Lockdowns Did Not Work

[Fueri]

Again, dolt, nobody says not to protect the vulnerable or take reasonable precautions to slow it so as not to overwhelm medical systems. Not me, not Sweden, nobody.

Even though those reasonable precautions, as recommended by your medical experts, are what you're protesting about, fuckwit. Yeah right.

Again, dumbfuck, from my earlier post, which you conveniently have removed from the conversation

"And the point is, for those too myopic to realize this, that there are other strategies out there that have been employed, and other nations that are further along the timeline than we are. As those results start to become available it makes sense and is necessary to assess them to determine the best path forward for us."

If you don't think we should be taking into account the actions of other nations and how they did or did not work so that we can assess how to best move forward here you are nothing short of a moron. Let's not assess actual empirical results and data, because that would make too much fucking sense, and may just contradict our current beliefs.

Which country has done the best at protecting their population from Coronavirus? TAIWAN! only 429 infections and 6 deaths out of a population of 24 million people. Why not follow the country that has the best results instead of the country, Sweden, with the 9th worst rate of death from this virus?

Taiwan has managed containment. Taiwan is where Taiwan is and we are where we are. Trying to push the toothpaste back into the tube here at this point is an exercise in futility.

If Denmark's experiment is successful and/or a similar approach in the Netherlands is as well and as we see results in some states here, which have various little experiments going on, we need to incorporate those results into the strategy to move forward. How that it isn't obvious I have no idea.

 

[Fueri]

Protect the vulnerable, develop the herd immunity. Only way out and has been from the beginning.

Sweden resisted a lockdown, and its capital Stockholm is expected to reach 'herd immunity' in weeks

Sweden went against the grain by keeping public life as unrestricted as possible when the coronavirus hit. Now, it says its strategy appears to be working.

www.cnbc.com

Meanwhile we're arresting people in parks and hiding like rats and it is, of course, way more widespread than people thought, even with all of these measures here.

The Herd immunity strategy would kill 2.4 million people by August 2020 in the United States. 99% of countries are not following the Herd immunity strategy. Their doing the responsible thing which is lockdown and Isolate until new cases are low enough to test, contact trace, and isolate any potential fires that flare up.

The coronavirus pathogen is far to deadly and easily transmissible to do something like Herd immunity. That approach was not even tried in 1918 to combat the pandemic then. You the few back then that did the right thing, and the majority that pretended the virus was not a problem.

Sweden now has the 9th highest rate of death per capita in the world from coronavirus. Sweden is an example of what NOT to do.

The GOLD standards for fighting this pandemic are TAIWAN and SOUTH KOREA.

TAIWAN only has 6 deaths and 429 infections with a population of 24 million. How many people would die in TAIWAN if they followed your strategy for HERD immunity?

Nonsense. Your numbers are simply wrong. This is far more widespread than people realize, so your apparent 6% fatality rate is being proven incorrect over and over again. It is looking to be anywhere from .1 to .3%. It is certainly not 6.

Is it nonsense that Taiwan has only 6 deaths and 429 infections?

Is it nonsense that Sweden has the 9th highest number of deaths per capita from covid-19?

What is your evidence that proves that its more widespread than people think? How reliable is such evidence?

Based on known infections and deaths in the United States, the current rate of death of the infected is 5.6%.

But the number of deaths may be an undercount as people who die In their homes are never tested for coronavirus. About 200 people in New York City are dying in their homes every day and its suspected that the majority of them are dying from coronavirus but their deaths are not apart of the total death figures.

In Italy the death rate is 13.4% and may be even higher. Several cities in Italy have recorded 3 to 4 times as many deaths in March/April this year from natural causes over the same time period in 2019. Its like that Covid-19 is responsible for this massive surge in deaths, most of these deaths are not being added to the official death total from Covid-19. But what else would explain a 300% increase in death in that time period over last year?

the evidence that it is more widespread than people think, or the data we are looking at shows, is everywhere FFS. Common sense dictates it as well. Others and myself have posted links ad nauseum on this board for crying out loud to these samplings and studies as they have come out.

but here are a few

Infection Fatality Rate €“ A Critical Missing Piece for Managing Covid-19 | Virology Blog

by Rich Condit Rich Condit is a virologist and emeritus Professor, University of Florida, Gainesville and a host on This Week in Virology. Modeling done by ...

www.virology.ws

Nearly a third of 200 blood samples taken in Chelsea show exposure to coronavirus - The Boston Globe

A Mass. General researcher says the results point to a "raging epidemic," but may also indicate the city is further along the disease curve than some other municipalities.

www.bostonglobe.com

Testing shows hundreds of thousands in LA County may have been infected with coronavirus

The coronavirus outbreak in Los Angeles County is believed to have infected an estimated 28 to 55 times more people than originally thought, according to a report on Monday.

www.foxnews.com

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?

fsi.stanford.edu

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Guy thinks he's being clever. The death rate would naturally be fairly constant everywhere among positive cases. Only a disingenuous asshole would use that single factor to make such a broad declaration. Slowing the rate of spread is key.

