Thread: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

  1. #2301
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,419

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Exarch View Post
    The pandemic is going to cost the entire United States their entire yearly GDP; everything americans earned this year will have been for naught


    Source: https://www.rt.com/business/503350-c...ts-us-economy/
    Once you realise the entire financial system is a gentlemen's agreement, debt means nothing.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  2. #2302
    Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    21,467

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Even after so many of their own people have needlessly died from this pandemic, america's leaders still refuse to work with China- the only nation to have successfully contained and defeated the virus.
    History will condemn those leaders who allowed their people to die for the sake of political baggage and ideology.



    Wuhan has now become a tourist destination for Chinese tourists, amazing what can be achieved with a competent government and society.

  3. #2303

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Here's a pretty good article, explaining the failure of "lockdown" method:
    The daily coronavirus reports have become the equivalent of Soviet harvest reports. They sound impressive, mean absolutely nothing, and are the pet obsession of a bureaucracy that not only has no understanding of the problem, but its grip on power has made it the problem.

    The smarter medical professionals understand that the theories have failed, while the administrators who put the theories into practice confused their system with science. The politicians listen to the administrators and when they tell us to trust the science, they mean the bureaucracy. The medical professionals can’t and won’t backtrack now. It’s too late.

    The best and brightest spent the worst part of a year shuffling rationales like a gambler’s trick deck, wrecked the economy, and sent tens of thousands of infected patients into nursing homes to infect the residents, accounting for at least a third of the national coronavirus death toll.
    Like most national leadership disasters, it was a combination of misjudgement, understandable mistakes, tragic errors, and acts of incomprehensible stupidity or unmitigated evil.
    A lot of people are dead, a lot more are out of work, and the problem is far from solved. Someone will have to be blamed and they certainly don’t want it to be themselves.

    The lockdown and the rule of the public health experts has become too big to fail.
    Mistakes were made, as the saying goes. Projections were built based on bad and incomplete data. Everyone followed the path of least resistance by doing what China had done. And everyone in the system, from the experts to the administrators to the politicians to the media, is complicit. That makes the massive error the world has been living under too big to fail.

    There are only two choices left. Admit the magnitude of the mistake or find someone to blame.
    The establishment that touted the experts is blaming its political and cultural enemies, the people it has been priming the public to see as strange, selfish, irrational, and dangerous. And also the very people who have been the loudest opponents of lockdown culture.
    Given a choice between admitting the system was wrong or blaming the system’s failure on its critics, the establishment has followed the same pattern as every authoritarian leftist regime.
    Lockdown culture needs patsies to take the fall for why it didn’t work. Like every leftist social and economic experiment, its defenders are left to argue that it was never properly tried. If only it weren’t for Trump, and for the dissenters, for the Chassidic Jews in Brooklyn, for Christian weddings in San Francisco and Maine, for gyms, bars, and beaches, it would have worked.

    Yet the simple truth is that the China Model hasn’t worked in any country that isn’t China.

    It doesn’t matter who the leader or the ruling party are, whether the public wore or didn’t wear masks, the resurgence is not a political phenomenon, science doesn’t speak, and the virus doesn’t listen. But of all the countries in the world, America was especially ill-fitted to adopt an authoritarian public health model. The sheer size, openness, and diversity of the country makes us unique and should have made it abundantly obvious that no such system would work.

    Anyone but an expert or administrator would have understood that these plans were doomed.
    But what the system failed to accomplish in battling the virus, it made up for by providing the leadership that had enacted it with a wonderful opportunity to settle its political scores.

    The lockdowns don’t exist anymore as a prophylactic policy, but as a political vendetta. The more people die, the more businesses are ruined, the more everyone suffers, the more vicious the vendetta grows as it hunts for scapegoats, political and religious, for the great error of terror.

    Leftist regimes turn to political terror as their policies fail. When the idealism dies, and the theories fall apart, the organizers pursue misery for the sake of misery, using fear, deprivation, and hate to maintain their grip on power while crushing the political threats to their rule.
    The rule of the experts isn’t fighting the virus. It has become the virus.
    https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/202...WuhKzI3KT-4cvY
    Without a doubt, Western elites, in their sociopathic lust for power, simply used the Chinese virus pandemic as an opportunity to attack their opponents, at the expense of making it worse for everyone else, especially elderly - people most vulnerable to the pandemic to begin with.
    The crisis caused by the pandemic isn't a testament to faults of a specific healthcare system, but rather to the fact that Western elites are too obsessed with preserving "status quo" of their wealth and power that they simply would rather sacrifice lives of their own citizens then risk losing a small part of it.

