Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

Remember, we have the Grifter and others on here STILL trying to say lockdowns worked LOL. They are completely full of crap and will then try to post some garbage cdc "study" showing lockdowns worked. Don't keep falling for the banana in the tailpipe. And this is why the Grifter is laughed at by me. Won't accept that they were wrong for 3 years and won't admit it. Just laugh at them and move on.

COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.

So in attempting to gauge the value of lockdowns, the most appropriate way is to look not just at COVID deaths but at all deaths during the pandemic years. That’s known as the “excess deaths” — a measure of how many more people died than in a normal year. One authoritative accounting was compiled by The Spectator using data gathered by the OECD. It showed that during the first two years of the pandemic — 2020 and 2021 — the U.S. had 19 percent more deaths than it normally saw in two years’ time. For the U.K., there was a 10 percent rise. And for Sweden — one of the few countries that had refused to lock down its society — it was just 4 percent. An analysis by Bloomberg found broadly similar results. In other words, for all the criticism Sweden shouldered from the world’s public health officials for refusing to institute lockdowns, it wound up seeing a lower overall death rate during the pandemic than most peer nations that shut down schools and public gatherings. It is not unreasonable to conclude from the available data that the lockdowns led to more overall deaths in the U.S. than a policy that resembled Sweden’s would have.

There were other negative consequences too. In the U.S., lockdowns forced hundreds of thousands of small business closures. They exacerbated inequality, as Amazon warehouse workers and meatpackers showed up to crowded workplaces while the “Zoom class” locked down at home. Worst of all, though, it had a devastating effect on children whose schools were closed as part of a lockdown. During the first weeks of the pandemic it probably made sense to close schools given how little was known about the coronavirus. Better safe than sorry. But by the time school started up again in the fall of 2020, two things were clear. The first was that remote learning was a disaster. The second was that there was surprisingly little transmission among kids in school. Well-to-do parents moved their children to private schools, many of which reopened their classrooms. But most big-city public-school systems continued to rely on remote learning well into the 2020–2021 school year. It was a tragic policy choice.

In ProPublica and The New Yorker, the journalist Alec MacGillis vividly described the consequences in Baltimore. With no classrooms to go to, thousands of students abandoned school. The school system made free laptops available, but few students took the trouble to get one. Teachers gave up trying to prod those who didn’t log onto their remote classes. Plus, teachers had kids of their own to take care of, which made it difficult to teach.

 

Seems like a good read!

 

Uses Lougle.

 

Global pandemics are a lose-lose proposition. No matter what you do, something is going to give. And while yes, we lost out on educational attainment and some people did go undiagnosed, as a whole, most studies show that lives saved due to lockdowns are higher than lives potentially lost.

The article posted by someone who likes to call people names like a 6th grader is ridiculously lazy. Just looking at excess deaths without looking at causes is silly. The US had more excess death than Sweden, but how many were from COVID? How many from other causes? If 99% of the excess deaths were from COVID, for example, then the number of extra deaths from other causes, like undiagnosed cancer, is small. And likely more people were saved from COVID than lost to cancer.

In addition, comparing country to country requires baselines. In a country with the highest number of single occupancy households and average number per household at 2.1 versus a country with 2.9 persons per household, you would expect the country with less persons per household to fare better. But early in the pandemic, Sweden with 2.1 pph fared very poorly versus the US at 2.9 pph. Now, Sweden didn't ever lockdown officially, but it's not like they didn't change anything.

The Swedish version of the CDC recommended people shelter at home and work from home if possible. The result? Stockholm became the leader in WFH with nearly 50% of the population working from home. In comparison, no city in the US had more than 25% WFH. The Swedes also closed all high schools and universities. It was only after these changes in behavior did Sweden see COVID numbers drop. It's as if they cut down the person-to-person contact, they successfully slowed the spread of a virus!

I don't mind the conversation and continued studies. Lockdowns had and still have value during a global pandemic. Did some places lockdown too long? Yes. Were they completely ineffective? No. Did some people suffer under a lockdown that would not have without one? Yes, but more people would have suffered without a lockdown, which is why a pandemic is a lose-lose proposition. There is no winning. Only mitigation.

 

LOL at the people who are guffawing at people who don’t believe in inert particles that enter the respiratory tracts of people to invade their cells to hijack their cellular machinery and reproduce apparently to kill the host because reasons.

 

Fact Check: Uproariously True

 

Who ordered MANDATORY lock downs? Biden and his clan did...

And all of that mandatory BS where people lost their jobs was ALL ON BIDEN.

 

I seem to remember being in lockdown while someone else was President

 

It came down to states. All locked down too long. But some realized the data and reopened within about two months. The idiots like Biden supported the states that failed and stayed locked down. That is reality.

 

Good one from a buddy on FB…

“I would be preparing for the WW3 draft but unfortunately I am unvaccinated. LOL!”

 

Had flu, rsv and Covid update vaxes yesterday. no effects other than mildly sore shoulders

 

I remember when Trump screamed bloody murder when Kemp opened up Georgia. I don’t think that a single politician, Republican or Democrat, raged against lockdowns.

 

Serious question for those that are part of the 3% taking the shot/giving it to their kids…

Do you really believe your doctor is part of the 3% you are part of?

***don’t get me wrong…there will be a few doctors who take the shot but the vast majority of this vast minority taking the shot are 65 and older people who can’t accept they were lied to***

 

New study just published in JAMA regarding mask efficacy. Let's just say the person who likes to argue using grade school level name calling isn't going to like the conclusion. The study addresses the lack of RCT mask studies, and explains these studies aren't always feasible. And while RCT may be considered gold standard, there are times other studies must be referenced and relied upon.

From the study's conclusion:

The COVID-19 pandemic and the global mpox outbreak are sobering reminders that we will confront new infectious disease threats in the future. Despite new approaches to developing and manufacturing vaccines (particularly mRNA technology) that can reduce the time between pathogen discovery and vaccine availability, that time frame will still be months at best and, for some pathogens, years or decades. Thus, decision-makers will again need to rely on existing and rapidly generated evidence as they implement interventions to mitigate disease spread. In these circumstances, RCTs and meta-analyses have important limitations and should not form the sole, or even primary, basis of public health decisions. Available evidence strongly suggests that masking in the community can reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and that masking with the highest-quality masks that can be made widely available should play an important role in controlling whatever pandemic caused by a respiratory pathogen awaits us.​

 

So this study suggests that masks can reduce the spread of a non-existent pathogen ?

 

Harrumph …

 

Grifter gonna grift. Can't fix stupid. Won't admit they were wrong. Too funny.

 

Zero evidence for viruses + staggering excess deaths = hiding in plain sight

 

Name callers who can't argue like an adult is going to name call. Do you have anything else besides grifter? Can't fix stupid, and can't admit they were wrong? I doubt it.