Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
For those of you ignorant TDS morons who didn't get the message: The lockdown will not stop a single person from getting corona virus. All it does is slowdown the rate at which people become infected. It was implemented only to prevent hospitals from becoming overwhelmed, and that outcome is clearly no longer a possibility.
On Wednesday Dr. Dan Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi, who own seven Accelerated Urgent Care facilities in Kern County, Calif., gave a press conference to local media. They extrapolated from their own COVID-19 data, along with data sets nationwide and globally. Using this data, their own medical knowledge and information gathered from conversations with their colleagues around the country, they presented a compelling case, which included unreported health risks related to sheltering in place, for ending the severe shutdowns.Both doctors understand and support the initial reactions to the COVID-19 outbreak by the federal, state and local governments. It was a novel virus and there was very limited information. However, now they assert that the data is telling them that the disease pattern of COVID-19 is more like the flu. Dr. Erickson phrased it this way, “Millions of cases, a small number of deaths.” He specifically noted that the difference in the number of deaths between Sweden, with limited restrictions, and Norway, which locked down, is not statistically significant."Lockdown versus non-lockdown did not produce a statistically different number of deaths. That is the bottom line," said Erickson.Throughout the briefing he emphasized that decision making going forward needs to be based on data, not predictive models. This echoes comments made by Dr. Anthony Fauci during press briefings. And we have all watched the predictive models be radically adjusted as actual data has been loaded into them.Their data extrapolations, using a method similar to the one the CDC uses for influenza, suggest that death rates for COVID-19 are similar to those for the flu. According to their analysis, both Kern County and the state of California have likely experienced a widespread viral infection.
California is the empirical evidence that the lockdown has worked.
I've been on lock-down since February and I haven't gotten sick.
Neither have plenty of others who haven't.
I've been on lock-down since February and I haven't gotten sick.
Neither have plenty of others who haven't.
That just defies common sense. How do you think we’ve flattened the curve? The less people you come into contact with the less chance of anyone transmitting the virus to you. The fact that you’re arguing different means you’re retarded.
California is the empirical evidence that the lockdown has worked.Yes. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/04/01/lockdown-coronavirus-california-data/Did those doctors graduate from Trump U.?
Do you have a scientific refutation of their hypothesis or are you one those "listen to the science" guys who only accept the science you agree with?
There Is No Empirical Evidence for These Lockdowns | RealClearPolitics
There Is No Empirical Evidence for These Lockdowns | RealClearPoliticswww.realclearpolitics.com
I've been on lock-down since February and I haven't gotten sick.
Neither have plenty of others who haven't.
That just defies common sense. How do you think we’ve flattened the curve? The less people you come into contact with the less chance of anyone transmitting the virus to you. The fact that you’re arguing different means you’re retarded.
They're conservatives. Logic is beyond their ken, and common sense is rare as hen's teeth in conservatives.
And if what they are saying is true, they will be able to demonstrate this in a rigorous, peer reviewed research paper. In fact, if it is true, there will be a flood of research papers demonstrating the fact. Obviously their stated "methods" are kind of garbage. What they are saying may, indeed, be true. But people shouldn't be gullible enough to accept it based on this shaky display.
They described it themselves. Very rough analysis.How is it "obvious?"
South Dakota has A LOT fewer people. Like Wyoming, they are socially distant by default. And they are not a shining example.California is the empirical evidence that the lockdown has worked.Yes. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/04/01/lockdown-coronavirus-california-data/Did those doctors graduate from Trump U.?
Do you have a scientific refutation of their hypothesis or are you one those "listen to the science" guys who only accept the science you agree with?
There Is No Empirical Evidence for These Lockdowns | RealClearPolitics
There Is No Empirical Evidence for These Lockdowns | RealClearPolitics
South Dakota has no lock down. They have less deaths per million than California.
