JP Morgan study shows lockdowns did not alter course of pandemic

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, torturedsole said:

Reminds me of the climate change nonsense way back in 2019.  Haven't heard a word about climate change for eleven weeks now which is nice.  

way back in 2019

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, Logosone said:

You obviously don't understand the concept, if the lockdowns are suddenly lifted and lockdowns were the sole cause of reducing cases then once they are lifted case numbers would have gone up. They didn't. All the evidence points to the fact that lockdowns were therefore not the cause of falling infection rates, obviously it was testing and isolating the infected.

 

Look up the term "causation".

 

Simplistic nonsense. What evidence points to the fact that lockdowns were not the cause of falling infection rates?

[nauseus]

36 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

Actually, the data shows the virus was on the decline before lockdowns.  

 

But hey, never miss a chance to throw in a comment after the fact.

False. Data shows the virus spread more before lockdowns, where lockdowns were applied.  

[steelepulse]

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

False. Data shows the virus spread more before lockdowns, where lockdowns were applied.  

False.  Data shows peak was before lockdowns.

 

But hey, if I was old, obese, diabetic and had comorbidities, I'd be saying the same.

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

False.  Data shows peak was before lockdowns.

 

But hey, if I was old, obese, diabetic and had comorbidities, I'd be saying the same.

Wrong on all counts. Prove what you say.

 

 

[steelepulse]

19 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Wrong on all counts. Prove what you say.

 

 

Prove what you say.

[Lacessit]

7 hours ago, torturedsole said:

Reminds me of the climate change nonsense way back in 2019.  Haven't heard a word about climate change for eleven weeks now which is nice.  

Another poster uneducated in the laws of thermodynamics.

[cornishcarlos]

4 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Another poster uneducated in the laws of thermodynamics.

 

I would think a lot of posters are uneducated in the laws of thermodynamics. Lots are uneducated in technicalities of bee keeping too !!

[tropo]

20 hours ago, Moonlover said:

There is no advise in the article, medical or otherwise. It's a retrospective opinion.

I agree. Everyone is an expert when looking back.

 

I don't know who exactly "it" is, but "it" actually believes the numbers coming out of China.

 

'This on its own was odd, given that in China there were only several thousand deaths, and the mortality rate outside of Wuhan was very low,' it says.

 

They're talking about flawed scientific papers now. What's the point of comments like that? Obviously any "scientific papers" were a work in progress as this unique event unfolded.

 

The JP Morgan analysis linked the decision to impose lockdowns to 'flawed scientific papers' predicting millions of deaths in the West. 

 

Regarding continuous reference to "end of lockdown"... I missed the memo. I was under the impression that most countries and states in the US were starting a very gradual lifting of the lockdown, and quite recently. LIfe is far from back to normal anywhere in the world as far as I know. 

 

[pineapple01]

Do nufin, then thems whos deads dead, n them wats alive be OK. Dont need no bits o sitific bits o paper old Mother Nature cant read. No vaccine for that bloody big wave she sent to wash things down was there.

[Logosone]

10 hours ago, chessman said:

Absolute nonsense.

The spread is caused by human interaction, lockdowns are a way of changing patterns of interaction. They achieved that goal. The lockdowns lift but people are still cautious and so the patterns of interaction don’t change so much.

 

The really interesting question is if these patterns could have been changed in other ways, without such drastic measures.

Just totally untrue.

 

Patterns have changed massively, even minor easing of the lockdown resulted in people swarming to the beaches in the UK.

 

 

[Logosone]

10 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Perhaps Australia and New Zealand haven't registered in your thought bubble.

You are obviously unaware that Australia and New Zealand tested more than most nations on earth. They contained the virus by their massive testing and isolating the infected, not through the lockdowns. 

[Bkk Brian]

If this study actually named the countries then its a simple task to test the conclusions by plotting the exact dates of lockdown easing to the trajectory of the virus. Without this vital piece of info then the study is useless.

[bert bloggs]

23 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

In the end, a lot of leaders heads will roll as voters make up their own minds, we hope.

Problem in the UK is that although Boris may have not got it right(not saying he did or didnt) what alternative is there? Labour what a joke the days when they were the party of the people has long gone ,can you imagine what it would be like now if the likes of Corbyn and Abbott had been voted into power .

[bert bloggs]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

Just totally untrue.

 

Patterns have changed massively, even minor easing of the lockdown resulted in people swarming to the beaches in the UK.

 

 

yes but no rush back to work (not while your getting paid to go to the beach)????

[Logosone]

3 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

If this study actually named the countries then its a simple task to test the conclusions by plotting the exact dates of lockdown easing to the trajectory of the virus. Without this vital piece of info then the study is useless.

