by Malcolm Kendrick
Information sent by CFGO
Spanish translation 'on
Malcolm Kendrick, doctor and author who works as a GP in
the National Health Service in England.
blog can be read
here and his book,
'Doctoring Data - How to Sort Out Medical Advice from
Medical Nonsense,' is available
Adriana Cardenas, a medical technologist
processes test samples for the coronavirus
at the AdventHealth Tampa labs
on June 25, 2020 in Tampa, Florida.
Getty Images / Octavio Jones
In February, US Covid guru
Anthony Fauci predicted the
virus was 'akin to a severe flu' and would therefore kill around 0.1
percent of people.
Then fatality rate
predictions were somehow mixed up to make it look ten times
When you strip everything
else out, the reason
for lockdown comes from a single
one percent (1%)...!
This was the prediction
that Covid, if left unchecked, would kill around one percent of
You may not think that percentage is enormous, but one percent of
the population of the world is 70 million people - and that's a lot.
It would mean 3.2 million Americans dead, and 670,000 Britons.
But where did this one percent figure come from?
You may find this
hard to believe, but this figure emerged by mistake...
A pretty major thing to
make a mistake about, but that's what happened.
Such things occur.
On September 23,
1998, NASA permanently lost contact with the
Mars Climate Orbiter.
It was supposed to go
round and round the planet looking at the weather, but instead
it hit Mars at around 5,000 mph, exploding into tiny fragments.
It didn't measure the
weather; it became the weather - for a few seconds anyway.
An investigation later
found that the disaster happened because engineers had used the
They didn't convert pound
seconds into Newton seconds when doing their calculations. Imperial,
not metric. This, remember, was NASA, an organization not completely
full of numbskulls.
Now you and I probably have no idea of the difference between a
pound second and a Newton second (it's 0.67 - I looked it
up). But you would kind-of hope NASA would. In fact, I am sure they
do, but they didn't notice, so the figures came out wrong.
The initial mistake was
made, and was baked into the figures. Kaboom...!
With Covid, a similar mistake happened.
One type of fatality
rate was substituted for another.
The wrong rate was
then used to predict the likely death rate - and, as with NASA,
no-one picked up the error.
In order to understand
what happened, you have to understand the difference between two
medical terms that sound the same - but are completely different.
Rather like a pound
second or a Newton second...
rate, did you say?
First, there's the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR).
This is the total
number of people who are infected by a disease and the number of
them who die.
This figure includes
those who have no symptoms at all, or only very mild symptoms -
those who stayed at home, coughed a bit and watched Outbreak.
Then there's the Case
Fatality Rate (CFR).
This is the number of
people suffering serious symptoms, who are probably ill enough
to be in hospital.
Clearly, people who
are seriously ill - the "cases" - are going to have a higher
mortality rate than those who are infected, many of whom don't
all cases are
infections, but not all infections are cases...
Which means that,
the CFR will
always be far higher than the IFR.
With influenza, the
CFR is around ten times as high as the IFR.
Covid seems to have a similar
Now, clearly, you do
not want to get these figures mixed up.
By doing so you would
either wildly overestimate, or wildly underestimate, the impact
But mix these figures
up, they did.
The error started in
America, but didn't end there.
In healthcare, the US
is very much the dog that wags the tail.
The figures they come
up with are used globally.
On February 28, 2020, an
editorial was released by the National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases and the Centers for Disease Control and
Published in the New
England Journal of Medicine, the editorial stated:
"… the overall
clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to
those of a severe seasonal influenza."
They added that influenza
has a CFR of approximately 0.1 percent. One person in a thousand who
gets it badly, dies.
But that quoted CFR for influenza was ten times too low - they meant
to say the IFR, the Infection Fatality Rate, for influenza was 0.1
percent. This was their fatal - quite literally - mistake.
The mistake was compounded.
On March 11, the same
experts testified to Congress, stating that Covid's CFR was
likely to be about one percent, so one person dying from a
hundred who fell seriously ill. Which, as time has passed, has
proved to be pretty accurate.
At this meeting, they compared the likely impact of Covid to
flu. But they used the wrong CFR for influenza, the one stated
in the previous NEJM editorial. 0.1 percent, or one in a
The one that was ten
times too low.
Flu toll 1,000
- Covid toll 10,000
So, they matched up the one percent CFR of Covid with the incorrect
0.1 percent CFR of flu.
Suddenly, Covid was
going to be ten times as deadly...
If influenza killed
50, Covid was going to kill 500.
If influenza killed a
million, Covid was going to get 10 million.
No wonder Congress, then
the world, panicked.
Because they were told
Covid was going to be ten times worse than influenza. They could see
three million deaths in the US alone, and 70 million around the
I don't expect you or I to get this sort of thing right. But I
bloody well expect the experts to do so. They didn't. They got their
IFR and CFR mixed up and multiplied the likely impact of Covid by a
factor of ten.
Here's what the paper "Public
health lessons learned from biases in coronavirus mortality
"On March 11, 2020...
based on the data available at the time, Congress was informed
that the estimated mortality rate for the coronavirus was
ten-times higher than for seasonal influenza, which helped
launch a campaign of social distancing, organizational and
business lockdowns, and shelter-in-place orders."
