Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Health and Medicine
Reply to "COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure."
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Apologies if this was already posted, but I came across this article from New York magazine that made me question the efficacy of lockdowns, and our whole response to the pandemic. Very much 20/20 hindsight, but the more I think about it, the angrier I get, especially with closing the schools. Here’s a link, along with a key paragraph arguing that Sweden probably had the right response. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/covid-lockdowns-big-fail-joe-nocera-bethany-mclean-book-excerpt.html [i]So in attempting to gauge the value of lockdowns, the most appropriate way is to look not just at COVID deaths but at all deaths during the pandemic years. That’s known as the “excess deaths” — a measure of how many more people died than in a normal year. One authoritative accounting was compiled by The Spectator using data gathered by the OECD. It showed that during the first two years of the pandemic — 2020 and 2021 — the U.S. had 19 percent more deaths than it normally saw in two years’ time. For the U.K., there was a 10 percent rise. And for Sweden — one of the few countries that had refused to lock down its society — it was just 4 percent. An analysis by Bloomberg found broadly similar results. In other words, for all the criticism Sweden shouldered from the world’s public health officials for refusing to institute lockdowns, it wound up seeing a lower overall death rate during the pandemic than most peer nations that shut down schools and public gatherings. It is not unreasonable to conclude from the available data that the lockdowns led to more overall deaths in the U.S. than a policy that resembled Sweden’s would have.[/i][/quote] This is a stupid take. [/quote] That was enlightening. Let me guess, you’re a COVID cultist who’s angry that your extreme precautions proved to be a waste of time and resources.[/quote] COVID cultists? OK if you do not believe[b] that COVID in its earliest days was a killer disease, [/b]then there is no point in talking to you. You will never believe any precaution or vaccination is a needed reality. And those who believe it was a killer disease think you are delusional. You will never convince the latter that covid precautions were a waste so why are you even bothering? Honest question.[/quote] But was it really? That’s what I’m not so sure about. You could *maybe* argue it’s a killer disease for anyone over 75. But certainly not normal, healthy adults. [/quote] [b]1.1 Million dead in the US alone. How many millions have to die before a disease is a “killer”?[/b] You do know that saying COVID was a killer in spring 2020 and it no longer a killer in 2023 because we have vaccines and some level of immunity and Paxlovid and knowledge of how to treat are not mutually exclusive, right? It was a killer. If you mitigate as necessary based on your age and health status and seek treatment when necessary, it is not a killer now. IMO, the switch happened after the winter 2020-2021 wave, which is when we got vaccines. But, you can argue in either direction for a few months. You cannot argue with any degree of intellectual honesty that it was never a killer. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/[/quote] It’s not as big of a killer as heart disease, obesity or cancer. When you say 1.1 million at face value it sounds terrible. It’s truly awful so many people died. But when you compare it to other causes of death it’s not anywhere close to what we were told it would be. [/quote] Maybe that’s because 1.1 largely preventable deaths is terrible. And minimizing those deaths as “only” the elderly, frail, obese, etc. is also terrible. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics