Covid lockdowns Globally

[Logosone]

12 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Stop with the jejune sophistry. We do not agree on that. Not one bit.Have lockdowns worked there? They have succeeded in stopping the spread of the virus within China. China has 1/5 of the world's population. I'd say that's a pretty huge success.  In other nations as well. We can see in natural experiments like the contrast between Sweden and its neighbors how well lockdowns work. Your criterion for success in an impossible one. But by any rational measure, lockdowns work.

 

Maybe you're not sure about China but any rational person should be. China is not North Korea. If the pandemic was raging there, it's absurd to think that it could be hidden. The hospitals would be overrun. There are foreigners living throughout China. Would they not see evidence? Wouldn't they be suffering from Covid too? Or are they part of a conspiracy of silence?

 

 

But you said it above " Lockdowns didn't stop the virus from spreading". That's the whole point. We basically agree.

 

Of course the lockdown in Wuhan did not succeed in stopping the spread of the virus in China. Come on. Everyone knows that.

 

Yes, it would be a huge success if it was due to the lockdowns or any measure done by the Chinese leadership, alas, it may just be that the pandemic ran its course. There is no evidence that lockdown or any measure was the sole cause in the stop of the pandemic. They have may stopped a few transmissions, but drops on hot stones and all that.

 

Sweden is doing perfectly fine btw, several other European countries have higher rates of confirmed cases and deaths per capita than Sweden. Which just goes to show, they hardly used lockdown measures at all. But doing better than some European countries that did use lockdowns.

 

Any rational person would be sure of China's figures? Really. You may want to tell the Lancet, the Guardian and Hong Kong scientists. I guess these men are all "not rational"? Please.

 

"China coronavirus cases may have been four times official figure, says study

 

China reported more than 55,000 cases as of 20 February but, according to research by academics at Hong Kong University’s school of public health, published in the Lancet, the true number would have been far greater if the definition of a Covid-19 case that was later used had been applied from the outset."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/23/china-coronavirus-cases-might-have-been-four-times-official-figure-says-study

 

So excuse me if no, I don't take Chinese figures at face value. The same applies to figures from all Asian countries, btw, Japan, Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan. All very obviously false.

[placeholder]

Just now, Logosone said:

But you said it above " Lockdowns didn't stop the virus from spreading". That's the whole point. We basically agree.

 

Of course the lockdown in Wuhan did not succeed in stopping the spread of the virus in China. Come on. Everyone knows that.

 

Yes, it would be a huge success if it was due to the lockdowns or any measure done by the Chinese leadership, alas, it may just be that the pandemic ran its course. There is no evidence that lockdown or any measure was the sole cause in the stop of the pandemic. They have may stopped a few transmissions, but drops on hot stones and all that.

 

Sweden is doing perfectly fine btw, several other European countries have higher rates of confirmed cases and deaths per capita than Sweden. Which just goes to show, they hardly used lockdown measures at all. But doing better than some European countries that did use lockdowns.

 

Any rational person would be sure of China's figures? Really. You may want to tell the Lancet, the Guardian and Hong Kong scientists. I guess these men are all "not rational"? Please.

 

"China coronavirus cases may have been four times official figure, says study

 

China reported more than 55,000 cases as of 20 February but, according to research by academics at Hong Kong University’s school of public health, published in the Lancet, the true number would have been far greater if the definition of a Covid-19 case that was later used had been applied from the outset."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/23/china-coronavirus-cases-might-have-been-four-times-official-figure-says-study

 

So excuse me if no, I don't take Chinese figures at face value. The same applies to figures from all Asian countries, btw, Japan, Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan. All very obviously false.

Why are you repeating this nonsense? Lockdowns did stop the virus from spreading within China. So that shows that lockdowns can stop the virus and have in several countries. Of course if your criterion is ridiculously stringent and anything less than 100% effectives is disqualifying, then you have a point. Otherwise, not.

That article is over a year old. Even if the figures are 4 times what the Chinese reported, that is still a miniscule number. And once again, if hospitals were overflowing and people dying en masse, that can't be hidden. I haven't seen any reports anywhere of massive numbers of Chinese and foreigners dying. Have you? Or do you subscribe to the Donald Rumsfeld school of forensics "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

[CG1 Blue]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Really?

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/australia

I wouldn't wish ill health on anyone, but I can't help thinking Australians living in Australia are storing up problems for the future by isolating themselves from the pandemic. A bit like parents who disinfect everything their child comes into contact with and end up with a kid who has a weakened immune system. 

Will the Aussie population be more susceptible to Covid when it does the rounds in 2022, 2023 etc? Just a thought. 

[wprime]

1 hour ago, BenDeCosta said:

Throughout history, there have always been pandemics. And humanity survived, thrived even.

 

Never did any government introduce economy-destroying lockdowns.

 

Nature works like this: organisms breed, environmental selection pressures are applied to those organisms, the strong survive and the weak are eliminated, which results in a more resilient population, the weak genes are removed from the gene pool. Rinse and repeat, you end up with a stronger population who can survive almost anything.

