Lockdowns Did Not Work

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No you won't. That is not a given at all.

Correct.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Life is full of risks. Didn’t you work in risk management?

Which involves...brace yourself retard....managing risk.

 

[Dr Grump]

Yeap...you prolonged the suffering...errbody still gonna get it!

no they're not. As mentioned by several people - and politicians around the world - it is not only about stopping the spread so people don't get infected, it's also about trying to make sure hospitals can cope with the influx. It is about NOT overwhelming the system.

 

[Flopper]

There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns

Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.

www.google.com

This is science NOT opinion.


The most basic way to test this thesis is by direct comparison. As of 6 April, seven US states had not adopted shelter-in place orders and their stats are in line with those that did even when adjusting for population density.

Open the country!

Let's see your actually comparison. Exactly what states are you comparing and what stats are you using.

 

[Wapasha]

There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns

Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.

www.google.com

This is science NOT opinion.


The most basic way to test this thesis is by direct comparison. As of 6 April, seven US states had not adopted shelter-in place orders and their stats are in line with those that did even when adjusting for population density.

Open the country!

View attachment 326939

Oswlald is a rich celebrity and an idiot. I had the Virus it is not guaranteed death. Far from it. Nazis killed my people. That was guaranteed. Apples and oranges. You're an idiot.

It is guaranteed that as many as 5% of those who get the virus die. That makes it 50 times deadlier than the flu. To suggest that it wasn't that bad for you and therefore it isn't that bad period is misleading and frankly, kinda dangerous.

As of Wednesday, the United States had a 5.4% mortality rate based on a percentage of overall cases, according to the Johns Hopkins data.

Fact Check: Trump says the US coronavirus mortality rate is 'one of the lowest' in the world

President Trump claims the U.S. has "one of the lowest" coronavirus mortality rates in the world. Here's what the numbers say.

www.usatoday.com

We do not have enough data yet to make the claim that the fatality rate for those who catch COVID-19 is 5%. Maybe that is the death rate for people over 75 years old, with one or more comorbidity. But to say it's 5% across the board is silly.

NY state is testing the population for the antigen. About 20% of NYC population already has the antigen. That's getting close to two million New Yorkers who had the virus already, and prob didn't even know it at the time.

 

[Wapasha]

What nonsense would that be? Everything I cited is true.

looting the treasury, high on power, yadda, yadda, yadda. The high on power thing might be something with the odd politician. But looting the treasury? ppffttt..

What do you call it then, when Congress passes legislation to give away about $7 trillion dollars, and some members have suggested they want to crank that figure up to$10 trillion?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns

Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.

www.google.com

This is science NOT opinion.


The most basic way to test this thesis is by direct comparison. As of 6 April, seven US states had not adopted shelter-in place orders and their stats are in line with those that did even when adjusting for population density.

Open the country!

View attachment 326939

Oswlald is a rich celebrity and an idiot. I had the Virus it is not guaranteed death. Far from it. Nazis killed my people. That was guaranteed. Apples and oranges. You're an idiot.

It is guaranteed that as many as 5% of those who get the virus die. That makes it 50 times deadlier than the flu. To suggest that it wasn't that bad for you and therefore it isn't that bad period is misleading and frankly, kinda dangerous.

As of Wednesday, the United States had a 5.4% mortality rate based on a percentage of overall cases, according to the Johns Hopkins data.

Fact Check: Trump says the US coronavirus mortality rate is 'one of the lowest' in the world

President Trump claims the U.S. has "one of the lowest" coronavirus mortality rates in the world. Here's what the numbers say.

www.usatoday.com

We do not have enough data yet to make the claim that the fatality rate for those who catch COVID-19 is 5%. Maybe that is the death rate for people over 75 years old, with one or more comorbidity. But to say it's 5% across the board is silly.

NY state is testing the population for the antigen. About 20% of NYC population already has the antigen. That's getting close to two million New Yorkers who had the virus already, and prob didn't even know it at the time.

Not only silly, it's not at all true. But when have the facts ever mattered to the left

 

[colfax_m]

Anyway, before claiming something “doesn’t work” it’s probably best to actually do research. For example:

Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Social Distancing Measures

Pandemic Influenza—Social Distancing Measures

wwwnc.cdc.gov

 

[airplanemechanic]

So you are saying that I have an equal chance of catching the virus if I'm at home alone or if I'm in a packed football stadium?

How many football stadiums were packed in the 7 states that didn't lock down? I had no idea there was football in March and April, that's news to me.

 

[cnm]

But it seems we are not yet seeing good evidence that the lockdowns have affected the curve.

Lockdown implement March 26. Looks like 'good' evidence to me.

New confirmed and probable cases over time, as at 9.00 am, 23 April 2020

health.govt.nz

 

[Wapasha]

Appears all it did was saddle the taxpayer with a couple of trillion dollars more debt. ...

That's not all it did......

It put 26 million people out of work and that has given the democrats a chance to win the election in November....

Death and Destruction are tools of the left.

When bad things happen to good people, the dems always see it as a plus for them to move their agenda forward.

Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) reportedly told Democrats on a conference call that the coronavirus stimulus package is a “tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.”