  4. #2304
    LoZz's Avatar who are you?
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Northants, UK
    Posts
    10,021

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Here's a pretty good article, explaining the failure of "lockdown" method:


    https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/202...WuhKzI3KT-4cvY
    Without a doubt, Western elites, in their sociopathic lust for power, simply used the Chinese virus pandemic as an opportunity to attack their opponents, at the expense of making it worse for everyone else, especially elderly - people most vulnerable to the pandemic to begin with.
    The crisis caused by the pandemic isn't a testament to faults of a specific healthcare system, but rather to the fact that Western elites are too obsessed with preserving "status quo" of their wealth and power that they simply would rather sacrifice lives of their own citizens then risk losing a small part of it.
    except in New-Zealand, Oh and south Korea. Basically any country that actually had a decent plan and enforced it, or had majority of support from its citizens.


    I just want it be over now, It's not been great for loads of countries but it has been a national embarrassment for the UK which couldn't have come at a worse time for us frankly.
    The Virus was bad, But i fear the economic damage is going to last for a decade if not longer and will cause even more hurt.

  5. #2305
    Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    21,467

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Without a doubt, Western elites, in their sociopathic lust for power, simply used the Chinese virus pandemic as an opportunity to attack their opponents, at the expense of making it worse for everyone else, especially elderly
    Or rather, if western people had actually cooperated with their leaders and government, they could also be enjoying themselves as citizens of Wuhan are now enjoying themselves.

    Instead, some leaders, specifically anglo leaders looked to blame foreigners-Chinese- for their problems, exactly what totalitarian despots would do to hang onto power.

  6. #2306

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by LoZz View Post
    except in New-Zealand, Oh and south Korea. Basically any country that actually had a decent plan and enforced it, or had majority of support from its citizens.


    I just want it be over now, It's not been great for loads of countries but it has been a national embarrassment for the UK which couldn't have come at a worse time for us frankly.
    The Virus was bad, But i fear the economic damage is going to last for a decade if not longer and will cause even more hurt.
    Problem is that China-style lockdown measures simply can't work in any society that isn't China. Hence why should have taken the smarter path of Japan and some other nations, who managed to bring the numbers down without screwing our own economy. The real problem in places like Canada is leadership vacuum, since our government cares more about using the pandemic as an excuse to attack the opposition and "punish" working class for not supporting the Liberals instead of actually dealing with the health crisis, all while our PM think he is some kind of royalty and demonstrably violates the rules that his own government imposed. It is a health crisis, but it exposed even bigger lack of leadership crisis in nations like ours.

  7. #2307

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Problem is that China-style lockdown measures simply can't work in any society that isn't China. Hence why should have taken the smarter path of Japan and some other nations, who managed to bring the numbers down without screwing our own economy. The real problem in places like Canada is leadership vacuum, since our government cares more about using the pandemic as an excuse to attack the opposition and "punish" working class for not supporting the Liberals instead of actually dealing with the health crisis, all while our PM think he is some kind of royalty and demonstrably violates the rules that his own government imposed. It is a health crisis, but it exposed even bigger lack of leadership crisis in nations like ours.
    It worked in New Zealand.
    The Armenian Issue

  8. #2308
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,419

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    It worked in New Zealand.
    And Victoria/Australia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Problem is that China-style lockdown measures simply can't work in any society that isn't China.
    Lockdowns are just one tool that works - probably the best tool for reducing case counts irrespective of the country.

    Whether or not they can be deployed effectively is down to decisive and clear leadership and communication. Where they don't work it isn't because of anything inherent to that society, it's because they haven't been communicated or enacted clearly and quickly. So they've worked in China, Australia, New Zealand etc in spite of the countries having different types of government led by both conservative and liberal politicians because of good communication.

    Lockdowns certainly aren't the only tool. Others do work to some degree or another, and have other benefits (economic or mental health or whatever). Lockdowns might not even be the best tool in some contexts - especially where a society manages to keep the virus out in the first place (Taiwan) or already has a history of good education on behaviour around viruses (Japan, Korea).

    But HH, you're correct in assuming that lockdowns fail in a leadership vacuum. That's why they've largely failed in the US, UK, Brazil, etc etc.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  9. #2309
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,057

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by LoZz View Post
    Basically any country that actually had a decent plan and enforced it, or had majority of support from its citizens
    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    It worked in New Zealand.
    Yes and yes.