You're missing the entire point here and demonstrating what I said to Berg.
www.livescience.com
And guess what, you can continue to stay locked down without a government mandated one.I've been on lock-down since February and I haven't gotten sick.
Which is precisely what a lot of, if not most, people will do.And guess what, you can continue to stay locked down without a government mandated one.
So there you go, we don’t need a government mandated lockdown. People can decide for themselves when and where to go places and what to wear.Which is precisely what a lot of, if not most, people will do.And guess what, you can continue to stay locked down without a government mandated one.
That's not really rationale for that... Logic never was your strong suit...So there you go, we don’t need a government mandated lockdown.
And guess what, you can continue to stay locked down without a government mandated one.
The problem we have is not knowing a parameter to control the virus.
For example, to kill bacteria the most common period of time is taking antibiotics for ten days.
Ten days were tested and are taken as the standard for having antibiotic amount enough to kill bacteria in our organism, This is considering that the antibiotic's effect will last additional days after the last pill.
If the antibiotics is taken for four days only because the individual feels better after those days, then there is a possibility the survivor bacteria will act against the human body again and perhpas with stronger force, and that same treatment of antibiotics won't work anymore.
In this case with the Corona virus, the lockdown perhaps has contributed to contain the virus to spread faster in order to give time for doctors and hospitals to prepare better.
But, it is uncertain if opening back business and workplaces will speed up the spreading of the virus at a rate which might overcome the required care for the new people infected by the virus.
I think the government is counting with the warm season as another factor in favor of containing the virus. This is a wait and see scenario, because until today this virus has given lots of surprises about how it spreads out, the disparate symptoms in affected individuals and its attacks on people who live in warm areas of the globe.
By the way, these two jokers are the laughingstock of the scientific community right now. Ya got fooled again, ya gullible goober.For those of you ignorant TDS morons who didn't get the message: The lockdown will not stop a single person from getting corona virus. All it does is slowdown the rate at which people become infected. It was implemented only to prevent hospitals from becoming overwhelmed, and that outcome is clearly no longer a possibility.
On Wednesday Dr. Dan Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi, who own seven Accelerated Urgent Care facilities in Kern County, Calif., gave a press conference to local media. They extrapolated from their own COVID-19 data, along with data sets nationwide and globally. Using this data, their own medical knowledge and information gathered from conversations with their colleagues around the country, they presented a compelling case, which included unreported health risks related to sheltering in place, for ending the severe shutdowns.Both doctors understand and support the initial reactions to the COVID-19 outbreak by the federal, state and local governments. It was a novel virus and there was very limited information. However, now they assert that the data is telling them that the disease pattern of COVID-19 is more like the flu. Dr. Erickson phrased it this way, “Millions of cases, a small number of deaths.” He specifically noted that the difference in the number of deaths between Sweden, with limited restrictions, and Norway, which locked down, is not statistically significant."Lockdown versus non-lockdown did not produce a statistically different number of deaths. That is the bottom line," said Erickson.Throughout the briefing he emphasized that decision making going forward needs to be based on data, not predictive models. This echoes comments made by Dr. Anthony Fauci during press briefings. And we have all watched the predictive models be radically adjusted as actual data has been loaded into them.Their data extrapolations, using a method similar to the one the CDC uses for influenza, suggest that death rates for COVID-19 are similar to those for the flu. According to their analysis, both Kern County and the state of California have likely experienced a widespread viral infection.
Do you think, oh just maybe, that's not quiiiite enough information do draw the conclusion that you are drawing, and that you actually don't know what the hell you are talking about? Has this crossed your mind?South Dakota has no lock down. They have less deaths per million than California.
Sorry, but that is just about the dumbest thing I have read about all this. "Slowing herd immunity" means fewer cases, which means fewer copies of the virus. The mutation rate is completely dependent on the number of copies of the virus.Slowing the process of herd immunity also gives the virus time to mutate within the population rather than rapidly stopping it in its tracks. So we get it more, later, worse.
