JP Morgan study shows lockdowns did not alter course of pandemic

[Bkk Brian 1,884]

38 minutes ago, Logosone said:

I am afraid you can not argue that mandatory full lockdown was the sole cause of reducing transmissions in New Zealand. Simply because New Zealand has also embarked on one of the most ambitious testing regimes of any country in the world, and isolated the infected.

 

Very obviously this has had an effect on the transmission figure. To attribute it solely to the lockdown is just wrong.

Again why is it I don't debate with you, because you make assumptions that are untrue. I have never argued that Lockdowns were the sole cause of any countries success as that would be a ridiculous position to be in, do you really think a country would lockdown and do nothing else.

 

Obviously when lockdowns are enforced they go together with testing, tracing etc etc. Would you also like me to point out that once they've traced and tested, those who have infections are sent to hospital if needed, yea seriously that happens in lockdowns, I know right, unbelievable isn't it, they don't even mention it in some reports when referring to lockdowns but really its true.

 

I pointed out the main contributions to New Zealands and Austria's success according to the experts was lockdown. You disagree of course with the experts who stated this, thats fine I accept that from a non expert, really, its your choice on what you believe, end of debate. ta ta

Edited May 25 by Bkk Brian

[Lacessit 15,533]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The only falsehood here is your totally false allegation, Wolloomooloo. New Zealand has tested more than most nations on earth, isolated the infected and that is the main reason why it succeeded in containing the pandemic, not lockdown.

 

That's not a falsehood. A falsehood is to claim that lockdown caused the stop in transmission. Very obviously mass testing on the scale that New Zealand did, isolating the infected has a major impact. We saw it with Germany, we saw it with South Korea, and we saw it with New Zealand. They just happened to use a hard lockdown as well, but that was not as important as their mass testing and isolating the infected.

 

Wear a mask if you have to to appease your overlords. Don't tell me what to do.

You seem to have omitted Australia in your response, the usual attempt at misdirection and obfuscation.

I'm not telling you what to do, I was just inquiring if you are still an arrogant and inconsiderate a##ehole who doesn't care if he infects others.

[chessman 831]

24 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The prospect of large crowds of tourists caused one seaside town to buckle and declare that they would open public toilets to stop visitors relieving themselves in parks and beaches. 

Great Yarmouth Borough Council's leader Carl Smith said yesterday: 'With the bank holiday weekend and second week of relaxed restrictions bringing the increased possibility of more tourists venturing further afield, we have decided to re-open a limited number of seafront toilets at Great Yarmouth and Gorleston from tomorrow for emergency use in the interests of public health, which remains our top priority."

Well, if they are opening up some the seafront toilets in Great Yarmouth then I admit defeat. Such action proves that people have reverted to their normal behaviour.

you got me.

I look forward to the next JP Morgan study that uses this startling and irrefutable fact to show the errors of the 100s of countries that foolishly persued NPIs.

 

Why bother with complex graphs showing changes in social interaction when you can just check if public toilets are open?

Edited May 25 by chessman

[Logosone 5,945]

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Again why is it I don't debate with you, because you make assumptions that are untrue. I have never argued that Lockdowns were the sole cause of any countries success as that would be a ridiculous position to be in, do you really think a country would lockdown and do nothing else.

 

Obviously when lockdowns are enforced they go together with testing, tracing etc etc. Would you also like me to point out that once they've traced and tested, those who have infections are sent to hospital if needed, yea seriously that happens in lockdowns, I know right, unbelievable isn't it, they don't even mention it in some reports when referring to lockdowns but really its true.

 

I pointed out were the main contributions to New Zealands and Austria's success according to the experts was lockdown. You disagree of course, thats fine I accept that from a non expert, really, its your choice on what you believe, end of debate. ta ta

You clearly implied it was lockdowns that ended New Zealand's pandemic. Your post "New Zealand did well after lockdown" is there for all to see. And you repeat it above again. It's not an assumption on my part. Another poster had mentioned the Kiwis and you agreed, saying "Yes, they did well after lockdown". 

 

However, you omit to qualify this with the fact that New Zealand embarked on a giant testing and isolation programme, which very obviously was a causative factor, most likely the main causative factor, in ending New Zealand's pandemic.

 

As for your fetish for "experts", plenty of experts have concluded that lockdowns had no effect on pandemic parametres, witness Nobel Prize Winner Michael Levitt:

 

"Nobel prize-winning scientist says Australia 'panicked' when it went into lockdown and made a 'huge mistake' - as he claims the country is a 'standout loser' for devastating the economy"

Stanford University professor of structural biology Michael Levitt, who specialises in mathematical models, branded lockdowns a 'huge mistake'.  Professor Levitt, who won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 2013, said he was in favour of 'herd immunity', which means letting enough of the population catch the virus to develop immunity so that it doesn't spread.

 

"He said Germany and Sweden had been the standout winners in their response to the coronavirus.

'They didn't practice too much lockdown, enough people got sick to get some herd immunity,' 

'And the standout losers are Austria, Australia, Israel, which have had strict lockdowns without many cases. They have damaged their economies, society, harmed the education of their children but not obtained any herd immunity.'  

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8281795/Nobel-winning-scientist-says-Australias-lockdowns-huge-mistake-medical-experts-disagree.html

 

So you can go with your New Zealand health board official, I'll go with my Nobel Prize winning Standford university professor. We'll each have our own experts.

[Logosone 5,945]

13 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

You seem to have omitted Australia in your response, the usual attempt at misdirection and obfuscation.