    --------
    John Snow Memorandum

    Defining who is vulnerable is complex, but even if we consider those at risk of severe illness, the proportion of vulnerable people constitute as much as 30% of the population in some regions(8).
    Prolonged isolation of large swathes of the population is practically impossible and highly unethical.

    Empirical evidence from many countries shows that it is not feasible to restrict uncontrolled outbreaks to particular sections of society. Such an approach also risks further exacerbating the socioeconomic inequities and structural discriminations already laid bare by the pandemic. Special efforts to protect the most vulnerable are essential but must go hand-in-hand with multi-pronged population-level strategies.

    Japan,Vietnam, and New Zealand, to name a few countries, have shown that robust public health responses can control transmission, allowing life to return to near-normal, and there are many such success stories.

    The evidence is very clear: controlling community spread of COVID-19 is the best way to protect our societies and economies until safe and effective vaccines and therapeutics arrive within the coming months.
    (8) Global,regional, and national estimates of the ... - The Lancet

    See fig.3.Proportion of population at increased risk and high risk of severe COVID-19 by country and region.

    Prolonged isolation of 30% of the population... think about that!! As the author(s) put it,...practically impossible and highly unethical.



    ----

    Why Have So Many American Conservatives Embraced Pseudoscience?

    In his weekly articles on the American Greatness site, NewCriterion publisher RogerKimball conferred legitimacy on the no-big-deal approach to the unfolding pandemic with highbrow literary references and Latin phrases. As the body count climbed, he began insisting onpicayune distinctions between “dying from the virus [or] with thevirus.”

    This pedantry continues to this day, as various conservatives spin the death numbers this way and that, in order to present the plague as an artifact of testing, natural mortality cycles, or media bias.
    Americans and Europeans. Call it the "Trump effect"...

    --------
    Here, the numbers are climbing, the number of people admitted to hospital has continued to rise for more than a week, with 1,794 people now hospitalised, and of these 262 are in intensive care units.
    Its quite clear to me that we are not far from the pre rupture scenario of the national health service. Only now (!!!) ,go figure, the parliament passed a bill which imposed the mandatory use of a mask on the street and public space. Too late.
    If democracy is a muscle, why we dont use it? we get what we deserve.
    Last edited by Ludicus; October 28, 2020 at 12:10 PM.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  10. #2310

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    And Victoria/Australia.



    Lockdowns are just one tool that works - probably the best tool for reducing case counts irrespective of the country.

    Whether or not they can be deployed effectively is down to decisive and clear leadership and communication. Where they don't work it isn't because of anything inherent to that society, it's because they haven't been communicated or enacted clearly and quickly. So they've worked in China, Australia, New Zealand etc in spite of the countries having different types of government led by both conservative and liberal politicians because of good communication.

    Lockdowns certainly aren't the only tool. Others do work to some degree or another, and have other benefits (economic or mental health or whatever). Lockdowns might not even be the best tool in some contexts - especially where a society manages to keep the virus out in the first place (Taiwan) or already has a history of good education on behaviour around viruses (Japan, Korea).

    But HH, you're correct in assuming that lockdowns fail in a leadership vacuum. That's why they've largely failed in the US, UK, Brazil, etc etc.
    The problem with lockdowns is that they are entirely incompatible with Western nations, who unlike China have somewhat high standards for individual freedoms and liberties. Then we see nations that flattened the curve without grossly violating basic freedoms of their citizens as well as not sending their nation into an economic turmoil via ineffective lockdown policy.

    Again, the primary issue is that governments simply found China virus pandemic as an opportunity to gain politically - by selectively using "lockdown" measures to "punish" demographics that don't support them and using pandemic as an excuse to cement their power and attack the opposition.

    But antaeus, you are 100% right about failure to stop Covid caused by general leadership vacuum in Commonwealth countries like Canada, UK , Australia and New Zealand (their claims about monthly defeats of the virus having some credibility as Soviet claims on its agricultural and industrial achievements), where democracy is already on retreat, while elites are becoming more and more brazen and autocratic, hence why they simply used Chinese virus as an excuse to repress their own people and cement their own grip on power. Then we have examples of countries like Japan, where government is sane and isn't trying to hurt its own people just to please some private interests or to become stronger politically.

    Perhaps, its not just Covid that is virus, it is plutocracy of our very own elites in Canad a, Australia and some other Western countries that adopted the ineffective Chinese model...

