Why Covid-19 Is a “Strange Pandemic”


Swiss Policy Research - TRANSCEND Media Service

3 Sep 2020 – Why does covid-19 appear to be a somewhat strange pandemic? It is because of the covid-19 mortality profile, which is almost identical to natural mortality.

To better understand this crucial point, we first look at two other well-known pandemics: the 2009 swine flu “fake pandemic” and the notorious 1918 “Spanish flu” pandemic.

The 2009 swine flu was a “fake pandemic” because in reality it was a rather mild flu that caused few deaths globally. It was labeled a “pandemic” in June 2009 only because the WHO had removed the requirement of “enormous numbers of death and illness” one month before. The pandemic warning then triggered a multi-billion dollar sale of rather useless and partially dangerous vaccines.

The 2009 swine flu strain was mild because it was somewhat similar to a flu virus strain that had circulated prior to the 1957 Asian flu pandemic. This meant that most people over 60 years – the main risk group – had already developed immunity against the new virus. And the virus simply wasn’t dangerous enough to seriously threaten many people younger than 60 years.

The 1918 “Spanish flu” virus, on the other hand, was a very dangerous virus that had a very different mortality profile. In addition to old people, it also killed babies and young children plus young adults between 20 and 45 years at very high rates (see chart at the bottom).

In contrast, the mortality profile of the covid-19 coronavirus is essentially zero for children and young adults and near zero below 50, before it begins to rise slowly and then very steeply above 70 and especially above 80, reaching extreme levels in nursing homes.

Thus the covid-19 mortality profile is almost identical to natural mortality. This doesn’t mean that covid-19 doesn’t increase someone’s risk of death – it absolutely does – but this increase is proportional to the pre-existing risk of death of the respective age and risk group.

The characteristics of covid-19 may have to do with the cardiovascular and immunological properties of the virus and they explain the high death rate in nursing homes (up to 70% of deaths), in people above 70 years (about 90%), and in Western countries in general. In contrast, covid death rates in Africa, predicted by many (including Bill Gates) to be high, have been very low.

Many people expect a “real pandemic” to kill also younger people, or at least babies, at a significant rate, as the 1918 flu and other flu pandemics indeed did. Some skeptics therefore concluded that covid-19 must then be another “fake pandemic”. But it is not – it simply has a very different and much more “natural” mortality profile.

Because of the covid-19 mortality profile, mass PCR testing and contact tracing in the general population make little sense and create an additional “casedemic” on top of the pandemic. Mass vaccinations will also make rather little sense, especially because at the  time experimental vaccines might become available, many people will already have been exposed to the wild virus.

However, the mortality profile of covid-19 is only “the tip of iceberg”. Covid-19 is also causing many standard and intensive care hospitalizations – even in people below 65 years – and it is causing post-acute “long covid” in about 10% of symptomatic people, including many young and healthy people. These are potentially very serious issues that should not be downplayed in any way.

The best currently available answer to these issues is early and prophylactic treatment based on simple and effective means, as emphasized by many leading experts from around the world. Simply isolating sick people at home until they cannot breathe anymore is the worst possible approach. Unfortunately, in most Western countries, it is still the most common approach.

It is important to keep in mind that in many parts of Europe and some parts of the US, coronavirus antibody values are still very low (e.g. 2% in Germany). Hence it is not reasonable at all to assume that the pandemic is already over. Even in global hotspots with a 20% antibody rate, it is not at all certain if this is going to provide collective immunity during winter months.

The following chart compares the very different mortality profiles of covid-19 and the 1918 flu. Note that even for the 85+ age group, covid-19 lethality doesn’t reach the value of the 1918 flu, as the chart uses two different scales (left and right), and the covid scale is four times smaller.

Mortality by age group of covid-19 and the 1918 flu (DB Research and CDC)

The following chart by Cambridge statistics professor David Spiegelhalter compares covid mortality to natural mortality. As mentioned above, covid does increase the risk of death, but this increase is proportional to natural mortality. The curve appears linear because the scale is logarithmic.

Covid mortality and natural mortality (Spiegelhalter)

Swiss Policy Research, founded in 2016, is an independent, nonpartisan and nonprofit research group investigating geopolitical propaganda in Swiss and international media. SPR is composed of independent academics that for personal and professional reasons prefer to protect their identities, and receives no external funding; there are no financial sponsors or backers. Our articles have been published or shared by numerous independent media outlets and journalists, among them Julian Assange, and have been translated into more than two dozen languages.

Go to Original – swprs.org


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Share this article:

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

There are no comments so far.

Join the discussion!

We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.



This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.