Anonymous
11/24/2023 02:53
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Florida kept the schools open and they did fine.
Anonymous
11/24/2023 01:00
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The problem with this example is that Sweden is a small, culturally homogenous, fairly wealthy country in a northern climate. Would the same approach have the same outcome in the US? Probably not.
Like questions I'd want answered include:
- Did high conscientiousness among Swedish people result in voluntary social distancing during Covid peaks even without lockdowns?
- Did the climate in Sweden, with just a short summer season, allow Sweden to avoid the worst of the pandemic because people there socialize less outside their families in cold months anyway?
- Did Sweden's strong social safety net play a role?
I do tend to think that hard, very restrictive lockdowns likely have less of an effect on death rates than we think, and also that prolonged lockdowns have real costs that we are still reluctant to acknowledge in many cases.
The problem is that this is a topic that’s such a magnet for propagandists and kooks that it’s hard to have a rational discussion about this.
We’re the descendants of people who survived endless waves of epidemics.
Chances are that, given a few days’ notice, people will spontaneously, instinctively, ferociously enforce any lockdowns that are really necessary.
The sign that the lockdowns stopped being necessary once we had access to masks is that plenty of ordinary people rebelled against the lockdowns after about two or three weeks.
But, on the other hand, it seems a little silly to judge the people who imposed the lockdowns. For the first few weeks, they had no idea what they were really up against.
And it’s not really fair to compare the United States with another country, because we probably don’t know what combination of virus variants, immune system genes and antibodies people went into the pandemic with.
Maybe the United States had worse results because a tougher strain dominated here, or because we had more people with genes that made them vulnerable to COVID.
Another problem is that it’s easy to assume that anyone who brings up the topic is a Russian or Chinese social media outreach worker who mainly wants to stir up trouble, install a fascist puppet government in Washington and help Putin conquer Europe.
I think most people remember and understand the uncertainty that came in the spring of 2020, and can forgive all but the silliest restrictions (e.g., closed playgrounds).
The issue is that many restrictions continued long after that initial knee-jerk reaction to a new risk.
They were not silly restrictions. They were in place to reduce hospitalizations for a highly contagious illness where hospital beds and ventilators were scarce. If you are so upset over being asked to stay home for a few weeks, you really need your mental health checked.
Other silly ideas we had to deal with: wiping down groceries, decontaminating mail, wiping down grocery carts, wiping down checkout belts, etc.
Activities that temporarily mollified the germaphobes until they thought of new "health precautions."
Remember two weeks to flatten the curve that changed to Zero COVID?
Anonymous
11/24/2023 00:46
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think what we’re seeing in this thread is the last gasp of people who wish Moms for Liberty had been successful in turning school closures into an issue that won school board elections, and are upset that it turns out they are a bunch of political failures.
Is that what you think we're seeing? I think we're seeing people correctly observing that school closures and other restrictions were pointless. The upside is that when we next encountered a threat (monkey pox), the collective reaction was STFU about it.
They were not pointless. They were necessary.
Nah, they were pointless. When you had to mask on the 30-second walk to your restaurant table but could remain unmasked after that...yeah, pointless.
Nope, not pointless, protocols saved lives. Your not liking them (which is your prerogative there isn't a feelings police) does not equal pointless.
Where is the evidence of this? The spread wasn’t contained. Everybody gets infected, and now it’s evolved into a fairly benign illness. Vaccines don’t explain that since most people haven’t gotten a booster in ages.
2020/2021 is done and gone. No one is going to prison or will be executed for the protocols. Your dreams will not come true.
It's satisfaction enough that bringing it up makes those on the wrong side of the science get uncomfortable and try to shut it down. Never forget.
Science said it was necessary so screaming science makes no sense. Grow up. You never followed it anyway.
No, science didn't. You never understood science and never will. So, nobody listens to your howling about masks, distancing, or any of the other nonsense you spewed.
Yes it did.
DP. Necessary to do what? And for what purpose?
Science doesn't tell you what you seem to think it can.
Saying "science" means nothing. Science at the time said it was important. But, you only care about yourself and not the millions who died or have long term health issues because of it.