  11. #2311
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,057

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    The problem with lockdowns is that they are entirely incompatible with Western nations, we see nations that flattened the curve without grossly violating basic freedoms of their citizens as well as not sending their nation into an economic turmoil via ineffective lockdown policy.
    .

    According to H.H, France isn't a Western nation...
    As expected, Macron orders back France in lockdown, just a couple of hours ago. The new lockdown measures in France will stay in place until 1 December.

    Macron rightly said, "We could do nothing and accept herd immunity...short term it will mean triage of patients and 400,000 extra deaths".


    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    selectively using "lockdown" measures to "punish" demographics that don't support them and using pandemic as an excuse to cement their power and attack the opposition
    Delusional nonsense.

    Edit: Germany will go into a national lockdown from the start of next week.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    New Zealand (their claims about monthly defeats of the virus having some credibility as Soviet claims on its agricultural and industrial achievements)
    Stop spreading hate, lies and misinformation. COVID-19: Current cases | Ministry of Health NZ
    Total deaths , 25.
    Total cases from 14 October to 27 October, 69.
    Last edited by Ludicus; October 28, 2020 at 05:39 PM.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  12. #2312

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    .

    According to H.H, France isn't a Western nation...
    As expected, Macron orders back France in lockdown, just a couple of hours ago. The new lockdown measures in France will stay in place until 1 December.

    Macron rightly said, "We could do nothing and accept herd immunity...short term it will mean triage of patients and 400,000 extra deaths".
    * Laughs in Japanese *
    Delusional nonsense.
    Gainsaying isn't an argument.
    Stop spreading hate, lies and misinformation. COVID-19: Current cases | Ministry of Health NZ
    Total deaths , 25.
    Total cases from 14 October to 27 October, 69.
    * government decides that it did a good job and pets itself on the back*

  13. #2313
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,419

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    * government decides that it did a good job and pets itself on the back*
    They've also just had an election where Covid response was front and centre. Government won in an historic landslide. So in this case, people also agree with government back-patting.

    Save the reply:

    "People sheeple, lambs to the slaughter our dear soviet leader hardly the world's freeist democracy or anything, besides democracy sucks and China something... etc"
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  14. #2314
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,057

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post

    * government decides that it did a good job and pets itself on the back*
    Stop lying.
    ----

    On a side note, Sweden’s model is not a positive model to follow. In Sweden, the number of total deaths (5918) is ethiccaly unneceptable. Latifa Löfvenberg, a nurse who worked in several care homes around Gävle,north of Stockholm, at the beginning of the pandemic, says,

    Some can have a lot of years left to live with loved ones, but they don't have the chance...because they never make it to the hospital, They suffocate to death
    Anders Vahlne, a professor of virology at the Karolinska Institut, says,

    They didn't try to save their lives. They were scared that the intensive care units would be overwhelmed and you couldn't take care of young people

    Until now the Swedish government never ordered a lockdown. Now, guess what, the city of Uppsala announces a lockdown aimed at slowing a spike in cases of Covid.
    Last edited by Ludicus; October 28, 2020 at 06:30 PM.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  15. #2315

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    As Covid-19 cases surge across large parts of Europe and the U.S., officials are reluctant to force another round of nationwide lockdowns of the sort imposed in March.

    But this time—unlike in the spring—public-health experts broadly and increasingly agree, with some worried that the general public won’t cooperate with another monthslong, generalized lockdown against a disease whose transmission is now much better understood.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/public-...ge-11602514769
    Dozens of doctors and scientists have launched a campaign urging the government not to impose a new lockdown, claiming that fears over the coronavirus pandemic are overblown and that the economic damage from such a move will prove too high a cost to bear.

    Among the approximately 90 doctors and researchers to sign an open letter warning against a general closure are Nobel Prize in Chemistry winner Michael Levitt and the directors of the emergency wards or coronavirus wards of several hospitals.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/health...-new-lockdown/
    Three leading epidemiologists gathered in Massachusetts on Sunday to sign the Great Barrington Declaration, a public call to end lockdown policies and adopt a public health strategy they call “focused protection.”

    Gathered in the Stone House at the American Institute for Economic Research in Great Barrington, Mass., the declaration was signed by Drs. Martin Kulldorff, Sunetra Gupta and Jay Bhattacharya.