Science says otherwise.

You say otherwise. I'm using science to critically examine the claim which is lacking the correct data points and proper statistical analysis. There's no way to even make that deterination until it's over and all the growth curves are lined up and adjusted for the incubation period of the virus plotted against when the various lockdown orders were implemented.

kinda like when azog was hawking for donny - who was hawking hydroxycholoquine.... how did that turn out?

It works. Many hospitals worldwide use it. That study was highly flawed. Mostly old, black men, who were very ill. It would be like me giving Coach K players who never touched a basketball and then saying he sucked as a coach because he didn't win any games. It was run by a competitor who wants their own drug used to make $$$$ as Hydorxy is old and pharma cannot make as much from it. You're stupid. Do some research. You have nothing else to do all day.

 

[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!

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.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Protect the vulnerable, develop the herd immunity. Only way out and has been from the beginning.

Sweden resisted a lockdown, and its capital Stockholm is expected to reach 'herd immunity' in weeks

Sweden went against the grain by keeping public life as unrestricted as possible when the coronavirus hit. Now, it says its strategy appears to be working.

www.cnbc.com

Meanwhile we're arresting people in parks and hiding like rats and it is, of course, way more widespread than people thought, even with all of these measures here.

The Herd immunity strategy would kill 2.4 million people by August 2020 in the United States. 99% of countries are not following the Herd immunity strategy. Their doing the responsible thing which is lockdown and Isolate until new cases are low enough to test, contact trace, and isolate any potential fires that flare up.

The coronavirus pathogen is far to deadly and easily transmissible to do something like Herd immunity. That approach was not even tried in 1918 to combat the pandemic then. You the few back then that did the right thing, and the majority that pretended the virus was not a problem.

Sweden now has the 9th highest rate of death per capita in the world from coronavirus. Sweden is an example of what NOT to do.

The GOLD standards for fighting this pandemic are TAIWAN and SOUTH KOREA.

TAIWAN only has 6 deaths and 429 infections with a population of 24 million. How many people would die in TAIWAN if they followed your strategy for HERD immunity?

About the same.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Protect the vulnerable, develop the herd immunity. Only way out and has been from the beginning.

Sweden resisted a lockdown, and its capital Stockholm is expected to reach 'herd immunity' in weeks

Sweden went against the grain by keeping public life as unrestricted as possible when the coronavirus hit. Now, it says its strategy appears to be working.

www.cnbc.com

Meanwhile we're arresting people in parks and hiding like rats and it is, of course, way more widespread than people thought, even with all of these measures here.

At a cost to Sweden so far of 192 deaths/million population compared to the US at 144/million.
So, are you volunteering to get infected?

Yes and they'll be largely done while we are still hiding and trying to stop something we cannot, while our death toll will likely be spread over a longer time period as we have multiple waves of this.

And spare me the BS leading question/false choice nonsense. I've been working right through this with very few changes in my life and nobody, including Sweden, is advocating not taking reasonable precautions. This is NOT an either or choice between total lockdown and slobbering all over each other at every opportunity while making no effort to slow transmission and protect the vulnerable- and never has been.

And the point is, for those too myopic to realize this, that there are other strategies out there that have been employed, and other nations that are further along the timeline than we are. As those results start to become available it makes sense and is necessary to assess them to determine the best path forward for us.

Which country has the best results in protecting it population from coronavirus? The Answer TAIWAN! Only 6 deaths in TAIWAN. TAIWAN is the gold standard in protecting its population. Trump's failure is measured by the number of deaths Taiwan has vs. the United States.

Sweden has the 9th highest death rate per capita in the world from coronavirus. Why would anyone follow that example for protecting its population. There are only 8 other countries that are dying at a greater rate than Sweden from coronavirus.

Because you're only delaying the inevitable. You can get the virus now or 6 months from now.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

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?

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.

Interacting with a lot of people when you put out the trash do you? Moron, it's the contact and interactions with...PEOPLE that spreads the virus, not merely appearing on the surface of the planet! Oh, what's the use of trying to convince the irreparably stupid? You'll believe anything as long as it doesn't appear in a text book!

Yeah. I had the virus. Lost 15 pounds, no fever. My MD said, my symptoms were rare until they weren't as 30% experience rapid weight loss. We are learning more and more about this virus. You WILL get it. Now or later. Your choice.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I can tell you something about Detroit and Wayne Co. Once this virus hit those areas, no amount of shelter or no-shelter was going to help and that's the truth.

Sorry, but you don't know shit.

Unsubstantiated opinions are just that.

So nothing to counter, just name-calling.

Fellow conservatives, we're winning.

But we knew that

What name did I call you?

"you don't know sh1t"

What part of what I said was wrong? That's called an ad hominem--name calling

The part where you said I called you a name.

