Lockdowns Did Not Work

[AzogtheDefiler]

Redirect Notice

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!

 

[Thunk]

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?

 

[Sunni Man]

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

 

[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.

 

[Wapasha]

Redirect Notice

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!

Depends on what our sheltering in place was supposed to accomplish.

If we sheltered in place:

1) So as to give modern medicine time to find a treatment,

2) To allow our hospitals to procure enough PPE and equipment, test kits, and get supply chains built up

3) To reduce the number of people infected from the initial exposures, so that we did not overwhelm hospital staff and facilities.

Then I think the shelter in place worked to some extent. We probably allowed it to go on too long. We really need to get back to work, albeit still observing mitigation practices.

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.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Redirect Notice

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!

Adventures in Cherry Picking..cool, I like that movie. Those red states that didn't implement those stay at home orders are experiencing their own surges right now. Look at the numbers from April 6th.
43 states now have stay-at-home orders for coronavirus. These are the 7 that don't.

 

[SmokeALib]

This is a free country. I do what I want, when I want, and where I want. Thank God I don't live in a sanctuary leftist shithole.

 

[occupied]

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.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Redirect Notice

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!

Depends on what our sheltering in place was supposed to accomplish.

If we sheltered in place:

1) So as to give modern medicine time to find a treatment,

2) To allow our hospitals to procure enough PPE and equipment, test kits, and get supply chains built up

3) To reduce the number of people infected from the initial exposures, so that we did not overwhelm hospital staff and facilities.

Then I think the shelter in place worked to some extent. We probably allowed it to go on too long. We really need to get back to work, albeit still observing mitigation practices.

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.

^^^THIS^^^

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Redirect Notice

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!

Adventures in Cherry Picking..cool, I like that movie. Those red states that didn't implement those stay at home orders are experiencing their own surges right now. Look at the numbers from April 6th.
43 states now have stay-at-home orders for coronavirus. These are the 7 that don't.

Right and using the population density data and running regression analysis they are still better off than the more densely populated states. How do you explain that?

 

[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.

 

[TNHarley]

Redirect Notice

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!

Adventures in Cherry Picking..cool, I like that movie. Those red states that didn't implement those stay at home orders are experiencing their own surges right now. Look at the numbers from April 6th.
43 states now have stay-at-home orders for coronavirus. These are the 7 that don't.

I swear, its nothing but politics with you tunnel vision dumbfucks
YOU are whats wrong with our country. Grow up, dipshit

 

[SmokeALib]

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.

This disease is damn near as bad as liberalism.

 

[occupied]

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.

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

Redirect Notice

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!

Why anyone would believe that it would is beyond me. You can't hide from a virus...by the time you start to hide it has more than likely run it's course or is already present on everything.

 

[cnm]

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

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.

Herd immunity is the only way to ensure effective immunity for a population.
Not only will a population acquire immunity for this year but as the virus mutates and reappears in a slightly different form in subsequent seasons immune systems will still have resistance.
Through quarantines and lockdowns we achieve a partial immunity which will almost certainly ensure another outbreak in the fall...which is exactly what we will have.

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

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.

 

[Thunk]

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?

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

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?

You do not live in a vacuum...you order food...you buy food...others in your household do as well...additionally as we resist herd immunity measures we keep the virus alive and functioning in the population at a lower rate. It will simply 'low boil' until the population at large come out and then spikes will happen.
You cannot hide from it unless you are truly in the middle of nowhere with no contact.