COVID-19 Far Less Deadly for Non-Elderly than Original Estimates: Study
A peer-reviewed study published this month at Science Direct found the infection fatality rate (IFR) for non-elderly people who contracted COVID-19 was far lower than original, widely-publicised estimates.
The report compiled data from 31 national seroprevalence studies that took place before mRNA injections were rolled out and before the appearance of the milder Omicron variant. It found that the median infection fatality rate of COVID-19 was 0.0003% at 0–19 years, 0.002% at 20–29 years, 0.011% at 30–39 years, 0.035% at 40–49 years, 0.123% at 50–59 years, and 0.506% at 60–69 years.
These figures stand in stark contrast to the 0.6% to 1% IFR cited by government officials and media publications, and used to justify draconian lockdowns and mRNA mandates in 2020–2021.
As recently as November 2022, for instance, AAP Factcheck used two-year-old data indicating a COVID-19 IFR of 0.4% for people aged 55 years old and 1.4% for those aged 65 — figures approximately three times higher than the results from the latest study.
Authoritative Research
The recent report was co-authored by John Ioannidis, one of the world’s most-cited and most influential physicians.
As the recent report highlights, 94% of the global population is younger than 70 years and 86% is younger than 60 years. For all people in those age brackets globally, it was found that the median COVID-19 IFR may have been as low as 0.07% and 0.03% respectively.
The subjects of the recent study were people who had not experienced a prior COVID-19 infection and were yet to take an mRNA injection — suggesting that today’s COVID-19 IFR would likely be far lower still.
Ignored
The peer-reviewed study, published in the journal Environmental Research on January 1st of this year, is yet to receive attention in the mainstream press.
The study further vindicates the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD), which as early as October 2020 advocated for focused protection for the elderly and at-risk.
The GBD has garnered almost 1 million signatures globally, though its authors faced censorship on social media for their advocacy of a measured approach to COVID-19.
___
Photo by cottonbro.
One Comment
Leave A Comment
Recent Articles:
2 September 2026
4.6 MINS
Political opponents can be criticised without being demonised. The rhetoric surrounding Pauline Hanson risks turning legitimate political disagreement into something far more dangerous.
28 August 2026
3.5 MINS
Alice Springs' Greens-backed mayor had her car stolen — then refused to press charges. James Macpherson asks why the progressive answer to rising crime is to fix the narrative instead of the crime.
27 August 2026
2.5 MINS
According to the bombshell report, the Biden administration told agencies to treat restrictions on these drugs as discrimination. The Trump administration now wants hospitals investigated.
24 August 2026
3.5 MINS
John Anderson joins Karl Stefanovic to unpack Australia's mounting challenges — from Cultural Marxism and youth values to Net Zero, farming pressures, defence gaps and Labor's economic mismanagement.
24 August 2026
7.6 MINS
A controversial UK government guide telling asylum seekers about sexual consent has sparked fierce criticism over immigration, public safety and government accountability.
21 August 2026
2.9 MINS
An Australian-designed nuclear microreactor, built in just 150 days, has been sold to a US firm after federal and state bans blocked its development at home — the latest in a long line of missed Australian innovations.
19 August 2026
4 MINS
On 17 August, Parliament House witnessed historic momentum for the Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) Bill 2026. Record numbers of politicians attended and spoke publicly in support, while media coverage reached unprecedented levels — marking a significant shift in political engagement on this highly important issue.
Thank you Kurt. As numerically illiterate as I am and trust me , I am. Even I understand what you have written.
May We thank God for the grace of His truth .