What name did I call you?

 

[Nosmo King]

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?

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.

Interacting with a lot of people when you put out the trash do you? Moron, it's the contact and interactions with...PEOPLE that spreads the virus, not merely appearing on the surface of the planet! Oh, what's the use of trying to convince the irreparably stupid? You'll believe anything as long as it doesn't appear in a text book!

If there's on thing Nosmo King can be counted on, it's just repeating whatever Party Line he's heard and then chastising the rest of us with it like some menopausal Karen off her meds.

"You're all Terrible People because you don't believe your Betters!!"

You are promoting the death of expertise. Why? Cynicism makes people stupid! Why celebrate that?

 

[JoeMoma]

The problem with "Lockdowns" is that when the Lockdown is over, all those people are exposed so that that can and often will be infected with the virus. A lockdown can be good in that it can give people time to prepare their health care systems so that they are not overwhelmed. However, being locked-down causes harm also. If we stay "locked-down" until a vaccine becomes available, that could be 18 moths or even forever. So what if the world has a great depression.

Mitigation, or Lockdowns extends decreases the rate of the infection rate, but it also extends the time period of the infection period. At some point it is time to remove the bandaid. Is it better to remove the bandaid slowly or simply rip it off.

 

[Wapasha]

The article was correct, we allowed a select few doctors, high on hubris, to cite really bad data, and grossly exaggerate the threat, the deaths and the spread of the infection. We also allowed politicians to get high on the feeling of power, to order their citizens around like year old toddlers, and allowed other politicians to loot the treasury.

I think the reaction down here - especially NZ - was excessive. Data wasn't bad or exaggerated. You have 900,000 infected over six weeks. I'd call that a pandemic.

You start to lose me when you get into the conspiracy theory nonsense.

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

 

[Fueri]

The problem with "Lockdowns" is that when the Lockdown is over, all those people are exposed so that that can and often will be infected with the virus. A lockdown can be good in that it can give people time to prepare their health care systems so that they are not overwhelmed. However, being locked-down causes harm also. If we stay "locked-down" until a vaccine becomes available, that could be 18 moths or even forever. So what if the world has a great depression.

Mitigation, or Lockdowns extends decreases the rate of the infection rate, but it also extends the time period of the infection period. At some point it is time to remove the bandaid. Is it better to remove the bandaid slowly or simply rip it off.

This ^^^^

The only way this ends: herd immunity - The Boston Globe

Flattening the curve was essential. But is it fueling a misconception that we can contain this disease?

www.bostonglobe.com

 

[2aguy]

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.

 

[DrLove]

Spiked is a RW site. Lockdowns are working.

Are the lockdowns working?

Keeping people at home is slowing transmission of the virus, but policymakers face more uncomfortable choices.

www.politico.eu

 

[Billy_Bob]

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!

You missed the point. We are ALL going to get this virus. No ifs about it. The point was to slow the spread so that the number of people who needed acute care did not overwhelm our systems. NY almost crashed and burned, it was close. This was never about stopping the spread dead it was about slowing the spread..

 

[JoeMoma]

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!

You missed the point. We are ALL going to get this virus. No ifs about it. The point was to slow the spread so that the number of people who needed acute care did not overwhelm our systems. NY almost crashed and burned, it was close. This was never about stopping the spread dead it was about slowing the spread..

So once it's determined that our systems can handle the number of people that need acute care, the lockdown should be lifted. Perhaps lifted gradually so just to be on the safe side.

 

[Billy_Bob]

This is a normal trend line as populations experience viruses for about four weeks peaking within the first two. All of this quarantine did nothing but harm if anything.

I disagree.

WE slowed the spread to those who could least afford to get it and that kept hospitalizations to a manageable level. That was the objective had we had a fast burn as Italy did it would have torn our nation apart.

 

[Wapasha]

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.

You're wrong.

The title of this thread is "LOCKDOWNS DID NOT WORK".

The hell they didn't! The lock downs worked better than expected...mainly because so many people cooperated and nobody thought they would (Americans are a a pesky bunch).

Then you have simple common sense. I have much much MUCH less of a chance catching a virus while sitting at home alone than I do being in a crowd (bus, train, plane, stadium, restaurant, etc.).

And finally...it's a "STRAW MAN"...not straw dog

I have said the lock down worked, but it's purpose was served, and we now need to get back to work or else we will destroy our economy. If you think we need to lock people in their homes for another month, or ten, then I will have to disagree.

 

[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!

You missed the point. We are ALL going to get this virus. No ifs about it. The point was to slow the spread so that the number of people who needed acute care did not overwhelm our systems. NY almost crashed and burned, it was close. This was never about stopping the spread dead it was about slowing the spread..

So once it's determined that our systems can handle the number of people that need acute care, the lockdown should be lifted. Perhaps lifted gradually so just to be on the safe side.

EXACTLY!

 

[DrLove]

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