 

When you introduce human intelligence, whereby we do everything we can to protect the weak and vulnerable, we are going against nature and allowing the weakest genes to perpetuate. Yes, of course it's human nature to save lives and prevent deaths, but nature doesn't give a rat's ass about that, it applies pressure to the population to eliminate the weakest, which results in a stronger population in the end.

 

If you have a population of zebras in Africa, every time they are attacked by a lion, the slowest one would die. Over time, the zebra population would get faster and faster because the slowest ones would get eaten. That is nature, that is how life works.

 

As conscientious human beings, we don't want anyone to die, we want to save everyone and be as safe as we can. As honorable as that may sound, all we are doing is retarding nature's efforts to make us a stronger population.

 

It's almost like our intelligence and appreciation for life is at odds against nature, who is doing everything she can to improve us.

 

I apologise if that sounds offensive to some, but that's how the world works.

 

Your views on natural selection are incomplete. Positive selection is rarely driven by qualities that help an individual survive - it's primarily driven by qualities that help groups survive and reproduce.

 

Letting other members of your species die is decidedly bad for the survival of a species. This is why humans (and many other species) evolved an innate desire* to protect one another. Because groups of our ancestors that protected each other must have had better survival rates than groups where everyone flees for themselves.

 

So your entire position that letting the virus kill our weak being "natural" could not be further from the truth. Evolution does not care about making species subjectively better, it is solely driven by what yields greater survival and reproduction and letting people die is rarely the best thing for the survival of a species.

 

*Incidentally this desire to protect one another only applies to individuals. Humans never evolved to care about the massive groups of people in today's society. So if 1 person is suffering we want to help, if a million people are suffering and we can't individually identify any, we don't give a <deleted>. As they say, 1 death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic.

[Logosone]

23 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Why are you repeating this nonsense? Lockdowns did stop the virus from spreading within China. So that shows that lockdowns can stop the virus and have in several countries. Of course if your criterion is ridiculously stringent and anything less than 100% effectives is disqualifying, then you have a point. Otherwise, not.

That article is over a year old. Even if the figures are 4 times what the Chinese reported, that is still a miniscule number. And once again, if hospitals were overflowing and people dying en masse, that can't be hidden. I haven't seen any reports anywhere of massive numbers of Chinese and foreigners dying. Have you? Or do you subscribe to the Donald Rumsfeld school of forensics "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

 

I could ask you the same question, why are you repeating this nonsense? Very obviously the Wuhan lockdown DID NOT stop the virus spreading within China. If you think that it did, you're divorced from reality.

 

You just cavalierly declare lockdowns have stopped the virus in several countries, you may want to tell academics investigating this very issue who have published studies saying the exact opposite. Yes there are studies saying that some lockdown measures have worked, but it's a very mixed, contradictory and murky picture.

 

I am not asking for 100% effectiveness at all, but you would have to establish that lockdowns were the sole cause of the end of the pandemic. As far as I can see the pandemic has not even ended yet. Whether it has in China, we shall see, but I certainly would not be surprised if there are clusters that are kept quiet. As we saw from the HK paper published in the Lancet the Chinese have underreported by 400%. I mean, seriously.

 

And not just China, btw, all Asian countries are providing fantasy figures that are no reflection of reality, it is very obvious. I'm not saying people are dying en masse in China, but that China has massively underreported cases and deaths is well established.

 

Don't get me started on Rumsfeld, the evil criminal. 

 

 

 

[brewsterbudgen]

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

I wouldn't wish ill health on anyone, but I can't help thinking Australians living in Australia are storing up problems for the future by isolating themselves from the pandemic. A bit like parents who disinfect everything their child comes into contact with and end up with a kid who has a weakened immune system. 

Will the Aussie population be more susceptible to Covid when it does the rounds in 2022, 2023 etc? Just a thought. 

Maybe Australia will just keep itself isolated from the rest of the world for years to come.  Might not be a completely bad idea.

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

 

[Jeffr2]

14 hours ago, James105 said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-53150808

 

Peru.

 

"The county's borders were shut, curfews were imposed, and people could only leave their homes for essential goods - but infections and deaths continued to rise."

There are several reasons Peru is in trouble.  One being a low vaccinate rate, the other is a vast majority ignored safety standards.  Still going out despite curfews, not social distancing and not wearing masks.  From that article, which doesn't prove your point at all.

 

Peru's vaccination drive has been slow, with less than 4% of the country fully vaccinated.

 

These jobs are by their nature unpredictable, and mean many workers have to chose between going out to work or not having enough money to survive.

 

"Peruvians who went out to work had to use public transport, and to sell goods in very crowded markets," Peruvian economist Hugo Ñopo told the BBC.

 

On top of this, the latest National Household Survey suggests 11.8% of poor households in Peru live in overcrowded homes.

 

Cramped housing makes social distancing harder and allows the virus to spread more easily.