    Since their signing of the declaration over the weekend, more than 4,500 medical and public health scientists, 8,400 medical practitioners and 118,000 members of the general public have added their names to it.

    https://www.themainewire.com/2020/10...matters-worse/
    Thousands of scientists and health experts have joined a global movement warning of "grave concerns" about Covid-19 lockdown policies.

    Nearly 6,000 experts, including dozens from the UK, say the approach is having a devastating impact on physical and mental health as well as society.

    They are calling for protection to be focused on the vulnerable, while healthy people get on with their lives.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54442386
    Lockdowns are a primarily political solution to a medical problem; this has been demonstrated during past pandemics, as I cited back in January in this same thread. Earlier this year, it was noted that rather than being overwhelmed, US efforts to ramp up surge capacity went un-utilized despite surging virus cases. Meanwhile, the healthcare sector faced mass layoffs as people avoided routine care and postponed surgeries for fear of the virus.
    As hospitals were overrun by coronavirus patients in other parts of the world, the Army Corps of Engineers mobilized in the U.S., hiring private contractors to build emergency field hospitals around the country.
    The endeavor cost more than $660 million, according to an NPR analysis of federal spending records.

    But nearly four months into the pandemic, most of these facilities haven't treated a single patient.

    Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, said: "These 1,000-bed alternate care sites are not necessary; they're not filled. Thank God."

    Senior military leaders also said the effort was a success — even if the beds sit empty. Gen. John Hyten, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was asked at a news conference if it bothered him to see the field hospitals go unused.

    "For gosh sakes, no," Hyten said. "If you see beds full, that means the local capacity of the local hospitals to handle this [has] been overwhelmed. And now we're into an emergency situation."

    New York has "so far avoided the worst-case scenario we were preparing for," the spokesman said in a statement. "There has been a reduced need for hospital beds, and as of now we are not moving forward on purchasing supplies and equipment or securing staff for these sites."

    https://www.npr.org/2020/05/07/85171...id-19-patients
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  16. #2316
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,419

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Lockdowns are a primarily political solution to a medical problem; this has been demonstrated during past pandemics, as I cited back in January in this same thread.
    For the past months sceptics in this thread have been saying lockdowns are too focused on the medical solution at the expense of the economy. Now when it's expedient it's flip-flopped into being too much of a political solution?

    The quickest and easiest way to stop an infectious disease that is spread via people interacting is to stop people interacting. That's not political. That's just the logic of infection. It's the most effective approach for dealing with specifically the disease. Every other option is a compromise on this. As in, is trying to achieve some level of separation between people that is balanced against people's need to interact for work, family, etc.

    What's political is when people decide that they don't like a solution because their favoured political party doesn't like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Earlier this year, it was noted that rather than being overwhelmed, US efforts to ramp up surge capacity went un-utilized despite surging virus cases. Meanwhile, the healthcare sector faced mass layoffs as people avoided routine care and postponed surgeries for fear of the virus.
    As we noted back at the start of the year this comment was made in this thread, the excess capacity occurred because the lockdown worked, and not as many people got sick. It was preparedness in case - noting it's better to have an excess of medical response, than a lack. Since then, and because of the extra capacity that as bought, we've seen smart lockdowns around the world that have better managed capacity and not left routine care out. I for example have had 2 wisdom teeth removed, at the height of one of the longest and most strict lockdowns in the world.

    I say this, as I am about to go on holiday for the first time this year, as my city - which in July had the same case count as the UK, looks to completely open up from a strict lockdown and almost normal economic activity with 3 cases today, while the UK has 25,000.

    The Great Barrington Declaration, which these quotes you provide reference, has been widely criticised and in spite of being good clickbait, does not represent mainstream scientific opinion, because it seeks to justify a largely political expediency, particularly as it leans towards eugenics in the face of actual real world evidence that COVID can be effectively balanced with long term economic and mental health requirements in countries that have managed it. What is political, is a failure to address mental health and the economy alongside preventative measures like lockdowns, or even in some cases while not even bothering to address COVID. And for that you can lay blame squarely on your politicians.
    Last edited by antaeus; October 28, 2020 at 10:04 PM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  17. #2317

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    For the past months sceptics in this thread have been saying lockdowns are too focused on the medical solution at the expense of the economy. Now when it's expedient it's flip-flopped into being too much of a political solution?

    The quickest and easiest way to stop an infectious disease that is spread via people interacting is to stop people interacting. That's not political. That's just the logic of infection. It's the most effective approach for dealing with specifically the disease. Every other option is a compromise on this. As in, is trying to achieve some level of separation between people that is balanced against people's need to interact for work, family, etc.