Again, "science" doesn't say what you seem to think it says. It can make predictions, but can't tell you what is "necessary"- particularly with your poorly-defined criteria.
Anonymous
11/24/2023 00:40
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The problem with this example is that Sweden is a small, culturally homogenous, fairly wealthy country in a northern climate. Would the same approach have the same outcome in the US? Probably not.
Like questions I'd want answered include:
- Did high conscientiousness among Swedish people result in voluntary social distancing during Covid peaks even without lockdowns?
- Did the climate in Sweden, with just a short summer season, allow Sweden to avoid the worst of the pandemic because people there socialize less outside their families in cold months anyway?
- Did Sweden's strong social safety net play a role?
I do tend to think that hard, very restrictive lockdowns likely have less of an effect on death rates than we think, and also that prolonged lockdowns have real costs that we are still reluctant to acknowledge in many cases.
The problem is that this is a topic that’s such a magnet for propagandists and kooks that it’s hard to have a rational discussion about this.
We’re the descendants of people who survived endless waves of epidemics.
Chances are that, given a few days’ notice, people will spontaneously, instinctively, ferociously enforce any lockdowns that are really necessary.
The sign that the lockdowns stopped being necessary once we had access to masks is that plenty of ordinary people rebelled against the lockdowns after about two or three weeks.
But, on the other hand, it seems a little silly to judge the people who imposed the lockdowns. For the first few weeks, they had no idea what they were really up against.
And it’s not really fair to compare the United States with another country, because we probably don’t know what combination of virus variants, immune system genes and antibodies people went into the pandemic with.
Maybe the United States had worse results because a tougher strain dominated here, or because we had more people with genes that made them vulnerable to COVID.
Another problem is that it’s easy to assume that anyone who brings up the topic is a Russian or Chinese social media outreach worker who mainly wants to stir up trouble, install a fascist puppet government in Washington and help Putin conquer Europe.
I think most people remember and understand the uncertainty that came in the spring of 2020, and can forgive all but the silliest restrictions (e.g., closed playgrounds).
The issue is that many restrictions continued long after that initial knee-jerk reaction to a new risk.
They were not silly restrictions. They were in place to reduce hospitalizations for a highly contagious illness where hospital beds and ventilators were scarce. If you are so upset over being asked to stay home for a few weeks, you really need your mental health checked.
Closing playgrounds did not "reduce hospitalizations" in any meaningful way. Why post if you're going to be disingenuous?
Anonymous
11/24/2023 00:34
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think what we’re seeing in this thread is the last gasp of people who wish Moms for Liberty had been successful in turning school closures into an issue that won school board elections, and are upset that it turns out they are a bunch of political failures.
Is that what you think we're seeing? I think we're seeing people correctly observing that school closures and other restrictions were pointless. The upside is that when we next encountered a threat (monkey pox), the collective reaction was STFU about it.
They were not pointless. They were necessary.
Nah, they were pointless. When you had to mask on the 30-second walk to your restaurant table but could remain unmasked after that...yeah, pointless.
Nope, not pointless, protocols saved lives. Your not liking them (which is your prerogative there isn't a feelings police) does not equal pointless.
Where is the evidence of this? The spread wasn’t contained. Everybody gets infected, and now it’s evolved into a fairly benign illness. Vaccines don’t explain that since most people haven’t gotten a booster in ages.
2020/2021 is done and gone. No one is going to prison or will be executed for the protocols. Your dreams will not come true.
It's satisfaction enough that bringing it up makes those on the wrong side of the science get uncomfortable and try to shut it down. Never forget.
Science said it was necessary so screaming science makes no sense. Grow up. You never followed it anyway.
No, science didn't. You never understood science and never will. So, nobody listens to your howling about masks, distancing, or any of the other nonsense you spewed.
Yes it did.
DP. Necessary to do what? And for what purpose?
Science doesn't tell you what you seem to think it can.
Saying "science" means nothing. Science at the time said it was important. But, you only care about yourself and not the millions who died or have long term health issues because of it.
Anonymous
11/24/2023 00:33
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The problem with this example is that Sweden is a small, culturally homogenous, fairly wealthy country in a northern climate. Would the same approach have the same outcome in the US? Probably not.
