u/Xemptor80

During Covid, a few people were constantly saying that younger and healthy and healthy people had the least risk of dying from Covid but I didn’t know the mathematical explanation specifically when it came to case fatality rate (CFR) versus infection fatality rate (IFR). I am most certain I had heard of the term mortality rate and I think I had also heard of the term case fatality rate (CFR). But I never heard of the infection fatality rate (IFR) and I believe that was by design. If I have been this clueless about these terms, I definitely know there are other people out there who are still not knowledgeable about the CFR and IFR so I feel compelled to share the knowledge I have recently obtained.

The Distinction between Cases and Infections 

An infection that gets detected, recorded and counted (or diagnosed) by the health system becomes a case.

Infections represent the total number of infections both diagnosed (which are cases) and undiagnosed. 

Case Fatality Rate (CFR)

This sometimes also called the case  fatality risk or case fatality ratio. To turn the CFR into a percentage, multiply by 100. To get the information to calculate the CFR, an antigen test and/or a PCR test needs to be carried out.

Case Fatality Rate (CFR)=Deaths/Number of Cases

The CFR always undercount the number of infections (and overestimates mortality) because it only counts people who get tested, tested positive and got reported through the health system. Many infections particularly those that are mild or asymptomatic infections never get diagnosed. The CFR is not the same as the risk for an infected person. If your question is, “Among diagnosed cases, what’s the risk?”, use the CFR.

Infection Fatality Rate (IFR)

This sometimes also called the infection fatality risk or infection fatality ratio. To turn the CFR into a percentage, multiply by 100. To get the information to calculate the IFR, a seroprevalence study would need to be conducted. Another option is mathematical modeling. A seroprevalence is done by researchers taking blood samples in a defined population and testing for antibodies (IgG) against a specific infection/illness. 

Infection Fatality Rate (IFR)=Deaths/Number of Infections

It is important to note that the numerator (the deaths) for both the IFR and CFR are the same, it is the denominator that is different. The number of infections always exceed cases in epidemics hence the IFR is always smaller than the CFR. The IFR is a close approximation to the true risk of dying from an illness because it corrects the CFR by accounting for infections that never become cases. CFR and IFR are a few ways to measure the mortality rate. If your question is “Among all infections/infected, what’s the risk?”, use the IFR.

Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) as it applies to Covid 

The WHO reported the global case fatality rate 3.4% as the mortality rate. Dr. John Ioannidis, a Stanford Epidemiology Professor and a pioneer of meta-research and evidence-based medicine, in his article here he argued that the Covid CFR 3.4% was meaningless because it was based on insufficient testing and selection bias. The people getting tested were disproportionately the ones that were symptomatic and/or had severe symptoms so the true risk of dying from Covid were immensely overestimated. In the same article it is worth noting that he was not in favor of the draconian measures such as the lockdowns and had concerns about the potential effects of them.

Dr. Ioannidis co-conducted a study in regard to IFR called “Age-stratified infection fatality rate of Covid-19 in non elderly informed from pre-vaccination national seroprevalence studies”. The study can be found through this article or directly here. In the abstract and in the introduction, the researchers emphasized on the importance of accurately estimating the IFR among the non-elderly since 94% of the world population is younger than 70 years and 86% is younger than 60 years. The researchers found 40 seroprevalence studies across 38 countries on SeroTracker and PubMed. The researchers decided to analyze 29 countries because these countries had both the age-stratified antibody data (how many people in each group had been infected) and the age-stratified death data (how many people in each group died of Covid). The researchers also used studies before vaccines rolled out because vaccines also create antibodies and would distort the results.

For each age group, the IFR was calculated dividing the number of Covid deaths in that age group by the estimated total infections in that age group. The median IFR for (Birth) 0-19 years is 0.0003%, 20-29 years it is 0.003%, 30-39 years it is 0.011%, 40-49 years it is 0.035%, 50-59 years it is 0.129% and 60-69 years it is 0.501%. The median IFR of all age groups (0-69 years) is 0.095% and the median IFR for age groups (0-59 years) is 0.035%.

