Good old “JD” Roberts! as Canadians used to call him.
This video seems real. I wish I could trust the presenter, but his points seem to be sound enough this time. We’ll see if we can verify the essentials of the report:
Roberts refers to a “USC” report.
Apparently there is up to date information reported by the LA Times and other publications from California health departments that show a much wider spread of the virus, and therefore the death rate is much lower than it is portrayed to be.
What he says just sounds like a confirmation of what Fauci actually wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine on March 26 (which contradicts the policies he advocated):
. . . If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS . . .
The main LA Times corona coverage page hasn’t been updated to reflect this when I looked at it and I would have to subscribe to read further: https://www.latimes.com/projects/california-coronavirus-cases-tracking-outbreak/
I found these articles that mention a USC report, so I believe this is likely the same one Roberts is talking about.
Just as Fauci did, both of these articles and the people involved spin the interpretation of these results in a way that encourages the current policies.
From the ktla.com article, they quote the lead scientist:
But having up to that many people who may have already had the illness means that the fatality rate from the virus is much lower than originally believed, Neeraj Sood, the USC scientist leading the study said Monday.
They took a random sample of LA County residents. 2.8% to 5.6% of them already had the antibodies in their blood. So they project that there are:
221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who may have been infected with COVID-19 at some point before April 9 — a much higher number than the 13,816 cases
So for 617 deaths, the fatality rate becomes 617/221,000 (0.3%) or 617/442,000 (0.14%) instead of 617/13,816 (4.5%)
Those involved are obviously under pressure to spin this to mean that they should maintain the draconian policies in order to try to contain the virus, but the points that we should be getting from this is that the threat has been extremely exaggerated and that the virus had already been spread very widely.
We have been bullied by media and public officials with exaggerated stories about this virus into submitting to degrading new restrictions on our lives.
When they scare people into submission, it’s called “science.” I call it abuse, lies and tyranny.
All of this reminds me of Julian Huxley’s view of science, that it is for “knowledge” and “control.”
These people running this are still in lock-step with their agenda and that is very disturbing to realize and hard to believe for the public. They have fixed dictatorial agendas that they are determined to achieve with these policies. It will require a lot of resistance to reverse them.
People must speak out and save each other from these devastating policies that are generating needless fear in everyone. The most vulnerable people are definitely going to be hurt the most by this situation-viruses affect them the most–but the media won’t even consider that some elderly might be suffering more from isolation and lack of proper care than from their hyped virus. When we become helpless economically and when we let our freedoms be curtailed, we’re not helping anyone.