Well, this is exactly what this study has done and it concluded that "blanket stay-at-home orders had little effect on curbing coronavirus outbreaks".

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8294507/New-study-reveals-blueprint-getting-Covid-19-lockdown.html

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260v1.full.pdf

[yuyiinthesky]

11 hours ago, steelepulse said:

 

It is remarkable, isn't it, that all the lockdown fanatics would have you believe that lockdowns were so crucial in controlling the virus, and then it turns out that, well, actually, 'the vast majority of countries had decreased infection rates' after lockdowns were lifted'.

 

So lockdowns not so crucial after all then. Despite all the earnest hysteria.

Lockdowns and the preference towards lockdowns have a lot to do with how the governments think of their citizens.

Some think they are stupid, don't understand, and need to get forced to do what they should do, and impose draconian lockdowns, order the police to enforce them.

Others respect their citizens, treat them as adults, explain what they think they should do, allow discussion, encourage them to follow the guidelines, but respect their decision if they don't.

(I was astonished to see South Korea in the second group, they seem to have a lot of respect for their citizens there. Definitely on my list of countries to visit now.)

All what you can achieve with a draconian lockdown (assuming it would achieve something useful) you can achieve without it, as long as you have a convincing case for what you want and explain it to your citizens. 

So in my humble opionion this all boils down to the lockdown governments thinking they have to force their citizens because they are too stupid to understand. Which also leads to nonsense orders such as beach bans. A lot of the lockdown fans here seem to share that understanding of their fellow citizens, seeing them as being too stupid to understand.

Of course ordering lockdowns is much more easy than presenting good arguments. Or allowing discussions, questioning. Heaven forbid, different opinions, discussions, oh no (a big thanks for censoring and deleting them to Google, Twitter, FakeBook)!  So for many countries, and many posters here on TVF, "ordering" it is. 

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Lockdowns and the preference towards lockdowns have a lot to do with how the governments think of their citizens.

Some think they are stupid, don't understand, and need to get forced to do what they should do, and impose draconian lockdowns, order the police to enforce them.

Others respect their citizens, treat them as adults, explain what they think they should do, allow discussion, encourage them to follow the guidelines, but respect their decision if they don't.

(I was astonished to see South Korea in the second group, they seem to have a lot of respect for their citizens there. Definitely on my list of countries to visit now.)

All what you can achieve with a draconian lockdown (assuming it would achieve something useful) you can achieve without it, as long as you have a convincing case for what you want and explain it to your citizens. 

So in my humble opionion this all boils down to the lockdown governments thinking they have to force their citizens because they are too stupid to understand. Which also leads to nonsense orders such as beach bans. A lot of the lockdown fans here seem to share that understanding of their fellow citizens, seeing them as being too stupid to understand.

Of course ordering lockdowns is much more easy than presenting good arguments. Or allowing discussions, questioning. Heaven forbid, different opinions, discussions, oh no (a big thanks for censoring and deleting them to Google, Twitter, FakeBook)!  So for many countries, and many posters here on TVF, "ordering" it is. 

 

That's right, we see this in Spain and Italy where there is zero respect for the citizens and they are effectively treated like criminals from the outset. Same in the UK.

[nauseus]

14 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Well, this is exactly what this study has done and it concluded that "blanket stay-at-home orders had little effect on curbing coronavirus outbreaks".

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8294507/New-study-reveals-blueprint-getting-Covid-19-lockdown.html

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260v1.full.pdf

Old stuff with inconclusive conclusions. They missed so much. 

[Bkk Brian]

19 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Well, this is exactly what this study has done and it concluded that "blanket stay-at-home orders had little effect on curbing coronavirus outbreaks".

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8294507/New-study-reveals-blueprint-getting-Covid-19-lockdown.html

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260v1.full.pdf

That tells us nothing, you've pointed to links that are for a separate non peer reviewed study and paper not the one by JP Morgan which is what the threads about, again the J P morgan study does not list the countries it bases its findings on, so its impossible to make a valuation as to its credibility.

[yuyiinthesky]

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Old stuff with inconclusive conclusions. They missed so much. 

Why did I know you would have to make such a comment ???? ????

[Logosone]

15 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

That tells us nothing, you've pointed to links that are for a separate non peer reviewed study and paper not the one by JP Morgan which is what the threads about, again the J P morgan study does not list the countries it bases its findings on, so its impossible to make a valuation as to its credibility.

That's not correct.

 

The JP Morgan study is a note to clients I understand which explicitly refers to Denmark seeing continued falls in its R number despite re-opening, it also refers to Germany which has largely had an R Number below 1 despite opening up for business, it also refers to several US states which have continued to see no major spikes in cases despite opening up, such as Alabama, Wisconsin and Colorado. In fact their R numbers decreased after they abandoned lockdowns.