    What's political is when people decide that they don't like a solution because their favoured political party doesn't like it.
    If you’re going to avoid the substance of what I said by lazily accusing me of some kind of rhetorical inconsistency and political bias, you could at least have the decency of quoting what you’re referring to. None of what you’ve said here is a discussion of lockdown measures or the concerns raised by medical professionals about continuing or reimposing those measures.

    As we noted back at the start of the year when you made this comment, the excess capacity occurred because the lockdown worked, and not as many people got sick. Since then, and because of the extra capacity that as bought, we've seen smart lockdowns around the world that have better managed capacity and not left routine care out. I for example have had 2 wisdom teeth removed, at the height of one of the longest and most strict lockdowns in the world.

    I say this, as I am about to go on holiday for the first time this year, as my city - which in July had the same case count as the UK, looks to completely open up from a strict lockdown and almost normal economic activity with 3 cases today, while the UK has 25,000.

    The Great Barrington Declaration, which these quotes you provide reference, has been widely criticised and in spite of being good clickbait, does not represent mainstream scientific opinion, particularly as it leans towards eugenics in the face of actual real world evidence that COVID can be effectively balanced with long term economic and mental health requirements in countries that have managed it. What is political, is a failure to address mental health and the economy alongside heavy handed tactics like lockdowns, or even in some cases while not even bothering to address COVID. And for that you can lay blame squarely on your politicians.
    I cited the report from the CFR below in January (aka before widespread lockdowns anywhere outside of China ) and I don’t see any response from you, nor could anyone have made a point about lockdowns working before they happened in March. In any case, insinuating that the medical professionals around the world cautioning against continuing or reimposing lockdown measures “lean toward eugenics” while citing criticism of their concerns from governmental representatives just makes whatever point you’re trying to make look that much more ridiculous.

    Rather than seek to contain the spread of the virus, the US government and health authorities focused their energy and resources on strengthening surge capacity to treat the increasing number of cases and diminish the virus spread. According to a report of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), there were four critical pillars to the mitigation effort: vaccines antivirals medical care and non-medical interventions. Particular attention was focused on ‘decisions that could reduce instances of severe disease and death by accelerating the delivery and use of vaccines; developing integrated plans to protect especially vulnerable populations; and ensuring access to intensive care facilities.

    While the Politburo’s heavy-handed approach was not scientifically grounded, it made perfect political sense. Chinese leaders had strong political incentives to pursue an excessive approach not informed by science and epidemiology. Given the initial mismanagement of the SARS crisis, they were more interested in creating an impression that the government was acting differently this time around, that they indeed cared about the people’s health and wellbeing. On the eve of the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown on the democracy movement, and in the months leading up to the celebration of the 60th anniversary of the People’s Republic, forceful government action against H1N1 was shown to have helped shore up its legitimacy. Indeed, a survey conducted by the China Youth Daily found that 85 per cent of Chinese people supported the draconian government measures.

    As Caijing magazine noted, the cost borne by public health personnel, H1N1 patients and those who had close contact with them were secondary to the issue of social and economic stability. True, Party leaders emphasised ‘science’ and the ‘rule by law’ in undertaking the anti-H1N1 measures. Yet, when they made H1N1 prevention and control a top priority, and warned that it would punish any failures to contain the spread of the disease, non-scientific and heavy- handed measures became more appealing to local government officials, who found it safer to be overzealous than to be seen as ‘soft’.

    What can we learn from these two countries’ responses to the H1N1 pandemic? A comparison of the effectiveness of the two strategies clearly points to the inferiority of the containment strategy in handling the H1N1 pandemic. The containment approach is costly, unsustainable, inflexible and impractical. When adopted at the very beginning of the outbreak, it may help slow down the transmission of the virus. But, against the backdrop of globalisation, it is impossible to institute barriers against such spread. Moreover, it may complicate efforts of surge capacity building when a shift to mitigation becomes necessary. Interestingly, China looked to a centuries-old approach to contain the rapid spread of the H1N1 flu pandemic, even though both scientific data and historical evidence suggested the limits of this approach.

    https://www.cfr.org › contentPDFWeb resultsComparing the H1N1 Crises and Responses in the US and China - Council on Foreign Relations
    This has been known in principle for years, even considering diseases that are less infectious than Covid.
    There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza. A World Health Organization (WHO) Writing Group, after reviewing the literature and considering contemporary international experience, concluded that “forced isolation and quarantine are ineffective and impractical.”2 Despite this recommendation by experts, mandatory large-scale quarantine continues to be considered as an option by some authorities and government officials.35,43

    The interest in quarantine reflects the views and conditions prevalent more than 50 years ago, when much less was known about the epidemiology of infectious diseases and when there was far less international and domestic travel in a less densely populated world. It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease. The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration.

