BOOM! Stanford's John Ioannidis proves AGAIN what I, Risch, McCullough, Atlas, J Tucker, Tenenbaum, Bhattacharya, Gupta, Kulldorff, Wolf, Oskoui knew, COVID was NOT deadly for vast majority, low IFR
by Paul Alexander
Ioannidis shows us what we have been arguing for 2 years, to strongly protect the elderly & leave rest of non-elderly society alone, free, NO lockdowns or school closures, no mandates, no vaccine
Two years ago I wrote this in AIER (under Tucker and Eastman) with Risch and Tenenbaum and Dara and McCullough and Oskoui, working with Ioannidis and his data, listening, sharing, we knew the risk was near zero. For the younger, healthy, well, even middle-aged persons. No one ever said that this was not serious for the elderly and high risk who we call ‘elderly’ elderly. But we knew how to manage them then with early treatment and support and who the risk group was.
We knew then as is now, that you can only tame a pandemic if you can cut the chain of transmission and get to herd immunity with sterilizing immunity e.g. natural innate immunity (innate antibodies and natural killer cells (NK cells)) and to an extent, natural acquired-adaptive second line immunological memory. Sterilizing immunity with a vaccine (if you brought one) that sterilizes the virus. However, this COVID gene injection by Pfizer and Moderna has failed in sterilizing the virus and is harmful, is non-neutralizing and does not stop infection or transmission as you know as you now proceed to your 5th shot and on the booster treadmill you cannot get off of and will likely need a booster each day. They are taking you to where you will need a booster every day. How many other ways do we show you, that you need to see people around you becoming infected after vaccine, dying too, before you wrap your mind around the fact that it has failed!
So we knew the only thing to do here maybe 2 weeks out March 2020, and given the vast low risk, was to strongly protect the elderly and vulnerable persons in our societies best you could (in nursing homes, assisted living, long-term facilities, as well as private homes), leave the children on the immunological battlefield by allowing them to be free to confront the pathogen harmlessly and naturally (as would all healthy and well in society, the low-risk people) and leave the rest of society alone, open, in full and free, no closures, NONE. No shielding, no school closures, nothing. Just protect the vulnerable and we would have been done with this in a few months.
That via natural and harmless exposure, daily living, we would in the low-risk society face the pathogen, be infected, asymptomatically (not even know we were) or with mild symptoms, then recover, and then protect the vulnerable as we do and did for centuries. And we develop natural exposure immunity, build immunological memory for subsequent exposure, and march towards herd immunity where we cut the transmission to the vulnerable (those who are immune-compromised and cannot get the pathogen or the vaccine for some reason).
We even knew from records of the Athenian Plague, 430 BC, what natural immunity was (even if rudimentarily reported): Infection seems to have brought with it some immunity: “The same man was never attacked twice—never at least fatally.” We even had evidence of natural immunity being potent as long as 100 years post exposure and infection, as seen in research by Yu et al.(https://www.nature.com/articles/nature07231) on the survivors of the Spanish Flu of 1918 (natural exposure of survivors to the 1918 pandemic virus). Yu et al. showed that “of the 32 individuals tested that were born in or before 1915, each showed seroreactivity with the 1918 virus, nearly 90 years after the pandemic.” Yet Fauci and Birx and Francis Collins refused to listen to us that the COVID recovered were not candidates for their COVID gene injection and that we were largely immune from the virus given accumulating evidence. The body of evidence was bullet-proof that natural (innate and acquired-adaptive) immunity was far superior than anything conferred by vaccinal immunity (see Brownstone with over 150 pieces of evidence showing the superiority of natural immunity and failures of the lockdowns and school closures).
Scott Atlas was out front, Nick Hudson from PANDA joined us and led too. Ballan of PANDA. But we were cancelled and slandered. Yet we were right! They were wrong and killed people needlessly in the process with their lockdown lunacy. Business owners, laid off employees, children committed suicide due to their lockdown lunacy. They, those who enacted these failed, specious, and unscientific unsupported policies, must be held accountable today.
Not one policy, not one statement by the CDC, NIH, FDA, NIAID officials, not Fauci, Birx, Francis Collins, Walensky, not one of them, none, were correct and all were flat wrong! Every single COVID lockdown lunatic policy by the Trump and Biden administration hurt people, harmed them and caused deaths.
We knew the data over 2 years ago, that the age-stratified infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in the non-elderly non-vaccinated population was close to zero. That COVID was amenable to risk-stratification and that baseline risk was prognostic on severity of outcome. That there was a steep age-risk curve with a 1000 fold difference in risk of death between 85 year old granny and 10 year old Johnny. We knew it, we told them this but they, CDC, NIH, Fauci et al. will not listen.
Dr. Ioannidis must be applauded today and celebrated for he has remained steadfast and resolute and many of his statements 2.5 years ago have proven 100% correct. When we started the response in March 2020 or so, John was out front with Jeff Tucker, Scott Atlas, Nick Hudson (PANDA), Kulldorf, Bhattacharya, and myself, with Dara and Tenenbaum, as well as Risch and McCullough and Vanden Bossche hammering away about the devastation of the lockdowns and the data as we understood it. We were pilloried and smeared and mocked.
