being miscalculated, that drives it down even more. Did mainstream media and federal health regulatory agencies create unnecessary fear, panic and hysteria for some sort of ulterior motive? Or was it really for our own good?

Today, there powerful presence of a digital Orwellian “fact checker” that’s going around the internet and social media deleting any evidence that threatens corporate, political, financial or elitist interests, or information that simply highlights the corruption within agencies that have been tasked to safeguard us.

When it comes to the coronavirus, and perspectives that do not fit the one that’s being beamed out by the mainstream media, these views  are being censored and flagged as false. This alone should have people asking more questions, and pondering what’s really going on here?