Closing Remarks

The results of this study further proves what others have been saying-the younger a person (assuming the person is relatively healthy), the less likely he or she is to die from Covid. Hence, not everyone should have been treated the same and herd immunity should have been encouraged. As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, people were constantly saying younger and healthy people and healthy people had the least risk of dying from Covid but never mentioned the phrase infection fatality rate (IFR). I had also never came across the name Dr. John Ioannidis until very recently but I am still very grateful that Dr. Ioannidis and other researchers decided to conduct this study.

Dr. Ioannidis apparently also did another study that primarily analyzed the crude mortality rate (CMR) and IFR in 51 locations globally and another seroprevalence study with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

In this prominent video, RFK Jr. started off by saying that the U.S. (along with China) have allocated hundreds of millions of dollars into racial/ethnic bio weapons and that there’s an argument that Covid is racially/ethnically targeted. He also mentioned the genetic structure of the ACE2 receptor is different among racial/ethnic groups which is why certain races/ethnicities are more immune or susceptible to Covid. RFK Jr. said that Whites and Blacks that were most susceptible to Covid and named two other groups that were the least susceptible to Covid. The media intentionally focused on this last part and called him a racist, antisemitic, etc. I had previously learned that he was referring to results in a study I now decided to look more closely at it. Before I get into the results of the study, I would like to discuss what the ACE2 and TMPRSS2 are and why they are significant in the context of Covid. In addition, I would like to briefly go over the methodology.

Insight about ACE2 and TMPRSS2

ACE2 and TMPRSS2 are natural human proteins that some viruses such as Covid are used to invade the cells. The ACE2 is a receptor protein found on the surface of many cells in the body. The Covid virus’s spike protein latches on the ACE2. The TMPRSS2 is a helper enzyme that cuts the spike protein so the virus can get inside the cell.

Methodology

The researchers first started by collecting protein-altering variants in ACE2 and TMPRSS2 from population genome databases (gnomAD v3, ESP,1KGP). Then they scored each variant with PolyPhen2 and CADD, then kept only those that met the deleterious (bad genetic mutation) threshold. GnomAD split samples into ancestry/population groups (AFR, EUR,AMR, EAS, FIN, SAS,AMI, ASJ). For each population group, they checked among the 61 ACE2 deleterious variants (and 63 TMPRSS2 deleterious variants) which variants showed up with non-zero allele frequency in each population. The researchers then counted the number of deleterious variants found in each population and from there took most of the percentages.

Results of the study

For the deleterious ACE2 variants: 

39% of the deleterious ACE2 variants were in African/African-American (AFR) and 54% were in European (EUR) groups.

Latino/Admixed American (AMR), East Asians (EAS), Finnish (FIN) and South Asian (SAS) groups had fewer deleterious ACE2 variants-as few as 2-10%.

Amish (AMI) and Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ) groups didn’t show any deleterious ACE2 variants.

For the deleterious TMPRSS2 variants:

35% of the deleterious TMPRSS2 were carried by African/African-Americans (AFR)

59% were carried by Europeans (EUR)

East Asians (EAS), South Asian (SAS), Finnish (FIN) each carry 0.06% (4/63) of the deleterious TMPRSS2 variants 

 Latino/Admixed American (AMR) carry 0.22% (14/63), Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ) have 0.05% (3/63) and Amish (AMI) have 0.02% (1/63) of the deleterious TMPRSS2 variants

Closing Remarks

These results from the study are intriguing and I wish more independent media creators were discussing about this study. RFK Jr. isn’t the only one that made these comments. Dr. Lee Merritt went over this same study that RFK Jr. was referring to. I recall even Alex Jones making similar statements that make me believe he was also referring to the same study. But RFK Jr. comes from a prominent American dynasty family and he was running for high positions here in the U.S. so of course, he was attacked the most. I also noticed that all these 3 people that I named solely focused on the ACE2 receptor and never mentioned TMPRSS2 which is important because the enzyme helps to ultimately get the Covid virus inside the cell.

In this video from the 19:41 to 21:56 mark, this part of the interview really caught my attention. Kim Iversen said that the Chinese used more of the traditional style vaccine. In addition, she mentioned that the Cubans didn’t use the spike protein itself but a different part of the virus (that wasn’t mutating as quickly as the spike protein) to make the vaccine. Brianne Dressen, the co-founder and co-chairman of React19, stated that most neurotoxic component of the entire virus is the tip of the spike protein. Dressen also said all vaccine brands except Cuba’s presented similar injuries.

