cyprusgrump wrote:Here is another interesting article I've read today. It compares infection and death rates of American states that have Lockdowns to those that do not.
And the concluding paragraph...No single set of numbers can be perfect, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that numbers, not emotions, must guide the debate about how best to respond to Covid-19. And the numbers just discussed, human and economic, do not make the case for lockdowns.
Thanks. An excellent study. Just as the case of Sweden demonstrates, lockdown or no lockdown, the disease will have roughly the same effect and will not end until herd immunity is achieved. The only difference is whether you destroy the economy or not.
And ... no, no, no ... this does not mean I am saying Covid-19 is a hoax or is not dangerous (to the aged and those with serious health conditions) or that official figures have not shown weekly deaths at double the five-year average for the past two weeks or whatever other straw man arguments you care to invent. Just that viruses have been plaguing humanity for milenia, the human immune system is equipped to deal with them and they have to do the rounds until the community has acquired sufficient immunity to disable them and, sadly, they take a toll as they do so. We accept deaths in road accidents as being a necessary price to pay for the convenience of having vehicular traffic. If everyone must shelter at home and we wreck the global economy to prevent a single elderly person from dying, then, by the same logic, people should be prohibited from taking vehicles on the road to prevent a single person from ever dying in a road accident.
PS - The original rationale for the lockdown was, while accepting that the virus would ultimately have to go round most of the population, to "flatten the curve" and stop health services from being overwhelmed with cases. Given that the following report on the NHS Nightingale Hospitals reveals:
A series of emergency field hospitals established in the UK to combat the coronavirus pandemic have remained largely empty and are now being scaled back, despite more than 4,000 new deaths from the virus in the past week alone.
...
The London Nightingale, in east London’s ExCel exhibition centre, treated just 51 coronavirus patients during its first three weeks, despite having a 4,000-bed capacity. According to unconfirmed reports by the BBC, thirteen of these patients died from coronavirus. Only 19 patients remained at the hospital on Friday, according to a report in Saturday’s Independent.
Nightingale hospitals in Birmingham, Manchester and Harrogate have seen similar patient numbers, while Sunderland’s hospital, a 460-bed facility, “may never open”, the newspaper reported.
In Saturday’s exclusive story, the Independent reported that London’s Nightingale is “effectively being wound down” with staff told to expect a decision on its future “within days”.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/0 ... h-m04.html
this strategy has obviously been a resounding success and it is beyond my comprehension why it is still needed, if this really was the rationale.