 

The JP Morgan study is done by an employee with a well paid job, who sent out a note to clients, so you can be sure there is no way he would do that if he were not sure what he is saying is correct. Markovic also refers to several studies in his note to clients I understand.

 

One such study is the one I linked to above which clearly shows that the data from 30 countries does not support the conclusion that full mandatory lockdowns had a beneficial impact on the pandemic.

 

I would suggest that JP Morgan has credibility since they are a business providing advice to the clients in the US and their analysis is not driven by political considerations, but only by giving correct advice to clients.

[Bkk Brian]

34 minutes ago, Logosone said:

That's not correct.

 

The JP Morgan study is a note to clients I understand which explicitly refers to Denmark seeing continued falls in its R number despite re-opening, it also refers to Germany which has largely had an R Number below 1 despite opening up for business, it also refers to several US states which have continued to see no major spikes in cases despite opening up, such as Alabama, Wisconsin and Colorado. In fact their R numbers decreased after they abandoned lockdowns.

 

The JP Morgan study is done by an employee with a well paid job, who sent out a note to clients, so you can be sure there is no way he would do that if he were not sure what he is saying is correct. Markovic also refers to several studies in his note to clients I understand.

 

One such study is the one I linked to above which clearly shows that the data from 30 countries does not support the conclusion that full mandatory lockdowns had a beneficial impact on the pandemic.

 

I would suggest that JP Morgan has credibility since they are a business providing advice to the clients in the US and their analysis is not driven by political considerations, but only by giving correct advice to clients.

What? Do you deliberately lie? It is correct, your links were for a completely separate study that has been debated to death in a previous thread.

 

Please provide a link in the study that refers to Denmark, Germany and several US states because I cannot see that claim. I can then make my own test on the results.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Bkk Brian

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Why did I know you would have to make such a comment ???? ????

You didn't know. To prove such a claim you must post a prediction. ???? 

[Logosone]

2 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

What? Do you deliberately lie? It is correct, your links were for a completely separate study that has been debated to death in a previous thread.

 

Please provide a link in the study that refers to Denmark, Germany and several US states because I cannot see that claim. I can then make my own test on the results.

Keep your laughable insults, I already provided the link. Read what was provided.

 

It's again mentioned here as well, just for another source:

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1286058/US-coronavirus-news-JP-Morgan-study-lockdown-covid-19-infection-death-rates-donald-trump

[nauseus]

19 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

And the countries without lockdowns, why did also they have decreased infection rates? According to your logic, they shouldn't - but also they have decreased infection rates.

I don't understand why you are so strongly into lockdowns, fighting against every hint that they might be not needed. Do you just enjoy being locked up, or are there other reasons?

Show me a country where decreased infection rates have not followed some form of lockdown.

 

I am not strongly into lockdowns, the only one that should have been necessary was in China. 

[Bkk Brian]

57 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Keep your laughable insults, I already provided the link. Read what was provided.

 

It's again mentioned here as well, just for another source:

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1286058/US-coronavirus-news-JP-Morgan-study-lockdown-covid-19-infection-death-rates-donald-trump

A link to a news report, the same thing in the SUN another UK tabloid, the Mail and also at Fox news. No the study is not contained in any of them only cherry picked excerpts for click bait, but here it is for you.

 

The summary of the J.P Morgan Derivatives Strategy 20 May 2020 Market and Volatility Commentary Political risks of pandemic

 

 https://imgcdn.larepublica.co/cms/2020/05/21180548/JP-Morgan.pdf

 

Such a fine scientific note to its investors

 

 

[nauseus]

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

A link to a news report, the same thing in the SUN another UK tabloid, the Mail and also at Fox news. No the study is not contained in any of them only cherry picked excerpts for click bait, but here it is for you.

 

The summary of the J.P Morgan Derivatives Strategy 20 May 2020 Market and Volatility Commentary Political risks of pandemic

 

 https://imgcdn.larepublica.co/cms/2020/05/21180548/JP-Morgan.pdf

 

Such a fine scientific note to its investors

 

 

Thanks for posting this simplistic attempt to make JP Morgan great again.

 

Of course there were lower infections right after the lockdowns - much of the spread was halted by them!

[Bkk Brian]

8 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Thanks for posting this simplistic attempt to make JP Morgan great again.

 

Of course there were lower infections right after the lockdowns - much of the spread was halted by them!

Exactly

[GroveHillWanderer]

19 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

And the countries without lockdowns, why did also they have decreased infection rates?

There are very few countries that had no lockdown measures. Brazil was one. How are their numbers doing recently?

 

In case you weren't sure, Here's a graph showing the rolling 7-day average of deaths per capita there.