When these things were mentioned in that segment of the video, I decided to look more into it. It is true that China and Cuba did use non-mRNA, non-adenovirus Covid vaccines. Previously, I was under the assumption that all countries were primarily using mRNA and/or adenovirus Covid vaccines. Sinovac (CoronaVac) and Sinopharm made most of China’s Covid vaccines which used inactivated (killed) whole-virus vaccines. China also had their adenovirus vaccine out in early 2021 but not the mRNA one until March 2023. China was rightfully concerned about the mRNA shots hence why they didn’t use them right away. Cuba came up with two protein-based Covid vaccines, the Abdala and the Soberana. These protein-based vaccines used the harmless part of the spike protein. Cuba completely strayed away from using mRNA and adenovirus in their vaccines.

I have also looked into adenovirus vaccines usage here in the U.S. prior to Covid. Apparently, the US has used adenovirus vaccines before Covid but they were solely for the military. I would like to see more data and info regarding Dressen’s remark about all countries’ Covid vaccines (except Cuba’s) triggering similar vaccine injuries.

Around 2013, there was a measles outbreak in Wales and Paul Offit supported mandatory MMR vaccination there. This article criticizes the BBC for presenting Paul Offit as an independent expert without bringing up his financial relationship with Merck & Co. which makes the MMR vaccine. Previously, Paul Offit was on the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) when he and the others voted for the Rotashield (Rotavirus) vaccine. The Rotashield vaccine was permanently withdrawn from the market after numerous reports of intussusception.

Offit co-developed the Rotateq (Rotavirus) vaccine and it became available to the public a couple of years later. Shortly afterwards, Offit along with Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) sold the patent of the Rotateq vaccine to Merck and financially benefited immensely off the royalties. In 2010, two former Merck scientists filed a whistleblower lawsuit alleging that Merck knowingly overstated the effectiveness of the mumps component of its MMR vaccine. The plaintiffs alleged that Merck manipulated testing methods and data to report approximately 95% efficacy-the purpose was to maintain Merck’s exclusive position in the U.S. MMR vaccine market.

Note: These are not mentioned in the article but Paul Offit was on the board of ACIP from 1988 to 2003. Stanley Plotkin (nicknamed the Godfather of the vaccine) helped in creating the Rotateq vaccine.

On the DebateVaccines subreddit, I recently stumbled upon a few comments in interactions pertaining to the fact that the RRR was solely used to tout Covid vaccine efficacy and that the ARR was completely left out of the picture. This is when I decided to study the concept of ARR, RRR and later the NNV. I feel compelled to pass on this knowledge because even though I never took the damn shots, I was unaware about the concept of ARR, RRR and NNV. I know that others are not knowledgeable about these concepts as well so it makes so much sense as to why countless people have been deceived by the medical establishment especially during Covid. Before I discuss about RRR, ARR, and NNV, I have to cover Absolute Risk (AR) and Relative Risk (RR). 

Absolute Risk (AR)

For example, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) method was applied to a Pfizer vaccine trial, 21,720 individuals were vaccinated and 21,728 individuals were unvaccinated. Eight Covid cases were uncovered among the vaccinated and 162 Covid cases among the unvaccinated. The Absolute risk (AR) is a measure of the risk of an event occurring in a specific population.

AR for treatment group (vaccinated group): 8/21720 = 0.000368 or 0.037%

AR for control group (unvaccinated group): 162/21728=0.00745 or 0.745%

Interpretation: The vaccinated are at a 0.037% risk of getting Covid while the unvaccinated are at a 0.745% risk of getting Covid.

Relative Risk (RR)

Relative risk (RR) is a measure of the risk of a certain event happening in one population compared with the risk of the same event happening in another population.

Formula for RR: AR for control group/AR for treatment group 

RR: (0.000368/0.00745)= 0.04832  or 4.832%

Interpretation: The vaccinated group is 4.832% less likely to get Covid than the unvaccinated group.

Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR)

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) measures the *actual decrease* in the risk after applying a preventive or treatment measure. 

Formula for ARR: AR control group-AR treatment group 

ARR: 0.00745-0.00036= 0.00709 or 0.0709%

Interpretation: The vaccine reduces the actual risk of getting Covid from 0.745% to 0.036% or simply by 0.709%

Relative Risk Reduction (RRR)

The Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) measures the proportion of risk reduction. There are two ways to compute the RRR.

