This article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2020
Visit our Re-post guidelines
A recent article published in the Wall Street Journal titled, “New Data Suggest the Coronavirus Isn’t as Deadly as We Thought,” confirms what I, and many who have been questioning the mainstream narrative on COVID have been saying since the lockdowns began: fatality statistics have been dramatically over-inflated due to the vast submerged iceberg of asymptomatic or mild cases that were never accounted for within the official statistics used as justification to shut down the entire country.
Ironically, even Dr. Fauci himself raised these concerns in his recent NEJM editorial on the topic, where he estimates that fatality rates may be 10x lower than official projections. Add to this the fact that the US Gov. Health Statistics Agency and WHO explicitly do not require objective validation of COVID-19 deaths, i.e. no virus testing is required, only “suspicion” that a person’s death was caused by coronavirus to be labeled as such on a death certificate, and you have a perfect storm of unsubstantiated hysteria, which for those who have been paying close attention, has played perfectly into the hands of the emerging medical police state and New World Order global governance agenda.
The WSJ report opens up as follows:
“The Covid-19 shutdowns have been based on the premise that the disease would kill more than two million Americans absent drastic actions to slow its spread. That model assumed case fatality rates—the share of infected people who die from the disease—of 1% to 3%. The World Health Organization’s estimated case-fatality rate was 3.4%.”
However, the WSJ article goes on to explain how a preliminary study introduced by a team of Stanford researchers titled, “COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California,“ found that approximately 50 to 85 times more people have been infected by COVID-19 than official testing statistics have revealed, based on a recent sampling of blood antibodies for the virus in a cohort of 3,330 people living in Santa Clara County, California.
There are at least two ways to interpret this data. First, given that testing kits for COVID-19 antibodies may not be accurate enough to distinguish the so-called Wuhan coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) from naturally occurring background coronavirus strains, of which there are several dozen known to circulate regularly within human communities, the test may have been picking up the natural virome of the population, creating what are known as “false positives.” Another possibility is that somehow this Wuhan virus did, in fact, spread throughout the Santa Clara county at an extremely rapid rate, surreptitiously, but that the virus is actually no worse than any other coronavirus, which causes the common cold, or expresses itself asymptomatically in healthy individuals who are naturally immune to experiencing morbidity or mortality from it. If ture, this would indicate the catastrophizing of the medical community and media has not basis in science.
Either way, the dominant narrative that exposure equates to a near death experience, requiring immediate quarantine and/or forced medication or future mandatory vaccination when it becomes available, is decimated. At the least, the lockdown of most of the country’s population, and the majority of the developed world, would not be justified given the widespread prevalence and relative harmlessness of the virus revealed in this study.
The WSJ report offers this interpretation:
“That may sound scary, but it’s great news. It suggests that the large majority of people who contract Covid-19 recover without ever knowing they were infected, and that the U.S. infection fatality rate may be more than an order of magnitude lower than authorities had assumed. Based on this seroprevalence data, the authors estimate that in Santa Clara County the true infection fatality rate is somewhere in the range of 0.12% to 0.2%—far closer to seasonal influenza than to the original, case-based estimates.”
If, in fact, this new study is correct, the justification for shutting down most of the social and economic activity in the United States is hereby completely refuted. Clearly, the “science is not settled.” And given the profound, adverse socioeconomic, and psychobiological impacts associated with assuming the worst as concerns COVID-19, it is time to take a stand and assert our right to maintain Constitutionally protected liberties, open back up our schools, churches, parks, and enable people to return to the jobs and livelihoods. If this resonates with you, take action today by contacting your mayor and governor at the Stand for Health Freedom advocacy portal:
For those looking for a deeper dive, take a look at the new platform Questioning COVID, where clinicians, researchers, and health experts from around the world interrogate the mainstream narrative around the pandemic: https://www.QuestioningCovid.com
Sayer Ji is founder of Greenmedinfo.com, a reviewer at the International Journal of Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine, Co-founder and CEO of Systome Biomed, Vice Chairman of the Board of the National Health Federation, Steering Committee Member of the Global Non-GMO Foundation.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.