Danish study reveals Covid-19 20 times less deadly than WHO claims

Tests were carried out on 1,487 samples from Danish blood donors at the hospital showed a mortality rate of just 0.16 percent.

That puts the Danish scientists' estimates up to 20 times lower than those of the World Health Organization, which is putting deaths at anywhere between one percent and three percent

The study also suggested that far more Danes than the 5,000 which current figures show have caught the virus, with the number possibly being as high as 400,000.

Denmark has so far recorded ... 309 deaths out of a population of 5.8 million.

Source

Just another nail in the coffin for this manufactured hoax crisis.
A Danish study that conducted tests on 1,487 blood samples from donors is showing that many times more people are or have been infected than are currently claimed, which significantly lowers the mortality rate of this trivial virus.
Based on these tests, the more accurate mortality rate is about 0.16%.

Since New York is now counting sudden heart-attacks as Covid-19 deaths (retroactively!), America is determined to prove those Danish studies wrong.

a reply to: trollz

A Danish study that conducted tests on 1,487 blood samples from donors is showing that many times more people are or have been infected than are currently claimed

The study backs up what was already assumed , actual infection rates are bound to be higher than diagnosed cases.
Estimates are based on prediction which isn't a precise science.

a reply to: trollz

The "experts" crashed the world economy.

Ok so cancel all lockdowns , arrest Fauci, arrest Bill, arrest Tedros

It's been announced the UK is to have a further 3 weeks in lockdown.

a reply to: trollz

No it's not the flu it's really bad!!!!! You have it even when you're not sick!!!Just wait 2 weeks!!! 10 trillion are infected!!!!!!!GRAPHS!!!!!!

I think that's about all the talking points. Hard to argue with such intelligent logic.

Most ALL death rates are down because things like drug overdose, etc, etc, have been reported as covid, apparently because it saves the hospitals money.

originally posted by: carewemust
Since New York is now counting sudden heart-attacks as Covid-19 deaths (retroactively!), America is determined to prove those Danish studies wrong.

I heard that bullet holes have a direct link to COVID-19

a reply to: trollz


I am pretty sure there is a flaw in RT's comparison to WHO numbers:

The Danish scientists looked at Danish blood donors and found the mortality rate to be 0,16%.

However, it is widely recognized that the likelihood of dying with COVID19 is vastly greater if you suffer from other diseases, if you are old, or if you in other ways have a 'below par' health.

Blood donors in general are not old, does not suffer from other diseases and have a health above par.

What the danish scientists determined was the death rate of otherwise healthy people

What WHO determined, I believe, was the average global death rate - including those countries with zero healthcare and not a single ventilator, so I wonder if such a disparity between national findings and WHO numbers is at all unusual?

Anyone?

But...but....everyone needs to blame the Covid19 for all deaths that share symptoms. Didn't you get the memo on that?

This disease is very catchy and mostly only effects people who are on certain meds that treat some autoimmune issues, hypertension and stuff like some acne meds. Not all these meds for these diseases cause a problem, but I am not going to start researching which exact ones do. Now people who have had their immune system compromised by chemotherapy and by age over seventy are in a raised risk group too. If you are concerned, doctors know about the risk of some of these meds as to the relationship to infection. They probably cannot do anything officially till there is verified proof though. But it is their profession, I would assume they are aware of this.

originally posted by: trollz

Just another nail in the coffin for this manufactured hoax crisis.
A Danish study that conducted tests on 1,487 blood samples from donors is showing that many times more people are or have been infected than are currently claimed, which significantly lowers the mortality rate of this trivial virus.
Based on these tests, the more accurate mortality rate is about 0.16%.

No. You don't understand what the study really means. And that's not an accident. This article is from Russia Today, a very good propaganda and disinformation instrument. The way propaganda works is by taking a grain of truth and then wrapping a bunch of lies around it to get you to believe what the propagandist wants you to believe. In your case, it obviously worked.

Maybe you noticed that the article did not use any quotations from the doctors who actually did the research except for one sentence in which the article quoted "medics" (whom they did not identify) as saying the results are "complex". The headline was written by whoever wrote the article, and does not necessarily reflect anything that researchers concluded. All of the conclusions about what the results of the study supposedly mean were written by whoever wrote the article. By the way, the author of the article is also unidentified--totally untraceable and unverifiable.

Assuming that the study was real, it does not mean that the mortality rate is 20 times lower in the general population. It means that the population of blood donors (which were the only ones tested) is 20 times healthier than the general population. That's because blood banks screen out people with comorbidities.

originally posted by: DupontDeux

What the danish scientists determined was the death rate of otherwise healthy people

Typically the death rate of healthy people is well under .1%, and it is the unhealthy people that push it up to .1%. In the end it comes down to the correct denominator and numerator, and we have not seen anything remotely correct in either case, so who knows.

Just throwing a WAG in here. Since it seems we are off the top of the curve, and if a typical flu season sees 30 to 60 million infected, with this virus being more transmittable if we went with 60 million then .1% would be 60k, so we are 1/2 that right now.

How does this study account for the 34,000 deaths in the US and 143,000 deaths world wide?

If this virus is mild why are all those people dead?

Also, why are so many health professionals dying?

originally posted by: Wildbob77
How does this study account for the 34,000 deaths in the US and 143,000 deaths world wide?

If this virus is mild why are all those people dead?

Also, why are so many health professionals dying?

Is 34,000 a big number for a population of 340 million? Is 100 health professionals world wide a big number? In the US it has been like 1 or 2 so far. Are health professionals all healthy, not fat, do not smoke, do not have preexisting conditions etc.?

Remember that up to 60k can die any typical flu year in the US...

a reply to: trollz

Breaking News: Seth Rich and Jeffery Epstein's cause of death has been changed to 'Covid-19' to help boost the numbers.

originally posted by: Wildbob77
How does this study account for the 34,000 deaths in the US and 143,000 deaths world wide?

If this virus is mild why are all those people dead?

All? Out of 333,000,000 and 7,000,000,000 respectively? I guess because this virus is not good at math.

a reply to: trollz

Isn't it funny how many of those ATS'ers who want military action against China because it lied about its numbers, are the same people who want to prove that damn near everyone's numbers are wrong, and/or that deny that COVID-19 is a problem.



I suspect they couldn't even sit on a toilet the right way around.



Assuming that the numbers aren't perfectly correct, what do they actually tell us, and what should our leadership be doing with that information? - Ignoring it while bodies pile up from a bogus malady? - Or, acting on the information that we do have, to save as many as possible?

Tracking the invisible enemy :


SAS coronavirus report

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wildbob77
How does this study account for the 34,000 deaths in the US and 143,000 deaths world wide?

If this virus is mild why are all those people dead?

All? Out of 333,000,000 and 7,000,000,000 respectively? I guess because this virus is not good at math.

The mortality statistics are supposed to be related to those who are known to be infected, not to other large unrelated numbers. Does the numbers of atoms in the universe really have relevance in the epidemic spread and consequences of a pathogen?

It is a tragedy if one person dies unnecessarily of something treatable or preventable. It is a national tragedy if numbers of citizens die of something treatable or preventable.

The statistics are just indicative of underlying issues, even when there is a margin of error (and there always is).