Behind the Virus Report That Jarred the U.S. and the U.K. to Action| March 17, 2020, Updated: April 2, 2020
The Imperial College report warned that as many as 510,000 deaths could occur in the U.K. and 2.2 million deaths in the U.S. if the spread of the virus was unmitigated.
This article referred to FALSE predictions of hospitals being at over-capacity and to the supposed need for thousands of ventilators.
Also this alarmist March 5 article was predicting desperate conditions in UK hospitals:
It’s obvious to me that there was pre-planned rhetoric intended to dramatize the situation and condition the public to the idea of life-boat eugenics decisions (Brave New World ethics) which we also saw in Ontario articles:
And if cases of the deadly coronavirus surge in anything like the numbers some experts have predicted, doctors say they would have to consider denying lifesaving care to the frailest patients . . .
Instead, we learned later that thousands of important surgeries and treatments were put on hold in Canada.
Information about Professor Neil Ferguson, Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health at Imperial College, London: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/neil.ferguson
This is the March 26, 2020 version of the report. I’m not sure if the earlier report is available:
The Global Impact of COVID-19 and Strategies for Mitigation and Suppression
There is a list of authors, including Ferguson.
On behalf of the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team
WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Modelling
MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis
Abdul Latif Jameel Institute for Disease and Emergency Analytics
Imperial College London
Notice the direct relationship with the Gates funded World Health Organization.
The world faces a severe and acute public health emergency due to the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic. . . .
We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this year. Mitigation strategies focussing on shielding the elderly (60% reduction in social contacts) and slowing but not interrupting transmission (40% reduction in social contacts for wider population) could reduce this burden by half, saving 20 million lives, but we predict that even in this scenario, health systems in all countries will be quickly overwhelmed. . . .
So, in other words, we need more extreme measures or else 20 million will die. If we do nothing (meaning nothing different from the NORMAL responses which are very effective), then 40 million.
Totally out of order. With his computer models. Plenty of experts disagree!
Here is his history–look at the pattern–look at the results which impacted British farmers and the food supply.
This is an austerity agenda–a new type of society that has been planned for decades–sustainable development–Agenda 21–Agenda 2030–New Deal for Nature.
A sense of the invasive, draconian measures involved on page 7:
We note that each of these strategies would be, in practice, accompanied by surveillance to test and isolate all identified cases and their household members as rapidly as possible to reduce onward transmission.
So it isn’t just bizarre television programming invading our homes–for example during the London 2012 Olympic ceremony! Who is that black-robed character?
These types of people promise to come around to your home, test and isolate your family members.
Nobody ever did that to Canadians before in my life! Nobody ever talked like that WHO official did.
Nobody has punished the WHO Director General or other Ethiopians for their human rights abuses. Nobody has stopped the Gates Foundation after all its abuses with its vaccines.
Page 7 also refers to the predictions for the UK and US: “510,000 and 2,200,000 deaths respectively.”
There is a chart for regions of the world and a separate Excel file link I believe for countries.
Page 8 refers to “enhanced social distancing” and a prediction:
If mitigation including enhanced social distancing is pursued, for an R0 of 3.0, we estimate a maximum reduction in infections in the range 30-38% (median 33%) and a range of reduction in mortality between 19%-55% (median 39%) representing 16 million lives saved for R0=3 (assuming the mortality patterns observed in China)
So that mitigated estimate for mortality ranges from 19%-55%. Basically they are still expecting 20 million deaths worldwide in that case–which was intended to scare governments into more severe.
My reading of this is that they had this reasoning planned out from the beginning. The exaggerated and ridiculous numbers are not a mistake the way I think. They were used in order to force policies. And whatever measures and results we end up with, they will pat themselves on the back and say “oh, we were right to do the draconian lockdowns and other restrictive measures.”
So that’s how I interpret what happened next:
This article (March 26) elaborates how Ferguson saw things in light of the lockdown measures after his initial report:
. . . Ferguson, who tested positive for the coronavirus, said Wednesday the coronavirus death toll is unlikely to exceed 20,000 and could be much lower if lockdown measures in the U.K. stay in place . . .
As of May 19, 2020 (sorry, not up to date), the total coronavirus deaths for the world shows as: 324,156 (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/)
Total deaths reported for UK: 35,341, US: 93,342, Canada: 5,909
I looked up seasonal flu and the same source states:
So far in 2020 (as of May 19)
186,359 Seasonal flu deaths this year
But in general:
Every year an estimated 290,000 to 650,000 people die in the world due to complications from seasonal influenza (flu) viruses.
This figure corresponds to 795 to 1,781 deaths per day due to the seasonal flu.
That should give you perspective on one particular cause of death that is every year. There are many people dying normally every day.
Sources and info:
Seasonal flu death estimate increases worldwide – CDC
Up to 650 000 people die of respiratory diseases linked to seasonal flu each year – World Health Organization (WHO)
So, the reported deaths due to COVID-19 (skewed deliberately) for COVID-19 are comparable to deaths attributed to seasonal flu other years (and the flu death numbers need to be examined also as to their basis).
So the 20 million and 40 million numbers were completely out of line even with annual flu deaths.