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:
23 September 2026
4.2 MINS
For too long, maintaining regional Victoria’s crumbling roads has been an issue of “out of sight, out of mind” for the state’s incumbent Labor government.
23 September 2026
3.9 MINS
Italy’s euthanasia debate has reached a troubling new stage, with doctors facing criminal investigation after refusing to participate in assisted suicide.
22 September 2026
2.4 MINS
Science is a method, not a belief system. From Tamiflu to past medical failures, this piece asks what happens when consensus replaces scrutiny and evidence.
21 September 2026
4.4 MINS
On September 11, the Archbishop of Canterbury gave an interfaith award to a man who called Osama bin Laden the "Sword of God" and blames Jews and Christians for the war on Iran. The award was rescinded after public backlash.
21 September 2026
8.5 MINS
After a 20-week scan revealed possible heart abnormalities and genetic concerns, medical staff twice offered to abort a Christian couple's baby. Six weeks of fervent prayer later, the heart defect was gone — and their son is nearly ready to be born.
21 September 2026
2.4 MINS
It is truly concerning that this sort of incursion into free speech can even be suggested. Labor's Digital Duty of Care Bill is about controlling the narrative online, and must be defeated.
18 September 2026
4.5 MINS
Up to 10,000 rallied in Sydney for a ban on sex-selective abortion. Twenty-four hours later, the NSW Legislative Council defeated John Ruddick's bill 21–16. The fight, says Dr Joanna Howe, is just beginning.
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 .