Like questions I'd want answered include:
- Did high conscientiousness among Swedish people result in voluntary social distancing during Covid peaks even without lockdowns?
- Did the climate in Sweden, with just a short summer season, allow Sweden to avoid the worst of the pandemic because people there socialize less outside their families in cold months anyway?
- Did Sweden's strong social safety net play a role?
I do tend to think that hard, very restrictive lockdowns likely have less of an effect on death rates than we think, and also that prolonged lockdowns have real costs that we are still reluctant to acknowledge in many cases.
The problem is that this is a topic that’s such a magnet for propagandists and kooks that it’s hard to have a rational discussion about this.
We’re the descendants of people who survived endless waves of epidemics.
Chances are that, given a few days’ notice, people will spontaneously, instinctively, ferociously enforce any lockdowns that are really necessary.
The sign that the lockdowns stopped being necessary once we had access to masks is that plenty of ordinary people rebelled against the lockdowns after about two or three weeks.
But, on the other hand, it seems a little silly to judge the people who imposed the lockdowns. For the first few weeks, they had no idea what they were really up against.
And it’s not really fair to compare the United States with another country, because we probably don’t know what combination of virus variants, immune system genes and antibodies people went into the pandemic with.
Maybe the United States had worse results because a tougher strain dominated here, or because we had more people with genes that made them vulnerable to COVID.
Another problem is that it’s easy to assume that anyone who brings up the topic is a Russian or Chinese social media outreach worker who mainly wants to stir up trouble, install a fascist puppet government in Washington and help Putin conquer Europe.
I think most people remember and understand the uncertainty that came in the spring of 2020, and can forgive all but the silliest restrictions (e.g., closed playgrounds).
The issue is that many restrictions continued long after that initial knee-jerk reaction to a new risk.
They were not silly restrictions. They were in place to reduce hospitalizations for a highly contagious illness where hospital beds and ventilators were scarce. If you are so upset over being asked to stay home for a few weeks, you really need your mental health checked.
Anonymous
11/24/2023 00:25
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The problem with this example is that Sweden is a small, culturally homogenous, fairly wealthy country in a northern climate. Would the same approach have the same outcome in the US? Probably not.
Like questions I'd want answered include:
- Did high conscientiousness among Swedish people result in voluntary social distancing during Covid peaks even without lockdowns?
- Did the climate in Sweden, with just a short summer season, allow Sweden to avoid the worst of the pandemic because people there socialize less outside their families in cold months anyway?
- Did Sweden's strong social safety net play a role?
I do tend to think that hard, very restrictive lockdowns likely have less of an effect on death rates than we think, and also that prolonged lockdowns have real costs that we are still reluctant to acknowledge in many cases.
The problem is that this is a topic that’s such a magnet for propagandists and kooks that it’s hard to have a rational discussion about this.
We’re the descendants of people who survived endless waves of epidemics.
Chances are that, given a few days’ notice, people will spontaneously, instinctively, ferociously enforce any lockdowns that are really necessary.
The sign that the lockdowns stopped being necessary once we had access to masks is that plenty of ordinary people rebelled against the lockdowns after about two or three weeks.
But, on the other hand, it seems a little silly to judge the people who imposed the lockdowns. For the first few weeks, they had no idea what they were really up against.
And it’s not really fair to compare the United States with another country, because we probably don’t know what combination of virus variants, immune system genes and antibodies people went into the pandemic with.
Maybe the United States had worse results because a tougher strain dominated here, or because we had more people with genes that made them vulnerable to COVID.
Another problem is that it’s easy to assume that anyone who brings up the topic is a Russian or Chinese social media outreach worker who mainly wants to stir up trouble, install a fascist puppet government in Washington and help Putin conquer Europe.
I think most people remember and understand the uncertainty that came in the spring of 2020, and can forgive all but the silliest restrictions (e.g., closed playgrounds).
The issue is that many restrictions continued long after that initial knee-jerk reaction to a new risk.
Anonymous
11/24/2023 00:11
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think what we’re seeing in this thread is the last gasp of people who wish Moms for Liberty had been successful in turning school closures into an issue that won school board elections, and are upset that it turns out they are a bunch of political failures.