“You absolutely love to see it,” the freshman congresswoman tweeted about the price drop. “This along with record low interest rates means it’s the right time for a worker-led, mass investment in green infrastructure to save our planet.”

“My Lord. Look at what is possible. Look at the institutional changes we can make – without us becoming a ‘socialist country,’ or any of that malarkey – that we can make to provide the opportunities to change the institutional drawbacks …” from education, all the way through to all the other things we talked about. We have a chance to really move the ball forward in the next three or four years."

 

[Dr Grump]

What nonsense would that be? Everything I cited is true.

looting the treasury, high on power, yadda, yadda, yadda. The high on power thing might be something with the odd politician. But looting the treasury? ppffttt..

What do you call it then, when Congress passes legislation to give away about $7 trillion dollars, and some members have suggested they want to crank that figure up to$10 trillion?

Stimulating the economy. The bailouts of 2008 did the same thing and the US then had 10 years of continuous growth, which started under Obama, and now Trump takes credit for.

What's the alternative? USA circa 1929?

 

[Wapasha]

Well, naturally, the thread title is wrong. But it seems we are not yet seeing good evidence that the lockdowns have affected the curve. This is an interesting topic that is going to require a lot more data and analysis (instead of apples to oranges comparisons between states so early on).

Ya good point - All the data we get is a snapshot from 2-3 weeks back. I'd still maintain that lockdowns ARE positively affecting the curve.

But hiding from the disease does nothing for us, since if a vaccine can be created it's still 6-10 months away. We cannot lock down for that long, we'd destroy our nation, and we'd have economic devastation, and about 40% unemployment.

The people in the 40 and under age groups are reportedly the most resistant, and need to get back to work, albeit still observing mitigation protocol. The rest of the people need to be very careful, and the elderly may need to keep sheltering at home, and being careful going to buy food, etc... But not everyone needs to keep staying locked up in home, it's just insane.

There are counties in my state that still have not had one person test positive, and yet my governor wants to extend the shelter at home, for the entire freaking state, until mid to late May.

 

[Wapasha]

What nonsense would that be? Everything I cited is true.

looting the treasury, high on power, yadda, yadda, yadda. The high on power thing might be something with the odd politician. But looting the treasury? ppffttt..

What do you call it then, when Congress passes legislation to give away about $7 trillion dollars, and some members have suggested they want to crank that figure up to$10 trillion?

Stimulating the economy. The bailouts of 2008 did the same thing and the US then had 10 years of continuous growth, which started under Obama, and now Trump takes credit for.

What's the alternative? USA circa 1929?

We just passed the $2+ trillion stimulus, and we lost another 4.4 million jobs. Simply tossing money from a helicopter, is not going to create jobs, not if everyone is locked up in their homes, and business owners are going bankrupt.

 

[OldLady]

There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns

Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.

www.google.com

This is science NOT opinion.


The most basic way to test this thesis is by direct comparison. As of 6 April, seven US states had not adopted shelter-in place orders and their stats are in line with those that did even when adjusting for population density.

Open the country!

Do you know how he defines "lockdown" as opposed to "social distancing?" Because every state that didn't "lockdown" DID follow social distancing measures, which to me is pretty much the same thing.

 

[OldLady]

You don't go outside to get mail, to get groceries, to put out the trash? Evidence shows not for everyone but for most, lockdowns don't change your odds. Don't kill the messenger.

So taking my trash can to the end of the driveway with nobody else in sight is the same as being in a packed football stadium?

No one, not even the sports teams owners, are talking about reopening sporting events by packing fans into stadiums, so all you did was toss out a straw dog.

Was it the NFL that is going to start playing to an empty stadium? Some sport is.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns

Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.

www.google.com

This is science NOT opinion.


The most basic way to test this thesis is by direct comparison. As of 6 April, seven US states had not adopted shelter-in place orders and their stats are in line with those that did even when adjusting for population density.

Open the country!

Do you know how he defines "lockdown" as opposed to "social distancing?" Because every state that didn't "lockdown" DID follow social distancing measures, which to me is pretty much the same thing.

I agree. Social Distancing and lockdowns are not the same thing.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Lockdown implement March 26. Looks like 'good' evidence to me.

So what? How something "looks" is not evidence. You would have to somehow show that such a curve wouldn't have occured anyway, or would have been significantly different.

Dont get me wrong, i think it makes a difference and it makes sense that it would nake a difference. But these things are not good empirical evidence that it has.

Wishing or believing something is true does not mean it is. As we are seeing with chloroquine.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

You don't go outside to get mail, to get groceries, to put out the trash? Evidence shows not for everyone but for most, lockdowns don't change your odds. Don't kill the messenger.

So taking my trash can to the end of the driveway with nobody else in sight is the same as being in a packed football stadium?

No one, not even the sports teams owners, are talking about reopening sporting events by packing fans into stadiums, so all you did was toss out a straw dog.

Was it the NFL that is going to start playing to an empty stadium? Some sport is.

NFL games start in Sept. too soon to tell.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Anyway, before claiming something “doesn’t work” it’s probably best to actually do research. For example:

Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Social Distancing Measures

Pandemic Influenza—Social Distancing Measures

wwwnc.cdc.gov

Social Distancing is not the same as a lockdown.