 

See above, I just posted an article about a Nobel Prize winning scientists who says that Australia was a stand-out loser in the pandemic because it put in place a lockdown that achieved nothing but to damage the Australian economy. Just for you. Enjoy.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8281795/Nobel-winning-scientist-says-Australias-lockdowns-huge-mistake-medical-experts-disagree.html

[Lacessit 15,533]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

See above, I just posted an article about a Nobel Prize winning scientists who says that Australia was a stand-out loser in the pandemic because it put in place a lockdown that achieved nothing but to damage the Australian economy. Just for you. Enjoy.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8281795/Nobel-winning-scientist-says-Australias-lockdowns-huge-mistake-medical-experts-disagree.html

A response to my enquiry seems to be missing.

I wouldn't call 102 deaths as against nearly 100,000 in the USA achieving nothing.

[Bkk Brian 1,884]

10 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

So you can go with your New Zealand health board official, I'll go with my Nobel Prize winning Standford university professor. We'll each have our own experts.

Yes please do, Your Nobel Prize winning no less Standford uni prof and your JP Morgan report. Great.....................phew..................

[chessman 831]

12 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Stanford University professor of structural biology Michael Levitt, who specialises in mathematical models, branded lockdowns a 'huge mistake'.  Professor Levitt, who won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 2013,

I watched a long video with him, his ideas are very interesting but it must also be said, his Nobel prize and his expertise are in a completely different field.
 

He was also a big supporter of mask-wearing and felt that they had helped Asian countries immeasurably. How do you feel about that, Logosone?

[impulse 19,374]

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

A response to my enquiry seems to be missing.

I wouldn't call 102 deaths as against nearly 100,000 in the USA achieving nothing.

 

That may just come down to differences in how health care is doled out...

 

[Lacessit 15,533]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Yes please do, Your Nobel Prize winning no less Standford uni prof and your JP Morgan report. Great.....................phew..................

I seem to remember Yasser Arafat was a Nobel Peace Prize winner.

[Lacessit 15,533]

Just now, impulse said:

 

That may just come down to differences in how health care is doled out...

 

Or a belated response to a national threat.

[In the jungle 432]

I always take my heath advice from a bank that needed a 12 Billion bailout in the 2008 financial crisis.

[Lacessit 15,533]

2 minutes ago, chessman said:

I watched a long video with him, his ideas are very interesting but it must also be said, his Nobel prize and his expertise are in a completely different field.
 

He was also a big supporter of mask-wearing and felt that they had helped Asian countries immeasurably. How do you feel about that, Logosone?

It's called cherry-picking what suits one's argument.

[Kinnock 3,249]

8 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You clearly implied it was lockdowns that ended New Zealand's pandemic. Your post "New Zealand did well after lockdown" is there for all to see. And you repeat it above again. It's not an assumption on my part. Another poster had mentioned the Kiwis and you agreed, saying "Yes, they did well after lockdown". 

 

However, you omit to qualify this with the fact that New Zealand embarked on a giant testing and isolation programme, which very obviously was a causative factor, most likely the main causative factor, in ending New Zealand's pandemic.

 

As for your fetish for "experts", plenty of experts have concluded that lockdowns had no effect on pandemic parametres, witness Nobel Prize Winner Michael Levitt:

 

"Nobel prize-winning scientist says Australia 'panicked' when it went into lockdown and made a 'huge mistake' - as he claims the country is a 'standout loser' for devastating the economy"

Stanford University professor of structural biology Michael Levitt, who specialises in mathematical models, branded lockdowns a 'huge mistake'.  Professor Levitt, who won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 2013, said he was in favour of 'herd immunity', which means letting enough of the population catch the virus to develop immunity so that it doesn't spread.

 

"He said Germany and Sweden had been the standout winners in their response to the coronavirus.

'They didn't practice too much lockdown, enough people got sick to get some herd immunity,' 

'And the standout losers are Austria, Australia, Israel, which have had strict lockdowns without many cases. They have damaged their economies, society, harmed the education of their children but not obtained any herd immunity.'  

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8281795/Nobel-winning-scientist-says-Australias-lockdowns-huge-mistake-medical-experts-disagree.html

 

So you can go with your New Zealand health board official, I'll go with my Nobel Prize winning Standford university professor. We'll each have our own experts.

.... and New Zealand has not even started the COVID marathon yet. 

 

When they eventually allow international travel, they join the frey.

 

- Unless they are planning on keeping their borders closed for the next 2 years.  

 

All lockdowns are an unscientific panic reaction with no logical end game, hence the staged lifting when economic pressures force a change of tactics.

 

If no vaccine and no 60% immune population - what scientific reason is there to lift a lockdown?

 

The fundamental issue is that few people have the experience and knowledge to understand the data, so politicians, reporters, most social media posters and many 'experts' have reacted emotionally and not logically.  It's the Dunning-Kruger effect on a global scale.

 

And none of the lockdown theories can explain how in Thailand, after the scenes of packed skytrains and malls a week ago, we don't have a spike in cases.  And for people thinking it's solely due to under-reporting - why are Thai hospitals half empty?

 

[Kinnock 3,249]

15 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

A response to my enquiry seems to be missing.

I wouldn't call 102 deaths as against nearly 100,000 in the USA achieving nothing.

Much larger population in US in both numbers and obesity, different reporting criteria, sgnificantly higher population density in New York which accounted for a high proportion of the costs, and probably most significant - worse health system, especially for lower socio-economic ethnic groups.

 

Fatality rate is primarily driven by standards of health care plus age/health of the population, which explains Iran, Italy, Russia, UK, Brazil.  Government response is an insignificant factor on the path of the pandemic, but a huge factor on the economic economic impact.