We said what we had to say then and stood against CDC and NIH and FDA and Fauci and Birx and Francis Collins and the entire band of lockdown lunatics that killed people with their policies and now their ineffective and harmful COVID gene injection spearheaded by Bourla and Bancel. Mass vaccinating into a pandemic across all age-groups with an antigen specific, non-neutralizing vaccine that does not sterilize the virus and is causing (via Darwinian Natural Selection pressure on the target antigen/receptor binding domain and N-terminal domain epitopes) infectious variant after infectious variant to emerge.
We knew the very low infection-fatality rate (IFR) and age-risk stratified. We argued 2 years ago that there was absolutely no reason to lock down, constrain and harm ordinarily healthy, well, and younger or middle-aged members of the population irreparably; the very people who will be expected to help extricate us from the factitious nightmare and to help us survive the damages caused by possibly the greatest self-inflicted public health fiasco ever promulgated on societies. There was no reason to continue the illogical policy that was doing far greater harm than good. Never in human history have we done this and employed such overtly oppressive restrictions with no basis. We harmed and killed healthy people and children with the lockdowns and school closures for an infection fatality rate at or lower than yearly flu.
We are vindicated. Fully. I said then do not take children off the immunological battlefield by subverting their potent innate immune systems, I stand by it. Do not vaccine them with these failed injections that confer no benefit and skew to harms.
Dr. Ioannidis today October 2022:
“For 29 countries (24 high-income, 5 others), publicly available age-stratified COVID-19 death data and age-stratified seroprevalence information were available and were included in the primary analysis. The IFRs had a median of 0.035% (interquartile range (IQR) 0.013 - 0.056%) for the 0-59 years old population, and 0.095% (IQR 0.036 - 0.125%,) for the 0-69 years old.
The median IFR was 0.0003% at 0-19 years, 0.003% at 20-29 years, 0.011% at 30-39 years, 0.035% at 40-49 years, 0.129% at 50-59 years, and 0.501% at 60-69 years. Including data from another 9 countries with imputed age distribution of COVID-19 deaths yielded median IFR of 0.025-0.032% for 0-59 years and 0.063-0.082% for 0-69 years. Meta-regression analyses also suggested global IFR of 0.03% and 0.07%, respectively in these age groups.
Conclusion: The current comprehensive systematic evaluation of national seroprevalence studies suggests that the IFR of COVID-19 among non-elderly populations in the pre-vaccination era is substantially lower than previously calculated (4-8,59), especially in the younger age strata.
Median IFRs show a clear age-gradient with approximately 3-4-fold increase for each decade but it starts from as low as 0.0003% among children and adolescents and it reaches 0.5% in the 60- 69 years old age group. Sensitivity analyses considering all 38 countries with seroprevalence data that were identified in our systematic search showed that median IFR might be up to a third lower than the estimates produced by our main analysis, e.g. approximately 0.03% in the 0-59 years age group and 0.06-0.08% in the 0-69 years old group.
Consistent with these estimates, meta-regressions suggest IFR estimates in that range for the global population where 87% of the 0-59 years old people are <50 years old and 80% of the 0-69 years old people are <50 years old.
The current analysis suggests a much lower pre-vaccination IFR in non-elderly populations than previously suggested.”
Above bar graph by Daily Skeptic Will Jones (https://dailysceptic.org/2022/10/17/covid-19-much-less-deadly-than-previously-thought-major-study-finds/)
Dr. Alexander, near 2 years ago in the seminal paper (in AIER under Jeff Tucker then before he founded Brownstone) published:
“The present Covid-inspired forced lockdowns on business and school closures are and have been counterproductive, not sustainable and are, quite frankly, meritless and unscientific. They have been disastrous and just plain wrong! There has been no good reason for this. These unparalleled public health actions have been enacted for a virus with an infection mortality rate (IFR) roughly similar (or likely lower once all infection data are collected) to seasonal influenza.
Stanford’s John P.A. Ioannidis identified 36 studies (43 estimates) along with an additional 7 preliminary national estimates (50 pieces of data) and concluded that among people <70 years old across the world, infection fatality rates ranged from 0.00% to 0.57% with a median of 0.05% across the different global locations (with a corrected median of 0.04%). Let me write this again, 0.05%. Can one even imagine the implementation of such draconian regulations for the annual flu? Of course not!
Not satisfied with the current and well-documented failures of lockdowns, our leaders are inexplicably doubling and tripling down and introducing or even hardening punitive lockdowns and constraints. They are locking us down ‘harder.’ Indeed, an illustration of the spurious need for these ill-informed actions is that they are being done in the face of clear scientific evidence showing that during strict prior societal lockdowns, school lockdowns, mask mandates, and additional societal restrictions, the number of positive cases went up! No one can point to any instance where lockdowns have worked in this Covid pandemic.”
Ioannidis Oct 2022 publication now
Alexander’s (my) publication in AIER 2 years ago