Is that what you think we're seeing? I think we're seeing people correctly observing that school closures and other restrictions were pointless. The upside is that when we next encountered a threat (monkey pox), the collective reaction was STFU about it.
They were not pointless. They were necessary.
Nah, they were pointless. When you had to mask on the 30-second walk to your restaurant table but could remain unmasked after that...yeah, pointless.
Nope, not pointless, protocols saved lives. Your not liking them (which is your prerogative there isn't a feelings police) does not equal pointless.
Where is the evidence of this? The spread wasn’t contained. Everybody gets infected, and now it’s evolved into a fairly benign illness. Vaccines don’t explain that since most people haven’t gotten a booster in ages.
2020/2021 is done and gone. No one is going to prison or will be executed for the protocols. Your dreams will not come true.
It's satisfaction enough that bringing it up makes those on the wrong side of the science get uncomfortable and try to shut it down. Never forget.
Science said it was necessary so screaming science makes no sense. Grow up. You never followed it anyway.
No, science didn't. You never understood science and never will. So, nobody listens to your howling about masks, distancing, or any of the other nonsense you spewed.
Yes it did.
DP. Necessary to do what? And for what purpose?
Science doesn't tell you what you seem to think it can.
Anonymous
11/24/2023 00:06
Subject: Re:COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly at this point who cares. We did the best we could under a unique and heretofore inexperienced event. This is for scientists to be studying to plan for future pandemics. Getting angry now is ridiculous.
The problem is we weren’t allowed to ask questions and dissenting views were discouraged. Anytime you’re not allowed to ask questions or push back on something you should be concerned. The climate at the time didn’t allow questioning of precautions.
What are you talking about? There were plenty of people who questioned everything and did whatever they wanted anyway. It’s not like the police came and arrested people for expressing dissenting views. Even in early covid when people were dying, plenty of people questioned why they had to be inconvenienced to save other people’s lives and behaved accordingly. Lockdowns were never going to work in this country because we are a narcissistic and selfish society who rarely behave for the greater good of community.
+1 million - one of the most notable things about the COVID response was the almost immediate rise of a faction of loud people that were determined to push back against any measure that would inconvenience them in the slightest.
The measures were dumb. Just delaying the inevitable.
The truth is, we don't really know. There were too many people who ignored measures or implemented them improperly (see people with masks under their noses). And I don't trust a lot of data. See the lady on one of these threads who talks about how they were supposed to have a covid test before getting on a plane and the nurse came, they paid her to just go away, and she didn't do the test. So how many people did that nurse NOT test but report as negative? Repeat that kind of BS all over the country and you get suspect, useless "data".
So when people go on on here about "the data" i almost have to laugh. Except that it's so sad. What decent data do we really have?
And these same people are saying outright they will ignore public health directives next time around because of what they have "learned". Even though they have no idea what could be the cause of the next pandemic and how it will differ from covid.
God help us all.
Measures that the public is unable or unwilling to perform reliably are not effective public health measures. That should be a major lesson from the pandemic response. We spent 18 months keeping kids out of school and telling people to mask while walking on the sidewalk or between the restaurant table and bathroom rather than actually focusing on measures to help those at risk of severe illness.
Anonymous
11/23/2023 22:18
Subject: Re:COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly at this point who cares. We did the best we could under a unique and heretofore inexperienced event. This is for scientists to be studying to plan for future pandemics. Getting angry now is ridiculous.
The problem is we weren’t allowed to ask questions and dissenting views were discouraged. Anytime you’re not allowed to ask questions or push back on something you should be concerned. The climate at the time didn’t allow questioning of precautions.
What are you talking about? There were plenty of people who questioned everything and did whatever they wanted anyway. It’s not like the police came and arrested people for expressing dissenting views. Even in early covid when people were dying, plenty of people questioned why they had to be inconvenienced to save other people’s lives and behaved accordingly. Lockdowns were never going to work in this country because we are a narcissistic and selfish society who rarely behave for the greater good of community.