    As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals. The problems in implementing such measures are formidable, and secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable.

    http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/webs...ndemicflu.html
    This comports with the findings we are seeing emerge from the current crisis, which is why so many experts are sounding the alarm:
    The pandemic caused by COVID-19 has forced governments to implement strict social mitigation strategies to reduce the morbidity and mortality from acute infections. These strategies however carry a significant risk for mental health which can lead to increased short-term and long-term mortality and is currently not included in modelling the impact of the pandemic. Methods: We used years of life lost (YLL) as the main outcome measure as applied to Switzerland as an exemplar. We focused on suicide, depression, alcohol use disorder, childhood trauma due to domestic violence, changes in marital status and social isolation as these are known to increase YLL in the context of imposed restriction in social contact and freedom of movement. We stipulated a minimum duration of mitigation of 3 months based on current public health plans. Results: The study projects that the average person would suffer 0.205 YLL due to psychosocial consequence of COVID-19 mitigation measures. However, this loss would be entirely borne by 2.1% of the population, who will suffer an average 9.79 YLL. Conclusions: The results presented here are likely to underestimate the true impact of the mitigation strategies on YLL. However, they highlight the need for public health models to expand their scope in order to provide better estimates of the risks and benefits of mitigation.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7303469/
    The authors identified a negative association between the number of days to any lockdown and the total reported cases per million, where a longer time prior to implementation of any lockdown was associated with a lower number of detected cases per million. Countries with a higher median population age, prevalence of obesity, and a longer number of days to any border closure had significantly higher caseloads with the total number of reported cases per million (i.e. full or partial lockdown).... Full lockdowns, border closures, and high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with reduced number of critical cases or overall mortality.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/e...244-3/fulltext
    Several prominent studies, including Dehning et al. (2020), Hsiang et al. (2020), and Flaxman et al. (2020), have studied empirically the role of government-mandated non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) in reducing the transmission of COVID-19, and many of these studies argue that these NPI’s had a large impact on the transmission rate of the disease in the early phase of the pan- demic.3 Given the observation that transmission rates for COVID-19 fell virtually everywhere in the world during this early pandemic period, we are concerned that these studies may substantially overstate the role of government-mandated NPI’s in reducing disease transmission due to an omitted variable bias. Moreover, given the observation that disease transmission rates have remained low with relatively low dispersion across locations worldwide for the past several months as NPI’s have been lifted, we are concerned that estimates of the e↵ectiveness of NPI’s in reducing disease transmission from the earlier period may not be relevant for forecasting the impact of the relaxation of those NPI’s in the current period, due to some unobserved switch in regime.

    Our finding in Fact 1 that early declines in the transmission rate of COVID-19 were nearly universal worldwide suggest that the role of region-specific NPI’s imple- mented in this early phase of the pandemic is likely overstated. This finding instead suggests that some other factor(s) common across regions drove the early and rapid transmission rate declines.

    Our findings in Fact 2 and Fact 3 further raise doubt about the importance in NPI’s (lockdown policies in particular) in accounting for the evolution of COVID-19 transmission rates over time and across locations. Many of the regions in our sample that instated lockdown policies early on in their local epidemic, removed them later on in our estimation period, or have have not relied on mandated NPI’s much at all. Yet, effective reproduction numbers in all regions have continued to remain low relative to initial levels indicating that the removal of lockdown policies has had little effect on transmission rates.

    The existing literature has concluded that NPI policy and social distancing have been essential to reducing the spread of COVID-19 and the number of deaths due to this deadly pandemic. The stylized facts established in this paper challenge this conclusion. We argue that research going forward should account for these facts when assessing how important NPI policy is in shaping the progression of COVID-19.

    https://www.nber.org/system/files/wo...719/w27719.pdf
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  18. #2318
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,419

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Really great stuff.
    Other than getting upset at me over "rhetorical inconsistency and political bias" that's all really great stuff and I probably couldn't refute any of it without a great deal of effort.

