COVID-19 'Pandemic'
- Thread starter Ocean Breeze
- Start date
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
Yes, I can certainly see that as an issue having suffered depression and having panic attacks myself.
Yes, I can certainly see that as an issue having suffered depression and having panic attacks myself.
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
I don't know how many times I have to say that the lockdown has not worked in the USA. Stop staying it's worked because it hasn't.
And 66% of people in New York State who have been to hospital with coronavirus recently are people who contracted it in lockdown.
So stop saying it worked.
I don't know how many times I have to say that the lockdown has not worked in the USA. Stop staying it's worked because it hasn't.
And 66% of people in New York State who have been to hospital with coronavirus recently are people who contracted it in lockdown.
So stop saying it worked.
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
How do you know it hasn't worked?
If contracted during lockdown would that not mean they didnt follow lockdown suggestions including meticulous hygiene?
How do you know it hasn't worked?
If contracted during lockdown would that not mean they didnt follow lockdown suggestions including meticulous hygiene?
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
Because I've read the brilliant study conducted into it.
The lockdowned states in America are faring worse than the non-lockdowned ones, just as lockdowned countries are faring worse than non-lockdowned ones.
There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns
Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sp...o-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/amp/
REVEALED: 66% of New York state coronavirus hospitalizations are people staying at HOME and NOT essential workers - which begs question: Does lockdown even work?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...rus-hospitalizations-people-staying-HOME.html
Because I've read the brilliant study conducted into it.
The lockdowned states in America are faring worse than the non-lockdowned ones, just as lockdowned countries are faring worse than non-lockdowned ones.
There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns
Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sp...o-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/amp/
REVEALED: 66% of New York state coronavirus hospitalizations are people staying at HOME and NOT essential workers - which begs question: Does lockdown even work?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...rus-hospitalizations-people-staying-HOME.html
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
Mainly some of the sparsest populated states in the U.S. Lockdowns there are mainly unneeded so your post is mainly a moot issue. If you are trying to compare Wyoming with N.Y., Texas or California, YOU are an idiot!
Mainly some of the sparsest populated states in the U.S. Lockdowns there are mainly unneeded so your post is mainly a moot issue. If you are trying to compare Wyoming with N.Y., Texas or California, YOU are an idiot!
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
An advocate of lockdowns could object that the social-distancing (but non-lockdowned) states are little places, located in America’s ‘flyover land’. While this charge might be based as much on bias as reality – Utah, Nebraska and South Carolina are sizable places – the next step of my analysis was to adjust for population, using a standard deaths-per-million metric. In alphabetical order, the seven social-distancing states experienced 12, 19, 11, 12, 8, 7 and three deaths per million – for an average of 10 deaths per million when you exclude South Carolina and 12 with South Carolina included.
Again, these numbers compare very favourably to the US as a whole, despite adjusting for population. Across all US states, the number of deaths per million varied from 828 (New York) to three (Wyoming), for an average of 69. With New York removed from the mix, the hardest-hit remaining state was New Jersey, with 8,480 cases and 396 deaths. The average number of cases-per-million across the states minus New York was 1,392 and the average number of deaths-per-million was 54. Comparing the social-distancing states plus South Carolina to US states minus New York, the social-distancing states experienced 663 fewer cases per million and 42 fewer deaths per million on average than the lockdown states.
Next, I ran a regression model. For those unfamiliar with academic statistical methods, regression – in this case linear regression – is a computerised mathematical technique that allows researchers to measure the influence of one variable on another with all of the other factors that might be relevant held constant. In this case, the variables for each state included in my model were: population, population density, median income, median age, diversity (measured as the percentage of minorities in a population), and the state’s Covid-19 response strategy (0 = lockdown, 1 = social distancing). The data set used to construct this model is available for anyone to request it.
The question the model set out to ask was whether lockdown states experience fewer Covid-19 cases and deaths than social-distancing states, adjusted for all of the above variables. The answer? No. The impact of state-response strategy on both my cases and deaths measures was utterly insignificant.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sp...o-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/amp/
An advocate of lockdowns could object that the social-distancing (but non-lockdowned) states are little places, located in America’s ‘flyover land’. While this charge might be based as much on bias as reality – Utah, Nebraska and South Carolina are sizable places – the next step of my analysis was to adjust for population, using a standard deaths-per-million metric. In alphabetical order, the seven social-distancing states experienced 12, 19, 11, 12, 8, 7 and three deaths per million – for an average of 10 deaths per million when you exclude South Carolina and 12 with South Carolina included.