+1 million - one of the most notable things about the COVID response was the almost immediate rise of a faction of loud people that were determined to push back against any measure that would inconvenience them in the slightest.
The measures were dumb. Just delaying the inevitable.
It was beneficial to delay until vaccines were available
Natural resistance could have built up in the interim. That’s the primary defense now. Not many are getting the vaccine these days.
Covid has killed off the majority that it will and it’s mutated to being less serious which is what was the goal. The vaccines don’t stop transmission.
People don’t seem to care that many millions died prematurely from Covid. Kids lost their families.
And? Restrictions wouldn't have helped either. Those people still would have become infected.
Getting infected after vaccination reduced deaths. Fewer people died. The restrictions made sense until vaccines were available.
It's hard to speculate as many people had covid by the time the vaccines came. And many still died post vaccine.
Anonymous
11/23/2023 22:08
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:The problem with this example is that Sweden is a small, culturally homogenous, fairly wealthy country in a northern climate. Would the same approach have the same outcome in the US? Probably not.
Like questions I'd want answered include:
- Did high conscientiousness among Swedish people result in voluntary social distancing during Covid peaks even without lockdowns?
- Did the climate in Sweden, with just a short summer season, allow Sweden to avoid the worst of the pandemic because people there socialize less outside their families in cold months anyway?
- Did Sweden's strong social safety net play a role?
I do tend to think that hard, very restrictive lockdowns likely have less of an effect on death rates than we think, and also that prolonged lockdowns have real costs that we are still reluctant to acknowledge in many cases.
The problem is that this is a topic that’s such a magnet for propagandists and kooks that it’s hard to have a rational discussion about this.
We’re the descendants of people who survived endless waves of epidemics.
Chances are that, given a few days’ notice, people will spontaneously, instinctively, ferociously enforce any lockdowns that are really necessary.
The sign that the lockdowns stopped being necessary once we had access to masks is that plenty of ordinary people rebelled against the lockdowns after about two or three weeks.
But, on the other hand, it seems a little silly to judge the people who imposed the lockdowns. For the first few weeks, they had no idea what they were really up against.
And it’s not really fair to compare the United States with another country, because we probably don’t know what combination of virus variants, immune system genes and antibodies people went into the pandemic with.
Maybe the United States had worse results because a tougher strain dominated here, or because we had more people with genes that made them vulnerable to COVID.
Another problem is that it’s easy to assume that anyone who brings up the topic is a Russian or Chinese social media outreach worker who mainly wants to stir up trouble, install a fascist puppet government in Washington and help Putin conquer Europe.
Anonymous
11/23/2023 21:33
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think what we’re seeing in this thread is the last gasp of people who wish Moms for Liberty had been successful in turning school closures into an issue that won school board elections, and are upset that it turns out they are a bunch of political failures.
Is that what you think we're seeing? I think we're seeing people correctly observing that school closures and other restrictions were pointless. The upside is that when we next encountered a threat (monkey pox), the collective reaction was STFU about it.
They were not pointless. They were necessary.
Nah, they were pointless. When you had to mask on the 30-second walk to your restaurant table but could remain unmasked after that...yeah, pointless.
Nope, not pointless, protocols saved lives. Your not liking them (which is your prerogative there isn't a feelings police) does not equal pointless.
Where is the evidence of this? The spread wasn’t contained. Everybody gets infected, and now it’s evolved into a fairly benign illness. Vaccines don’t explain that since most people haven’t gotten a booster in ages.
2020/2021 is done and gone. No one is going to prison or will be executed for the protocols. Your dreams will not come true.
It's satisfaction enough that bringing it up makes those on the wrong side of the science get uncomfortable and try to shut it down. Never forget.
Opinions are like nostrils everyone has one. Your sharing your opinion makes people uncomfortable? What awesome powers you have! Your opinions and ability to make people uncomfortable guarantees what will happen in the future --no more protocols ever again due to your valiant efforts (actually no)
You still speak nonsense. Sorry your lockdown fantasies never came to fruition.
Anonymous
11/23/2023 17:47
Subject: Re:COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly at this point who cares. We did the best we could under a unique and heretofore inexperienced event. This is for scientists to be studying to plan for future pandemics. Getting angry now is ridiculous.