    The statements that you seem to be upset by: I didn't suggest that the declaration leans towards eugenics, Dr David Gorski did. I didn't suggest that it was a political statement, the American Public Health Association did. etc... etc... Literally the only thing I cited. To the most straight forward place on the internet, And you got offended and ran off to NCBI because I linked to a page and made you go to extra effort? Please.

    Sure I was a bit flippant in my tone, which I apologise about. But my scepticism of the Great Barrington Declaration is hardly fringe.
    Last edited by antaeus; October 29, 2020 at 12:13 AM.

  19. #2319

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Likewise I apologize for being triggered by my impression of the tone/point of what you were saying.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  20. #2320
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,057

    Default Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    TheGreat Barrington Declaration, which these quotes you provide reference, has been widely criticised and in spite of being good clickbait, does not represent mainstream scientific opinion,
    Precisely,already denounced by the scientific community. See my previous post- John Snow Memorandum
    The GBD was paid by a libertarian think thank, the American Institute forEconomic Research, enough said.

    The Useful Libertarian Idiocy of The Great Barrington ...
    ...It might seem a little ironic that a fundamentally libertarian document like the Great Barrington Declaration would be deployed in an attempt to obscure the enormity of the American state visiting mass death upon the American people. But it’s not really ironic at all. A state that kills its citizens by hobbling mechanisms created to protect them in times of crisis will always find allies in ideologues who believe that those mechanisms should not exist, that we’d bebetter off without them, and that it’s tyranny to collect the taxes that buy them
    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza.
    Not at all, my friend. There are innumerable examples, For example, read the history of the 1918 flu, written by the contemporary epidemiologists. New York City began quarantine measures before the death rate spiked. The city had the lowest death rate on the Eastern coast.

    Emerg Infect Dis. 2013 Feb; 19(2): 254–259.
    doi: 10.3201/eid1902.120312 ( Journal of Infectious Diseases)
    Lessons from the History of Quarantine, from Plague to Influenza A.

    ...During outbreaks of plague and cholera, the fear of discrimination and mandatory quarantine and isolation led the weakest social groups and minorities to escape affected areas and, thus, contribute to spreading the disease farther and faster, as occurred regularly in towns affected by deadly disease outbreaks.

    But in the globalized world, fear, alarm, and panic, augmented by global media, can spread farther and faster and, thus, play a larger role than in the past.

    Furthermore, in this setting, entire populations or segments of populations, not just persons or minority groups, are at risk of being stigmatized.

    In the face of new challenges posed in the twenty-first century by the increasing risk for the emergence and rapid spread of infectious diseases, quarantine and other public health tools remain central to public health preparedness. But these measures, by their nature, require vigilant attention to avoid causing prejudice and intolerance.
    It's just common sense. The virus is devastating the US hospitals.Hospitals in Europe are close to rupture, that's the crucial problem.
    I'm not fond of complacency and irresponsability. Liberty is not a fancy shop window, while behind the scenes selfish, short-sided,egotistical interests hold sway. When people doesn’t behave properly, in a responsible manner, undesirable (due to economic damage) partial or total lockdowns are a temporary neccessity. As I said before, sometimes we get what we deserve. Sad, but true.

    Here, the private (for profit) hospitals are refusing covid patients. A lesson to remember.
    ----
    Edit, lockdowns: more about the subject,
    No two countries locked down in the same way. Often,the effectiveness of the different government measures during the lockdowns to improve effectiveness of policies cannot be measured directly.China rings a bell?
    Comparing Norway and Denmark to Sweden, the lockdown measures have been dramatically effective in reducing the pressure on the healthcare system. The numbers
    diverge dramatically with much higher pressure on the healthcare system in Sweden: New LSE research on the effectiveness of lockdowns..

    More,The effectiveness of lockdowns: Learning from the Swedish...

    The results suggest the lockdown would have reduced the number ofCOVID-19 infections by a half and deaths by a third.
    people fail to internalise the costs they impose on others as they become infectious and, hence, voluntary social restraint fails to deliver the same extent of social distancing that we observe for the lockdowns cenario
    Localized lockdowns? Are they really effective? Yes, but,
    Effectivenessof Localized Lockdowns in the SARS-CoV-2 ...
    Our projections suggest that extending localized lockdowns will slow down the epidemic. However, by themselves, localized lockdowns will be unable to control epidemic growth due to spillovers from neighboring areas with high interdependencies, unless those contiguous areas also implement lockdowns.
    Last edited by Ludicus; October 29, 2020 at 06:28 PM.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •