Horowitz: Antibody tests are proving that continuing lockdown is senseless

We are going to lose 40% of our national GDP this quarter, incur trillions in debt, lose our freedoms and privacy, and shed tens of millions of jobs – including of health care workers – due to the shutdown and panic porn peddled by the political class. But for what? For a virus that had already been spreading for months and has a case fatality rate well below 1%. We will be left with nothing from the lockdowns other than a virus that will be kept alive for longer and kill more people. We no longer need to guess how pervasive the virus has been and therefore how low the fatality rate is. There are numerous serology tests being done throughout the country and the world that demonstrate the entire premise for the lockdown is counterproductive. While many Florida counties are overwhelmingly populated by elderly residents, Miami-Dade is just a little above the national median age of the country, so it’s a good sample of the macro fatality rate when averaging out all age groups nationwide.

Most notably, the serology test found that “more than half had NO symptoms in the seven to fourteen days prior to screening.” That is a result similar to that of other countries, such as Iceland. In other words, this thing was quietly spreading long before the lockdown, rendering the entire purpose of the lockdown moot. Many other antibody studies have concluded there is a similarly low fatality rate. Antibody sampling in Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties netted similar results – between 0.12% and 0.20%. The fatality rate in Chelsea, Massachusetts, based on an extrapolation of a sampling there, would be around 0.16 percent. That is identical to the results of a recent antibody test in Denmark, which demonstrates a degree of consistency throughout the world. One serology test in Germany showed a slightly higher but still low fatality rate of 0.37%. And Germany has a higher percentage of seniors relative to its general population than the United States.

However, the more this virus runs its course and the more antibody testing takes place, it’s likely that the denominator of total cases will be much larger, further driving down the fatality rate. According to Reuters, a recent tally of 3,277 inmates in state prison systems in Arkansas, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia who had tested positive for the virus showed that 96 percent of them were asymptomatic. This is likely a relatively young population of predominantly males in their 20s and 30s. If these surveys and tests showing wide asymptomatic spreading are representative of other places in the country and across the globe, it means that likely as many people have had SARS-CoV-2 as have the flu in a typical year. This has two important public policy implications: 1) The fatality rate is a fraction of what was suggested by the models that were used to justify the shutdown; and 2) This disease has spread so far and wide that implementing lockdowns and mass surveillance/contact tracing at this stage are like spitting into a sea.

Release the healthy; better protect the elderly and vulnerable 'What is the punch line?' If you are not elderly or chronically ill, you are less likely to die from coronavirus than most other things. Not only is the fatality rate of the virus overall only slightly higher than that of the flu, but it’s mainly targeting vulnerable populations. Over half the SARS-CoV-2 deaths in Massachusetts and Maine were in long-term care facilities, and the median age of death was 82. Nearly three-quarters of those in Minnesota were in long-term care facilities. That number is 75% in Rhode Island, 61% in Pennsylvania, and 43% in Connecticut. New York and New Jersey appear to be the only states where the percentage is lower, but even in those hot spots, it was mainly those with chronic illnesses who died. A new paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association by the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research found that 94% of fatalities in the New York City area had at least one chronic illness and 88% percent had at least two. The comprehensive study analyzed data from about 5,700 coronavirus patients admitted to New York City and metro-area hospitals between March 1 and April 4, of whom 553 passed away.

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/horowitz-antibody-tests-proving-continuing-lockdown-senseless/

Supreme Court tells U.S. government to pay insurers $12 billion under Obamacare

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The federal government must “honor its obligations” and pay private insurers $12 billion owed to them under an Obamacare provision aimed at encouraging them to offer medical coverage to uninsured Americans, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday. The 8-1 ruling authored by liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor paves the way for a significant one-time cash infusion for major companies such as Humana Inc, Anthem Inc and Centene Corp. The justices reversed a lower court’s ruling that Congress had suspended the government’s obligation to make such payments under the Affordable Care Act, widely known as Obamacare. Unlike other litigation involving Obamacare - long targeted by Republicans for repeal in Congress or invalidation through the courts - this case concerned only payments to insurers and did not directly challenge the law itself.

The Supreme Court in its next term, which starts in October, is set to hear a more politically freighted case concerning a bid by 20 Democratic-led states including California and New York to preserve Obamacare in the face of a challenge by Republican-led states backed by President Donald Trump’s administration. In Monday’s ruling, the court sided with insurers that had argued that the lower court ruling would have let the government pull a “bait-and-switch” and withhold money the companies were promised. “The government should honor its obligations,” Sotomayor wrote. Justice Samuel Alito, one of the five conservative justices, was the sole dissenter, saying the court’s ruling “has the effect of providing a massive bailout for insurance companies that took a calculated risk and lost.”

Moda Health Plan Inc and other insurers that sued to try to compel the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make the payments have said the government was supposed to help them recover from early losses they suffered after the law was passed by Congress in 2010 and signed by Trump’s Democratic predecessor Barack Obama. The law has enabled millions of Americans who previously had no medical coverage to obtain insurance, including those with pre-existing medical conditions. Other insurers involved in the case included Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Maine Community Health Options and Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance Company. “We appreciate that today’s Supreme Court 8-1 decision ensures that the federal government honors the obligations it made for services the private sector already delivered,” said Matt Eyles, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, an industry group representing insurers. An HHS spokeswoman said officials were “disappointed in the court’s ruling.”

Payments would have come through the law’s so-called risk corridor program designed to mitigate insurers’ risks from 2014 to 2016, when they sold coverage to previously uninsured people through exchanges established under Obamacare. Insurers that paid out significantly less in claims on policies sold through the exchanges than they took in from premiums provided some of their gains to the government. Insurers that paid out more were entitled to government compensation for part of their losses. From 2015 through 2017, Congress passed legislation barring HHS from using general funds to pay the government’s risk corridor obligations. Health insurers turned to federal courts to obtain the payments. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in 2018 that Congress effectively repealed its obligation to pay the insurers, prompting the insurers to appeal to the Supreme Court. In a case directly challenging Obamacare, the Supreme Court in 2012 upheld the bulk of the law. Three years later, it rejected another challenge to it.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-obamacare-idUSKCN2291Y3

>>8944157

Indeed..just another adventure in money laundering..

>>8944178

see:

>>8944198

>>8944189

Anon, I know there were 2 of those Dr. Erikson Vid's, in notables this weekend. I just did a query and they are not showing up. Qresear.ch has notables missing!

>>8944431

I didn't use a name search anon..I used the url..that I posted when they were notabled. Gone! Thinking ..the raid on this board had everything to do with it.

>>8944501

I don't have it, in that bread the board was slammed, couldn't get back on to retrieve it.