Coronavirus
Out of context: Reply #4658
- Started
- Last post
- 6,399 Responses
- drgs0
I'm with pr2 here
COVID-19: Rethinking the Lockdown Groupthink
https://www.frontiersin.org/arti…Tl:dr; A doctor from Alberta explaining why he intitally supported lockdowns, but now he thinks it was a mistake. It all started with delusional models which predicted 40 millions dead by the end of 2020. Like with all things in American media, covidocrisis was framed as war, conformism and obedience became the main public virtue, and people who objected to it declared traitors.
The largest share of covid victims are not the people who are sick with covid, but victims of medical refusal caused by the panic.
Comparing the damages from lockdown (quantified in QALY, "quality of life years") versus the benefits from lockdown, the sacrifice is ten times more:"Another cost-benefit analysis for the UK used National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines for resource decisions, that 1 QALY should cost no more than US$38.4K. Assuming lockdown could save up to 440 K people (although more likely at most: 66.65 million population × 40% to herd immunity × 0.24% IFR = 64 K people) of 5 QALY each, and a minimum GDP loss of 9% (i.e., assuming lost output comes back quickly, and not including any health costs of unemployment or disrupted education), “the economic costs of the lockdown... is far larger than annual total expenditure on the UK national health service... the benefits of that level of resources applied to health... would be expected to generate far more lives saved than is plausibly attributable to the lockdown in the UK... The cost per QALY saved of the lockdown looks to be far in excess... (often by a factor of 10 and more) of that considered acceptable for health treatments in the UK (page 9–10)” (147). The authors estimated the benefit of easing restrictions for over the next 3 months outweighs the cost by 7.3–14.6X (147). “A cost-benefit analysis of 5 extra days at COVID-19 alert level 4” for New Zealand found that the cost in QALY was 94.9X higher than the benefit (183). Finally, a cost-benefit analysis for the US is shown in Table 8, finding the cost of lockdown would be at least 5.2X the benefit (184, 185)."
Debate
- Why not just be very grateful that it wasn't much much worse?grafician
- in my native country, non-covid deaths are the highest since WWII! That said it's more reflection of the gov't ineptitude, but the stats ARE telling.pr2
- Madrid has had no real lockdown since last March and their numbers are no higher than Paris or London.Chimp
- Hey here's some math to tell you what a human life is worth (in local currency that we print as much as want of)nb
- "Like with all things in American media, conformism and obedience became the main public virtue." Slow down there, scientist!!!nb
- it is insane to me that this is still going on. never been convinced that anything beyond masks, basic hygiene, distancing, closing schools makes a difference.kingsteven
- i used to be the "shut down everything" kinda guy, then i started reading the science papers. at first the science was flimsy but nowdays it's very robust.pr2
- propel who bought into the original fear (just as i did), have a hard time accepting the reality.pr2
- *peoplepr2
- In my county, which had lockdowns, the death/case rate is about 33% lower than in Madrid.monospaced
- mono's reasoning: one instance of lower death rate + lockdowns = lockdowns work. That's not how the science works sonny.pr2
- The problem as I see it is that too many people can't be trusted to abide by common sense distancing and hygiene/mask rules.Nairn
- The other problem being that non-authoritarian regimes can't fully actualise lockdowns, so they're more ineffective and ultimately, far more costly.Nairn
- Damned if they do, damned if they diddle.Nairn
- There's no one size fits all solution. Lockdowns make more or less sense in different countries, states, cities, socio-economic groups etc.Fax_Benson
- In the UK, lockdowns were demonstrably effective in reducing cases, deaths - in the absence of, as Nairn says, 100% suitably sensible population..Fax_Benson
- and given the fact that we fucked it up initially.Fax_Benson
- Anyone who still thinks that doing nothing is okay has nothing to back it up. Either stupid or just willfully ignorant af.monospaced
- purpose of a lockdown is to give the med system some breathing room. BUT in many cases it was so badly instituted...pr2
- ...that it cost us more lives by, among others, denying people life-saving procedures.pr2
- anyone who doesn't see the lockdown as double-edge sword is either a child or a profound simpleton.pr2
- I don't disagree with you there - originally the lockdowns were to 'flatten the curve' then somewhere along the line it became total eradication, or somesuchNairn
- Basically, every cunt except China and Taiwan, et al, fucked up. NEXT time we'll hopefully get it right. They had SARS, we didn't.Nairn
- Nobody is saying lockdowns aren't a double edged sword. They were the best bet at the time and without them covid and, ergo, non-covid situation would have beenFax_Benson
- worse. You wanking on about data that wasn't available at the time with hindsight we didn't have doesn't change that.Fax_Benson
- Fax, to claim that non-covid deaths would have been even worse without lockdown is perplexing at best. Lockdowns were the "headless chicken" solution.pr2
- Posts a cost-benefit analysis, doesn't understand basic virology. If you want to debate about this, I'm happy to do so. Among other things, I work in..garbage
- ..medical publishing and am privy to, for lack of a better term, high-level hospital administration group text.garbage
- For instance, in November 2019 there were very important people shitting their pants and predicting a lockdown because Americans are too stupid and arrogant..garbage
- ..to use basic precautions. Also worries that it would be politicized by a fucking moron (that knew as early as they did) that it would kill at least 100k.garbage
- In Nov 2019 NOBODY knew crap. They were using math predictions that were laughed out of the room long ago.pr2
- 100k is nothing if u consider that every year 2.8m people die in US alone.pr2
- i think its been covered above but aye, in respect to other measures lockdown has little effect and is the most harmful, when its being used as it is herekingsteven
- ... as a prolonged measure in an attempt to lower cases while negating other more effective measures its effect is lessened further...kingsteven
- i'm not too sure how things are elsewhere, here we've been on lockdown/ 2 households for 10 months of the last 12 and we're now on the verge of civil warkingsteven
- problem with Ireland is that less than 20% of u guys had it, so however you look at it - a lot of people will still die/get it before it's over.pr2
- nearly half have received their first shot in the north now so i'm hopeful for some normal soon but it's gonna be tricky while the south catches upkingsteven
- They actually did. Medical professionals in 2019 were immediately worried and accurately projected Seattle to be the first vector city.garbage
- Looks like they "knew crap". And lockdowns do work, and original projections were blown out of the water due to superspreader events.garbage
- 100k was the hopeful projection if Americans could you know, not be stupid fucking Americans.garbage
- https://www.cdc.gov/…garbage
- And if you read, there was a significant number of excess deaths, so foh with that. Both from COVID and from people being afraid to go to get treatment they..garbage
- ..normally would have gotten. And there's already evidence of lingering effects. So yeah, maybe we needed to be stricter about lockdowns instead of..garbage
- ..flirting with a virus that we were misunderstanding in terms of transmissibility, incubation and severity.garbage
- Bumping for pr2. Or have you slunk out once again?garbage
- Paging pr2. Hello? Echo!garbage
- again, echo.garbage