Media claims COVID mortality rate below 1% is a hoax. Try below .01%.
Fri 4:51 am +01:00, 11 Sep 2020What Is the Real Risk of COVID-19 at This Point?
Indeed, it now appears the mortality rate of COVID-19 may be right around or lower than that of influenza. During an August 16, 2020, lecture at The Doctors for Disaster Preparedness14convention, Dr. Lee Merritt15 pointed out that, based on deaths per capita — which is the only way to get a true sense of the lethality of this disease — the death rate for COVID-19 is around 0.009%.
That number is based on a global total death toll of 709,000, and a global population of 7.8 billion. This also means the average person’s chance of surviving an encounter with SARS-CoV-2 is 99.991%. The U.S. area with the highest death rate, New York, has a death per capita rate of 0.17%. Merritt’s lecture with this information is featured in “How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible.”
So, while mainstream media still claims a mortality rate below 1% is a complete hoax, Birx verified — whether on purpose or by accident — that at least 99% of the population has nothing to fear from this virus.
And remember, the total death toll is enormously falsely inflated with those that died WITH, rather than FROM, SARS-CoV-2. The reason the U.S. Centers for Disease Control hasn’t ended COVID-19’s epidemic status also appears to be because they include deaths from pneumonia and influenza in the statistics. Combined, pneumonia, influenza and COVID-19 deaths were still above the epidemic threshold, based on data through August 22.16
Meanwhile, deaths in which COVID-19 is listed on the death certificate as the sole cause of death are only 6% of the total COVID-19 death toll, according to CDC data released August 26.17 On that day, the total death toll listed was 161,392, 6% of which would be 9,683.
The remaining 94% had an average of 2.6 “additional conditions or causes” contributing to those deaths. That even includes 5,133 deaths from intentional or unintentional injuries (according to the data listed on August 26; exact numbers may have changed since then).
Evidence Shows Masks Do Not Protect Against Viral Infection
I’ve already written several articles detailing studies showing that masks cannot protect against viral infections. The reason is simple. SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of 0.06 to 0.14 microns.18Medical N95 masks — which are considered the most effective — can filter particles as small as 0.3 microns.19 Surgical masks, homemade masks, T-shirts and bandanas are even more porous.
Strangely, mask mandates continue to flourish despite health agencies own research showing it’s a futile measure that only provides a false sense of security:
- The World Health Organization’s June 5, 2020, guidance memo20 on face mask use states “there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID- 19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.”
- According to a policy review paper21 published in the CDC’s own journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases, in May 2020: “Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
- The National Academies of Sciences in its Rapid Expert Consultation on the Effectiveness of Fabric Masks for the COVID-19 Pandemic report,22 published April 8, 2020, concluded “The evidence from … laboratory filtration studies suggest that … fabric masks may reduce the transmission of larger respiratory droplets,” but that “There is little evidence regarding the transmission of small aerosolized particulates of the size potentially exhaled by asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals with COVID-19.”
Researchers Warn Against Cloth Masks
A study published in 2015 recently received additional commentary from the authors in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The original study23 was titled “A Cluster Randomized Trial of Cloth Masks Compared with Medical Masks in Healthcare Workers.”
They found that health care workers wearing cloth masks had the highest rates of influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections, when compared to those wearing medical masks or controls (who used standard practices that included occasional medical mask wearing). Compared to controls and the medical mask group, those wearing cloth masks had a 72% higher rate of lab-confirmed viral infections. According to the authors:
“Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety.
Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs [health care workers], particularly in high-risk situations …”
In a follow-up commentary dated March 30, 2020, the authors of this study address questions received during the pandemic from health care workers concerned about instructions to use cloth masks if or when medical-grade masks are unavailable. Their comment reads, in part:24
“The study found that cloth mask wearers had higher rates of infection than even the standard practice control group of health workers, and the filtration provided by cloth masks was poor compared to surgical masks …
