Back to Fort Fairfield Journal      WFFJ-TV      Contact Us


Stanford University/UCLA Study:


COVID-19 Ten Times

Less Fatal Than

Originally Projected

By:  David Deschesne

Fort Fairfield Journal

September 23, 2020


   Left-wing establishment television network news hype aside, a new study from doctors at Stanford University and the University of California at Los Angeles have concluded the show is essentially over for COVID-19 hysteria - if the public wants it to be.

   The study, entitled, Estimation of Individual Probabilities of COVID-19 Infection, Hospitalization, and Death from a County-Level Contact of Unknown Infection Status was authored by Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, MD, MPH, who is assistant professor of medicine (affiliated), at Stanford University and a physician at the VA Palo Alto Health Care System.  Co-authoring the study was Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, MD, MPH, who is professor of medicine and public health at UCLA.

   The study was published at medRxiv1 and has revised the original infection, hospital and fatality probabilities for COVID-19 down to below seasonal flu levels.   The mainstream television news media, though, continues to hysterically and irresponsibly report death and case numbers to create the illusion of greater infection and fatality rates than are actually occurring in reality.

   Drs. Bhatia and Klausner examined CDC data for County-level contacts in counties with populations in excess of 500,000 people.   “The attack rate for an exposure varies by exposure intensity, context, proximity, and duration,” they wrote.  “For this analysis, contact means any substantive exposures that happen in a community, household, workplaces, or group living situations.  We do not consider contacts to be short-term events, such as passing by a person on the street.”

   The report finds incredibly low probabilities for catching the virus, becoming hospitalized and ultimately dying from COVID-19 - despite the corporate news media’s misguided, over-hyped reporting on the disease in order to generate maximum consumer demand for a forthcoming toxic, DNA-altering COVID-19 vaccine.

   They found an average rate of actually catching COVID-19 in normal contact within a County to be 0.002833%.  The average rate of hospitalization and fatalities for the various age groups were:


Rates of Hospitalization from COVID-19


Under 49 yrs           0.000074%

50-64 yrs                 0.000162%

65+ yrs                   0.000283%


Rates of Fatality from COVID-19


Under  49 yrs          0.000003%

50-64 yrs                 0.000017%

Over 65 yrs             0.000091%


   The report finds the median estimate of the county-level probability of getting a confirmed COVID-19 infection is 1 in 40,500 person contacts (with a range of 10,100 to 586,000).  In the same type of counties, the median probability of a hospitalization due to COVID-19 is 1 in 709,000 person contacts (with a range of 177,000 to 10,200,000).  The median death probability is even less for that age group, at 1 in 6,670,000 person contacts (with a range of 1.6 million to 97.6 million person contacts.)

   Similar findings were published by Drs. Shah, Saxena and Mavalankar in Oxford’s Quarterly Journal of Medicine which showed secondary infections of COVID-19 between family members sharing a home with a member infected with COVID-19 was only around 10 - 20%.2

   These findings appear to contradict mainstream television network news reports of “185,000+” COVID-19 deaths.  But, on closer inspection, the death numbers are admittedly arbitrarily inflated. 

   In the United States an average of 220,000 people die every month from all causes.  With new CDC guidelines adopted in March, doctors were told to mark down all of those deaths as being caused by COVID-19 if a positive PCR test was confirmed, whether or not COVID-19 was the actual cause of death.  The CDC is coming clean on the data, even if the establishment media isn’t report it, by admitting that only 6% of all “COVID-19” deaths actually had COVID-19 listed as their only cause; all other COVID-19 death victims had two to three additional comorbidities that actually contributed to their deaths.3  This means as of August 22, there were actually only around 9,700 COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. so far, this year.   This is only around one fifth of the deaths attributed to the complications from seasonal flu annually.  The rest of the deaths attributed to COVID-19 were caused by other serious, ongoing health issues.

   Drs. Bhatia and Klausner then suggested the lower levels of infection and fatality rates may be due to decreased susceptibility to the virus in some people.  “For example, cross immunity due to infection with other coronaviruses may be occurring,” they wrote in the report.  “Researchers have also observed cellular immune system responses to COVID-19 among unexposed individuals likely due to prior exposure to related coronaviruses.”

   They also addressed the variable of comorbidities, “The risk of hospitalization and death varies with other risk factors including race/ethnicity, level of deprivation, and chronic diseases such as lung disease and diabetes, that are not reflected in our analysis.”

   The doctors acknowledged how public perception has been artificially skewed by irresponsible television news reporting and government overreaction to the virus, “The estimated probabilities reported here may appear considerably lower than those reflected in public opinion surveys.  Scientific uncertainties, media attention, dramatic government action and a subjective perceived lack of control over exposure all may be influencing risk perception.”

   They conclude that continued government overreaction and subsequent skewed reporting by establishment television and online news sources may be continuing the false perception of heightened risk for COVID-19.   “In the US, policy makers have taken dramatic and unprecedented steps to control COVID-19, applying universal contact reductions through home confinement, limits on travel, closures of schools and businesses and limits on gatherings.  While heightened perception of risk (e.g., fear) motivated these restrictions at the outset of the epidemic, ongoing restrictions on community activity may be mediating [continuing to cause] risk perceptions.”