I have never said anything different. All I have ever done is counter the claims that Sweden shows lock down does not work, because in outcomes it is NOT that different. Which is the same 'evidence' that challenges the claim that of UK excess deaths, large numbers are caused by lockdown. If this were true you
would see a difference in Sweden outcome on the hard fact numbers and this is
not seen to date.
cyprusgrump wrote:Show me where I claim that in the link you've provided please...?
You stated that you have never claimed to "'seek the truth' and be 'evidence led'" yet only a handful of posts earlier you quote an expert extract that said
but it is becoming increasingly apparent that numbers, not emotions, must guide the debate about how best to respond to Covid-19
QED
cyprusgrump wrote:erolz66 wrote:The point of trying to flatten the curve is to reduce deaths that would occur if you did not flatten the curve.
No it isn't, it has never been...
The point of Lockdown is to prevent health services being overwhelmed by the disease and therefore more people dying
because they could not access hospitals for any reason as happened in Italy.
Now that hospitals have spare capacity (and some 'emergency hospitals' haven't even been opened) the justification for Lockdown doesn't exist.
Unless of course you'd prefer to be Locked down until a vaccine or effective treatment is developed...?
The sought benefits of 'lock down' of 'flattening the curve' are to 'buy time'. One benefit is to not overload health care systems all in one go but also to gain time to put measures in place that can mitigate morbidity and mortality resulting from the virus. One such measure is putting 'surge capacity' in place. It is not the only one. Buying time to get supplies and stocks of PPE in place and means to distribute them properly is another. Another is buying time to get proper testing in place. Another is buying time to recruit and put in place 'tracker teams' so that if there are new outbreaks following relaxing lock down these can be quickly identified and the consequences of them quickly mitigated and controlled. The sensible approach to removing lock down is to match it in timing and degree to degree of rates of new infection. The zealot approach to removing, the approach wanted by those who decided without any ref to any evidence or data what so ever that it was wrong and stupid from as soon as it was started, it is just to say 'it was pointless when first done, is pointless now and should just be cliff edge removed'.