Again, these numbers compare very favourably to the US as a whole, despite adjusting for population. Across all US states, the number of deaths per million varied from 828 (New York) to three (Wyoming), for an average of 69. With New York removed from the mix, the hardest-hit remaining state was New Jersey, with 8,480 cases and 396 deaths. The average number of cases-per-million across the states minus New York was 1,392 and the average number of deaths-per-million was 54. Comparing the social-distancing states plus South Carolina to US states minus New York, the social-distancing states experienced 663 fewer cases per million and 42 fewer deaths per million on average than the lockdown states.
Next, I ran a regression model. For those unfamiliar with academic statistical methods, regression – in this case linear regression – is a computerised mathematical technique that allows researchers to measure the influence of one variable on another with all of the other factors that might be relevant held constant. In this case, the variables for each state included in my model were: population, population density, median income, median age, diversity (measured as the percentage of minorities in a population), and the state’s Covid-19 response strategy (0 = lockdown, 1 = social distancing). The data set used to construct this model is available for anyone to request it.
The question the model set out to ask was whether lockdown states experience fewer Covid-19 cases and deaths than social-distancing states, adjusted for all of the above variables. The answer? No. The impact of state-response strategy on both my cases and deaths measures was utterly insignificant.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sp...o-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/amp/
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
Apparently it's okay for the Republic of Ireland's Taoiseach to break lockdown but not for Boris's adviser to do so...
A tale of two rule-breakers
Why Leo Varadkar's shirtless picnic is causing far less fuss than Dominic Cummings' Durham trip.
BRENDAN O'NEILL
EDITOR
26th May 2020
Spiked
Imagine if Dominic Cummings had been papped at a picnic, back in the early days of lockdown when having a picnic was against the rules. His shirt off, tucking into grub and booze, gleefully failing to social distance from his fellow picnickers. It would be frontpage news. ‘The elite living it up while the rest of us suffer’, every boring lockdown leftist would cry, ad nauseum. Which is funny because this scenario has occurred, though featuring Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar rather than chattering-class bete noire Dominic Cummings, and, you won’t be surprised to hear, there has been virtually no fuss.
A few days ago, photos emerged showing Varadkar and his partner, Matthew Barrett, having a picnic with friends in Phoenix Park in Dublin. At first, the photos were just floating around social media. The media, especially the notoriously unctuous Irish media, were not interested. Eventually, however, notice had to be taken. The pics were published in the press. They made their way over to the UK media too, in the BBC, the Guardian and elsewhere. And guess what tone these reports struck? Yep, they were sympathetic, supportive. ‘Nothing to see here.’
Now, as it happens, I agree there is nothing to see here. I fully support the Taoiseach’s, and every other Irish person’s, right to have a picnic, even if Ireland’s stringent lockdown advice says picnics are not allowed. And the advice has said that, pretty plainly. Indeed, a few days before the Taoiseach’s ‘shirtless picnic’, as the media refer to it, his own assistant secretary, Liz Canavan, advised against picnicking. ‘If you’re visiting a public amenity, try not to stay too long at the site or have picnics… do your exercise and go home’, she said.
Varadkar, her boss, the man who runs Ireland and has been promoting the lockdown and social distancing for weeks, was not exercising. He was picnicking. What’s more, the current guidelines in Ireland say that you can meet one or two people from other households so long as you maintain a two-metre distance. The Taoiseach’s get-together in the sun looked far cosier than that.
To me, that’s fine. I don’t think anyone – Varadkar, Cummings, Neil Ferguson, people crowding on to beaches, kids smoking weed in parks – should be slammed for exercising their judgement and bending lockdown rules. But some people, especially in the media, do care about the lockdown rules. A lot. Just witness their borderline deranged fury with Cummings for driving to Durham, not to whip his shirt off and eat and drink with friends, but to keep his ill family safe in an uncertain period. That caused media hysteria, including in Ireland, whereas Varadkar’s picnic generated only a tiny amount of criticism in the Irish press. Everyone else has shrugged their shoulders.
Why the double standards? Everyone knows the answer to this question. It’s because of politics. Varadkar is every Remoaner’s favourite Brexit-blocker, a man cheered for behaving like a patsy of the EU over the past couple of years. Cummings, on the other hand, is viewed as evil incarnate – the man who helped to deliver Brexit and Boris to Downing St and who, in the process, shattered the dreams of the Remainer elites and the woke left. They loathe him, and their weird, obsessive, creepy focus on where he went during lockdown is transparently an extension of that loathing.
It’s so clear now that the Cummings fuss has nothing to do with car journeys, Durham, Barnard Castle or any of the other crap. This is Remoaner Revenge and chattering-class politicking dolled up as concern about the pandemic. That’s why Varadkar is forgiven for having a shirtless picnic while Cummings is demonised for driving north to protect his wife and child from media intrusion. How about this: we forgive them both and move the hell on.
Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/05/26/a-tale-of-two-rule-breakers/
Apparently it's okay for the Republic of Ireland's Taoiseach to break lockdown but not for Boris's adviser to do so...
A tale of two rule-breakers
Why Leo Varadkar's shirtless picnic is causing far less fuss than Dominic Cummings' Durham trip.
BRENDAN O'NEILL
EDITOR
26th May 2020
Spiked
Imagine if Dominic Cummings had been papped at a picnic, back in the early days of lockdown when having a picnic was against the rules. His shirt off, tucking into grub and booze, gleefully failing to social distance from his fellow picnickers. It would be frontpage news. ‘The elite living it up while the rest of us suffer’, every boring lockdown leftist would cry, ad nauseum. Which is funny because this scenario has occurred, though featuring Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar rather than chattering-class bete noire Dominic Cummings, and, you won’t be surprised to hear, there has been virtually no fuss.
A few days ago, photos emerged showing Varadkar and his partner, Matthew Barrett, having a picnic with friends in Phoenix Park in Dublin. At first, the photos were just floating around social media. The media, especially the notoriously unctuous Irish media, were not interested. Eventually, however, notice had to be taken. The pics were published in the press. They made their way over to the UK media too, in the BBC, the Guardian and elsewhere. And guess what tone these reports struck? Yep, they were sympathetic, supportive. ‘Nothing to see here.’
Now, as it happens, I agree there is nothing to see here. I fully support the Taoiseach’s, and every other Irish person’s, right to have a picnic, even if Ireland’s stringent lockdown advice says picnics are not allowed. And the advice has said that, pretty plainly. Indeed, a few days before the Taoiseach’s ‘shirtless picnic’, as the media refer to it, his own assistant secretary, Liz Canavan, advised against picnicking. ‘If you’re visiting a public amenity, try not to stay too long at the site or have picnics… do your exercise and go home’, she said.
Varadkar, her boss, the man who runs Ireland and has been promoting the lockdown and social distancing for weeks, was not exercising. He was picnicking. What’s more, the current guidelines in Ireland say that you can meet one or two people from other households so long as you maintain a two-metre distance. The Taoiseach’s get-together in the sun looked far cosier than that.
To me, that’s fine. I don’t think anyone – Varadkar, Cummings, Neil Ferguson, people crowding on to beaches, kids smoking weed in parks – should be slammed for exercising their judgement and bending lockdown rules. But some people, especially in the media, do care about the lockdown rules. A lot. Just witness their borderline deranged fury with Cummings for driving to Durham, not to whip his shirt off and eat and drink with friends, but to keep his ill family safe in an uncertain period. That caused media hysteria, including in Ireland, whereas Varadkar’s picnic generated only a tiny amount of criticism in the Irish press. Everyone else has shrugged their shoulders.
Why the double standards? Everyone knows the answer to this question. It’s because of politics. Varadkar is every Remoaner’s favourite Brexit-blocker, a man cheered for behaving like a patsy of the EU over the past couple of years. Cummings, on the other hand, is viewed as evil incarnate – the man who helped to deliver Brexit and Boris to Downing St and who, in the process, shattered the dreams of the Remainer elites and the woke left. They loathe him, and their weird, obsessive, creepy focus on where he went during lockdown is transparently an extension of that loathing.
It’s so clear now that the Cummings fuss has nothing to do with car journeys, Durham, Barnard Castle or any of the other crap. This is Remoaner Revenge and chattering-class politicking dolled up as concern about the pandemic. That’s why Varadkar is forgiven for having a shirtless picnic while Cummings is demonised for driving north to protect his wife and child from media intrusion. How about this: we forgive them both and move the hell on.
Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/05/26/a-tale-of-two-rule-breakers/
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
In this video we look at completely dangerous news from Momentum in a Zoom conference. This time they are plotting to get our food production and union-regulated companies to strike for just the reason of crashing the economy to blame lockdown and the government!
And they wonder why they have recently suffered their worst election result since 1935.
Check it out.
In this video we look at completely dangerous news from Momentum in a Zoom conference. This time they are plotting to get our food production and union-regulated companies to strike for just the reason of crashing the economy to blame lockdown and the government!
And they wonder why they have recently suffered their worst election result since 1935.
Check it out.
Re: COVIDD-19 'Pandemic'
66% practiced shitty hygiene and careless behavior. Awesome.
So, you have absolutely nothing to show it doesnt work?
66% practiced shitty hygiene and careless behavior. Awesome.