Formula 1 for RRR: (AR control group-AR treatment group)/AR control group

Formula 2 for RRR: 1-RR

RRR: (0.00745-0.00036)/0.00745=0.9516

Interpretation: The vaccine reduces the risk of getting Covid by 95%. 

Number Needed to Vaccinate(NNV)

The Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNV) is the number of people that must be vaccinated to prevent one case of an illness. If the intervention had been drugs instead of vaccines, it would be called the Number Needed to Treat (NNT)

Formula for NNV: 1/ARR

NNV: 1/0.00709=141 people

Interpretation: 141 people need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of Covid 

How Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is misleading 

As I stated earlier, the calculated RRR for the Pfizer vaccines was 95%. This RRR is what was reported as the efficacy for both vaccines and drugs. This is misleading because it exaggerates the effectiveness of vaccines and drugs by comparing the percentage change in outcomes between the two groups rather than absolutes. The ideal thing would be state both the RRR and ARR, but it is very unlikely that the medical establishment is going to do that anytime soon. 

I got the Pfizer vaccine trial example from here. If you would like to familiarize yourself more with concepts of ARR, RRR, NNV and even RR, you can go here.

There were many different medical schools in the 19th century that brought herbal medicine. In addition, there were many Black physicians in the 19th century and early 20th century.

The Rockefellers swooped in and said that there’s too many different kinds of schools. They didn’t believe in competition. Any medical school that wasn’t AMA approved wasn’t going to get supported; this included herbal medical schools, osteopathic schools and other varieties of medicines. The Rockefellers weren’t fond of the Black medical schools and funded only 2 of them. AMA also had bylaws that said AMA physicians could not interact with other physicians if they were not part of the group. 

The Rockefellers made William Welsh the dean of John Hopkins Medical school and dictator of American medicine despite the fact that he never practiced medicine or had patients. William Welsh was also racist and no Black person was enrolled at John Hopkins under him. It wasn’t until the 1950s that Black people were getting into the approved medical schools. 

You can learn more about this topic [here](https://youtu.be/Q8n64Ov94Hc?si=Sz8zRu0PvxDvMX5z)

Some of the common issues surounding these data centers are they take up a lot of land and water, they create a lot of noise, they create air pollution. In addition, they use a lot energy and cause high electricity bills. In this video, Razi Ann Berry goes in detail of the water issues, the light pollution and sound pollution surrounding data centers.

Apparently, these data centers use all sorts of chemicals, refrigerants, coolants and antifreeze and data centers also uses a large amount of water. When this water cools these centers, it evaporates quickly and then these chemicals are concentrated and they go back into the water supply. These chemicals are known as forever chemicals or POPs (Persistant Organ Pollutants) that don't break down. They accumulate in tissue and they can cause reproductive harm, cancer, genetic problems.

Data centers emit a lot of light. ALAN (Artificial Light a Night) is known as light pollution. Light can disrupt your melatonin and circadian rhythm. When melatonin is depleted, it can lead to breast cancer, prostate cancer and even trigger dementia at an earlier age.

Sound waves from the data centers can penetrate concrete. Sound even at a lower frequency can cause fibrosis in the lungs and scarring of the heart.

In this video, Kim interviews Matthew Cormier, an independent researcher on the vaccine-autism link. Based on his research, Cormier says found that people may catch viruses but not exhibit any symptoms (in other words, that the viruses can be dormant). Once people get vaccinated though, the vaccines can trigger the viruses to reactivate, actively replicate and lead to an inflammatory response. Vaccines can reactivae viruses and make it into the brain triggering viral enciphilitis. Enciphilitis is an inflammation of the brain in the central nervous system. Viral infections can be contacted during preganancy and passed on in utero and play a role in causing autism later The two most common viruses observed in this process are herpes simplex type 1 and herpes simplex type 2.

I don’t really care that Makary resigned as the FDA Commissioner tbh. He refused to add a black box warning to the Covid shots despite the fact that FDA scientists recommended it. In addition, Makary blocked child Covid vaccine death data from being released.

As of May 12, 2026, Kyle Diamantas is currently serving as the acting FDA Commissioner.

More on Makary’s resignation here.

One of Kennedy’s sons has been working for Joe Lonsdale, one of Palantir’s founders. Learn more about the connection to Palantir here.