Scott 679 wrote:
Interesting article on if the lockdown is actually working.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/covid-19 ... vj8Q%3D%3DCurious to your thoughts on this.
My thoughts? The best thing for people like this is everyone to drop bars of soap in their socks and invite him outside for a blanket party. He's every bit as dangerous as the anti-vaxxers are. His point is the data is bad. This is about the only thing he is right about, nobody from WHO or any other epidemiologist is claiming we have good data. Some countries started sooner, some later, some did extensive testing and others weak. Even in Germany, every state tests and reports differently. The problem is everyone is running around trying to put out fires and has no time to do rigorous testing. And its hard to worry about quality assurance of testing when your house is on fire and expecting it at this point is unreasonable. So he cherry picks weak data to argue the data is weak. Nobody is claiming the data is great, they're just doing the best they can with the data they have, which is what they should do.
From another article he wrote.
Quote:
We didn't beat SARS, MERS, H1N1 and H5N1 by shutting down society. We developed herd imunity, followed common sense protocols and eventually developed a vaccine.
These were fundamentally different. SARS displayed symptoms almost immediately when contagious. This made it far easier to track and isolate individuals. Even with the common flu you will only be contagious for a day or two prior to exhibiting symptoms. SARS-COV-2 you can be contagious for up to 14 days before displaying symptoms or be totally asymptomatic but contagious. This is close to the worst case scenario that epidemiologists have feared for decades. Luckily it's not a super contagious bug like measles but it has such a long hidden life cycle that gives it so many opportunities to find new hosts.
He's also wrong when he says we developed herd immunity. We didn't the diseases were traced, and isolated from the rest of the population as they were much easier to recognize and thus trace.
He cherry picks the data like all flat earther; anti-vaxxer; anti-nuke; anti-GMO; humanity doesn't cause global warming types do. When their is an overwhelming scientific consensus I'll always go with the scientists. They don't always get it right, but their batting average for being right is far greater than any desk top critic with an internet connection.