The problem is we weren’t allowed to ask questions and dissenting views were discouraged. Anytime you’re not allowed to ask questions or push back on something you should be concerned. The climate at the time didn’t allow questioning of precautions.
What are you talking about? There were plenty of people who questioned everything and did whatever they wanted anyway. It’s not like the police came and arrested people for expressing dissenting views. Even in early covid when people were dying, plenty of people questioned why they had to be inconvenienced to save other people’s lives and behaved accordingly. Lockdowns were never going to work in this country because we are a narcissistic and selfish society who rarely behave for the greater good of community.
+1 million - one of the most notable things about the COVID response was the almost immediate rise of a faction of loud people that were determined to push back against any measure that would inconvenience them in the slightest.
The measures were dumb. Just delaying the inevitable.
The truth is, we don't really know. There were too many people who ignored measures or implemented them improperly (see people with masks under their noses). And I don't trust a lot of data. See the lady on one of these threads who talks about how they were supposed to have a covid test before getting on a plane and the nurse came, they paid her to just go away, and she didn't do the test. So how many people did that nurse NOT test but report as negative? Repeat that kind of BS all over the country and you get suspect, useless "data".
So when people go on on here about "the data" i almost have to laugh. Except that it's so sad. What decent data do we really have?
And these same people are saying outright they will ignore public health directives next time around because of what they have "learned". Even though they have no idea what could be the cause of the next pandemic and how it will differ from covid.
God help us all.
Anonymous
11/23/2023 17:39
Subject: COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Yes, the vaccines prevented deaths. Red and blue states had similar mortality rates pre-vaccine. Post-vaccine, mortality rates are very different. States that have high uptake have much lower rates.
Anonymous
11/23/2023 14:16
Subject: Re:COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly at this point who cares. We did the best we could under a unique and heretofore inexperienced event. This is for scientists to be studying to plan for future pandemics. Getting angry now is ridiculous.
The problem is we weren’t allowed to ask questions and dissenting views were discouraged. Anytime you’re not allowed to ask questions or push back on something you should be concerned. The climate at the time didn’t allow questioning of precautions.
What are you talking about? There were plenty of people who questioned everything and did whatever they wanted anyway. It’s not like the police came and arrested people for expressing dissenting views. Even in early covid when people were dying, plenty of people questioned why they had to be inconvenienced to save other people’s lives and behaved accordingly. Lockdowns were never going to work in this country because we are a narcissistic and selfish society who rarely behave for the greater good of community.
+1 million - one of the most notable things about the COVID response was the almost immediate rise of a faction of loud people that were determined to push back against any measure that would inconvenience them in the slightest.
The measures were dumb. Just delaying the inevitable.
It was beneficial to delay until vaccines were available
Natural resistance could have built up in the interim. That’s the primary defense now. Not many are getting the vaccine these days.
Covid has killed off the majority that it will and it’s mutated to being less serious which is what was the goal. The vaccines don’t stop transmission.
People don’t seem to care that many millions died prematurely from Covid. Kids lost their families.
And? Restrictions wouldn't have helped either. Those people still would have become infected.
Getting infected after vaccination reduced deaths. Fewer people died. The restrictions made sense until vaccines were available.
Did fewer people really die though? I think that's a very interesting question I wish would be explored honestly and more thoroughly. Bear with me, I am not anti-vax so don't even start but COVID is still killing those most vulnerable vaccinated or not. You can look at the statistics of red versus blue states and make some loose assessments but I know republicans who took lots of precautions and Democrats to took none. But the very red states tend to be in the south and the middle of the US where people live in the suburbs- i.e. tied to cars, healthcare generally isn't as good, people are overweight and that it tied to a number of other health issues which caused them to be more susceptible to COVID deaths. So it isn't as easy as saying here's the data comparing political leanings of each State. COVID killed a lot of people in the beginning but even before the vaccines, those were tapering off because it killed the most vulnerable/susceptible and the rest of us survived. Those most vulnerable are still the ones dying. Would be a really interesting study but it won't ever happen because there isn't money in that and maybe lives were actually saved but no one wants to know the answer if they really weren't.