On February 28 it was
estimated that Covid was going to have about the same impact as a
bad influenza season - almost certainly correct.
Eleven days later, the
same group of experts predicted that the mortality rate was going to
be ten times as high.
This was horribly,
Enter the Mad
Modellers of Lockdown
In the UK, the group I call the Mad Modellers of lockdown,
the Imperial College 'experts', created the same panic.
On March 16, they
used an estimated IFR of 0.9 percent to predict that, without
lockdown, Covid would kill around 500,000 in the UK.
Is this prediction
So far, the UK has had around 40,000 Covid deaths. Significantly
less than 0.1 percent, but not that far off.
Of course, people will
"We had lockdown...
without it so many more would have died. Most people have not
been infected…" etc.
To answer this, we need
to know the true IFR.
Is it a 0.1 percent, or
If it is one percent,
we have more than 400,000 deaths to go.
If it is 0.1 percent,
this epidemic has run its course. For this year, at least...
With swine flu, remember
that the IFR started at around two percent.
In the end, it was 0.02
percent, which was five times lower than the lowest estimate during
the outbreak. The more you test, the lower the IFR will fall.
So where can we look to get the current figures on the IFR?
The best place to
look is at the country that has tested more people than anywhere
else as a proportion of their population: Iceland...
As of last week,
Iceland's IFR stood at 0.16 per cent.
It cannot go up from
here. It can only fall. People can't start dying of a disease they
This means that we'll probably end up with an IFR of about 0.1
percent, maybe less. Not the 0.02 percent of Swine Flu - somewhere
between the two, perhaps.
the 0.1 percent
prophecy has proved to be pretty much bang on...
Which means that we've
had all the deaths we were ever going to get. And which also means
lockdown achieved, almost precisely nothing
with regard to Covid.
No deaths were
Yes, we are testing and testing, and finding more so-called cases.
As you will...
But the hospitals and
ICUs are virtually empty.
Almost no-one is
dying of Covid anymore, and most of those who do were otherwise
celebrating that, we've artificially created a whole new thing
to scare ourselves with.
We now call a
positive test a Covid "case."
This is not medicine...
A "case" is someone
who has symptoms.
A case is not someone
carrying tiny amounts of virus in their nose.
Now, however, you test
positive, and you're a "case."
Never in history has
medical terminology been so badly mangled.
Never have statistics
been so badly mangled.
When researchers look
back at this pandemic, they'll have absolutely no idea who died
because of Covid, or who died - coincidentally - with it.
Everything's been mashed
together in a determined effort to make the virus look as deadly as
Lockdown happened because we were told that Coivid could kill
'one percent'. But Covid was never going to kill more than about
0.1 percent - max.
That's the figure estimated back in February, by the major players
in viral epidemiology. A figure that has turned out to be remarkably
Bright guys… bad mistake.
tens of thousands - for nothing
But because we panicked, we've added hugely to the toll.
Excess mortality between
March and May was around 70,000, not the 40,000 who died of/with
Covid. Which means 30,000 may have died directly as a result of
the actions we took.
We protected the
young, the children, who are at zero risk of
But we threw our
elderly and vulnerable under a bus.
The very group who
should have been shielded.
Instead, we caused
20,000 excess deaths in care homes.
It was government policy to clear out hospitals, and stuff care
homes with patients carrying Covid, or discharge them back to
their own homes, to infect their nearest and dearest. Or any
community care staff who visited them.
We threw - to use health secretary Matt Hancock's
ridiculous phrase - a ring of steel around care homes.
As it turned out, this
was not to protect them, but to trap the residents, as we turned
their buildings into Covid incubators. Anyone working in care homes,
as I do, knows why we got 20,000 excess deaths.
policy did this...!
That is far from all
On top of care homes, the
ONS estimates that,
16,000 excess deaths
were caused by lockdown.
The heart attacks and
strokes that were not treated.
The empty, echoing
hospitals and A&E units.
The cancer treatments
Which means that at least
as many people have died as a result of the
draconian actions taken to combat Covid, as have been
killed by the virus itself.
This has been a
slow-motion stampede, where the elderly - in particular - were
trampled to death.
We locked down in
We killed tens of
thousands unnecessarily, in fear.
We crippled the
economy, and left millions in fear of their livelihoods.
We have trapped
abused women and children at home with their abusers.
We have wiped out
scores of companies, and crushed entire industries.
We stripped out the NHS, and left millions in prolonged pain and
suffering, on ever lengthening waiting lists, which have
There have also been tens
of thousands of delayed cancer diagnoses - the effects of which are
yet to be seen, but the Lancet has estimated at least
sixty thousand years of life will be lost.
Lockdown can be seen as a complete and utter disaster. And it was
all based on a nonsense:
A claim that Covid
was going to kill one percent.
A claim that can now
be seen to be utterly and completely wrong.
Sweden, which did not lock down,
has had a death rate of 0.0058 percent...
It takes a very big
person to admit they have made a horrible, terrible mistake.
But a horrible,
terrible mistake has been made.
Let's end this
ridiculous nonsense now.
And vow never to let such
monumental stupidity happen ever again.