Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns: Part 1: Introduction and Death Counts and Estimates

The book never denies the impact of lockdowns. The book questions the impact of lockdowns. Did the lockdowns in the state of New York and New Jersey lead to more COVID-19 deaths? I think the facts show that locking down people in nursing homes with other nursing home residents led to the deaths of thousands of people in New York and New Jersey. The book presents the facts.The numbers are wrong. A simple calculator shows that the 60 percent is false (Talking about the carrier)The numbers are correct. The numbers are in the actual articles and true if you read it. The rate was like 59.4% if you calculate it. There were other data that showed an even lower infection rate. I read the article.The author points out the mortality rate of the virus. It is approaching that of the flu in the US if you adjust for things like deaths caused by co-housing people with and without COVID-19 in nursing homes. The point is it's not 3% it's approaching something like 0.2% now with adjustments. Are they the correct adjustments? That's for you to decide. You need the facts to decide how we should compute the mortality rate.It seems that the author doesn't know the meaning of the median. Example, let’s say we have 7 dead people due to COVID and these are their age:20, 21, 23, 80, 81, 82, 84In this example, the median is 80, but does it mean that only older people die of COVID? of course not, what about the people on age 20, 21, 23? (in my example)The author states the statistics as they appear in the articles/journals. They are all large sample sizes. Your example should be N=7, mean=55.85, median=80 due to the small sample size. This would describe your data. The author correctly presents the mean and median values.The author did not provide any reference for the numbers about Italy and the United KingdomThis refers to the number of deaths in young people. No reference but I think the numbers match those of the time of publication. A reference would have been better.The author provides his own opinion of the explanation of the “Case” and concludes. I was hoping to see references.The author's point was that the epidemiologist appears to have purposefully misrepresented the effect the virus has on younger people by using the term "case" and not providing further information about the fact that "case" only meant they were infected and not that there was a very small risk of serious illness or death.“The website uses the higher figure” How do you say it without any references?The reference is above this sentence. I cannot paste links in a review.I am not against Censorship. Let's make an example. Imagine someone makes a website on the internet and mentions in his/her websites that based on his/her research, drinking bleach is the cure for coronavirus. Obviously that is a wrong statement. But if you allow this to be online on the internet and someone takes the person's advice and drink bleach and dies, would you still say that it is a good idea to have his/her website running? This imaginary website spreads the wrong information and leads people to death!This statement makes the argument for the book. Instead of "drinking bleach", replace that phrase with "putting COVID-19 patience in nursing homes" and you have the New York and New Jersey state public policy that killed many people. This is why censorship and book burning needs to be fought. The facts in this book are vital to have. The truth is up to you to determine. If you think the numbers are incorrect, write your own book, create a website, put out social media, write a review of the book or watch CNN. Not having information leads and led to many deaths. Never be afraid of the truth. Have a discussion about the issues and the facts. We need to have that debate and not ban books.If somebody writes a counter book showing other facts I'll read it too.

Now, most of us see that what is written here is right. To bad we didn't know that sooner. I would not be surprised that we did more people would refuse those 3rd and 4th booster shots. What is scary is that saying so could cause someone to lose his or hers job.

Best Selling Author with BANNED COVID-19 BOOK I feel Berenson's Anger!Congratulations to Berneson's grit and determination to get his book past the Amazon censors. you have to wonder how many other good books are being suppressed by BIG BROTHER..Although I use a famous scientist's name as my avatar my real name is JeffTBowles and I wrote the best selling book in the world on Vitamin D3.(an Amazon exclusive and always enrolled in KDP from beginning to now) and I am now banned just like Berenson was..so I feel his anguish and you can read about it in his book. For whatever misguided reason, Amazon seems to be putting the muzzle on any info that challenges anything about the CDC.CENSORED unless they get embarassed by Elon Musk tweeting they should be broken up due to arrogant unreasonable censorship-acting lie a monopoly..like the cable company used to... That's how Beenson's book was eventually allowed to be read by you the stupid masses. You can thank Elon Musk. Berenson goes into good detail about how the CDC is cooking the numbers to make it look like this lockdwn was necessary. And after reading the reviews here I see it is a big shock to most people but not me. Berenson shows how ridiculous it is that the CDC is claiming we (the US) have incurred 28% of the world's deaths by Covid 19 while comprisng only 4% of the population!! THAT DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO MAKING ANY SENSE AT ALL! Even Dr. Birx (of the CDC) he notes says she does not believe any of the numbers coming out of the CDC...and the CDC itself has even admitted to fudging the numbers it 's all in his book. Well maybe some day Amazon will unblock me and others with the unpublished truths about COVID-19 I have got a real barn burner waiting for you after Amazon's free speech lockdown is over! ...I doubt Amazon has the stones to publish this review..they just blocked my first one. What's the matter Amazon ? Afraid of a little free speech? wow how times have changed...Amazon used to be in the forefront of givng the little guy a voice and allowing conroversial infromation a platform ...what happened???!!! WHO got to you?? you can see the public wants the real info as Berenson's book shot up to #1 for awhile NUMBER 1 of all AMAZON ebooks! HMMM yo'd think soemone at Amazon might get the message!! And if it was up to Amazon he would still be censored. I dare Amazon to publish this review...I'm pretty sure you won't but believe me this review will be in my book when it is unbanned adn becoems a best seller..either at Amazon, at another publsiher or at a weebsite I set up.. ..They are going to read it sooner or later!

Neil Ferguson's Imperial College team modelling proved wrong, initial overestimation of COVID deaths and caused havoc to UK economy. The government should have listen to the rival team, Oxford University's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine - it will have a better total otcome.

Great piece of work. Most folk aren’t comfortable with the truth because it challenges their lazy reliance on the mainstream media and pokes a huge hole in their echo chamber existence. Oh look...there’s a box set and a pizza - must dash!!

Concise and interesting read. I've done some research around the true mortality rate for this coronavirus myself, and a lot of the studies and expert testimony mentioned here is familiar. It is clear that the government response to Coronavirus, including the lockdowns has been a massive overreaction that has possibly made the situation worse. This booklet explains that clearly and makes you wonder what the powers that be are really up to.

If you've lived your life through the lens of the MSM over the last 3 months, you have to read this book and inform yourself of the other side of this.

A clear, concise and rational look at the essential questions around SARS-COV-2 ... how lethal is it, who does it kill and are death counts accurate?A pity that few in the mainstream media ever considered such basic issues before putting pen to paper.Looking forward to Berenson's analysis of the other issues (such as lockdowns) surrounding how the SARS-COV-2 was dealt with by governments and the media.