[Jeffr2]

14 hours ago, BenDeCosta said:

 

Or, why don't you show us some evidence that lockdowns do anything to prevent the spread of a virus? That should be more interesting seeing as there isn't any.

 

It's pretty simple.  If people aren't moving about, the virus can't spread.  China proved that and continues to do targeted lockdowns to control the spread of the virus. 

 

Are lockdowns perfect?  Absolutely not.  In the US, even when there were lockdowns, people were having private parties and creating super spreader events.  Violating the purpose of a lockdown. 

 

We had lock downs here, but they didn't work because people were crossing the border illegally who were sick.  Or, like this last wave, it was a politician visiting a casino across the border and bringing the virus back with him.

 

Also, many of the lockdowns were too little too late.  Like in the US.  And then, they were made political, so many just ignored them.

 

[Jeffr2]

12 hours ago, Logosone said:

 

I could ask you the same question, why are you repeating this nonsense? Very obviously the Wuhan lockdown DID NOT stop the virus spreading within China. If you think that it did, you're divorced from reality.

 

<snip>

 

https://ldi.upenn.edu/healthpolicysense/wuhan-lockdown-halted-spread-coronavirus-across-china

 

Wuhan Lockdown Halted Spread of Coronavirus Across China

 

Without the Wuhan lockdown, the researchers estimate that between January 23, 2020 and February 29, 2020, COVID-19 cases would have been 65% higher in the 347 Chinese cities outside Hubei province, and 53% higher in the 16 non-Wuhan cities inside Hubei, even with the social distancing measures implemented by other cities.

 

The results from our analysis provide valuable causal evidence on the role of human mobility restrictions on the containment and delay of the spread of contagious viruses, including the 2019-nCoV virus that is now ravaging the world. Social distancing, and, if an epicenter can be identified as was the case for the city of Wuhan in China, a lockdown, can play crucial roles in “flattening” the daily infection cases curve, giving the stressed medical system a chance to regroup and deal with the onslaught of new infection cases.

[Fromas]

You can't argue with them Jeffr2, for most deniers their minds are made up. Any data you cite will be dumped with 10 questions what about this, what about that, ad nauseum.

[Jeffr2]

9 minutes ago, Fromas said:

You can't argue with them Jeffr2, for most deniers their minds are made up. Any data you cite will be dumped with 10 questions what about this, what about that, ad nauseum.

Agreed!  Boggles my mind how people deny the severity of this virus and the actions taken to control it.  Stunning.

[Jeffr2]

We're in a lock down, right?  Guess where the cases are coming from?

 

https://thepattayanews.com/2021/06/04/chonburi-covid-19-cases-rise-to-101-as-two-new-clusters-found-one-death/

 

Most cases have come from small social gatherings according to authorities.

 

The details on today’s cases given were:

1. Cluster at Suksawat Pansadet ice factory in Si Racha, 49 cases. The factory will be ordered for a temporary closure from today.
2. Cluster Chinese party, 10 cases (district was not given)
3. Close contact from previous confirmed case from Rayong, 1 case
4. Close contact from previous confirmed case from Chachoengsao, 1 case
5. Contact from previous confirmed cases
   • In families, 8 cases
   • In work places, 12 cases

[Logosone]

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

https://ldi.upenn.edu/healthpolicysense/wuhan-lockdown-halted-spread-coronavirus-across-china

 

Without the Wuhan lockdown, the researchers estimate that between January 23, 2020 and February 29, 2020, COVID-19 cases would have been 65% higher in the 347 Chinese cities outside Hubei province, and 53% higher in the 16 non-Wuhan cities inside Hubei, even with the social distancing measures implemented by other cities.

 

The results from our analysis provide valuable causal evidence on the role of human mobility restrictions on the containment and delay of the spread of contagious viruses, including the 2019-nCoV virus that is now ravaging the world. Social distancing, and, if an epicenter can be identified as was the case for the city of Wuhan in China, a lockdown, can play crucial roles in “flattening” the daily infection cases curve, giving the stressed medical system a chance to regroup and deal with the onslaught of new infection cases.

 

Thanks for the big caps, but I've seen the studies. If you read your link you'll see this is merely mathematical modelling, ie pie in the sky conjecture, of the kind Neil Ferguson provided, who famously predicted 2 million dead in the US. We have to accept that mathematical modelling can be deeply flawed and is just not the real world.

 

In the real world 5 million people had left Wuhan before the lockdown took place. Incredibly more than 50% of the urban population of Wuhan. Why did they leave? Because the authorities put up a sign there would be a lockdown. Do you think 5 million Wuhan refugees spread the virus? They did. The lockdown directly helped spread the pandemic to other parts of China and the world.

 

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3047720/chinese-premier-li-keqiang-head-coronavirus-crisis-team-outbreak

 

In the real world China continued to have outbreaks long after the Wuhan lockdown was finished:

 

"On 9 April, a COVID-19 cluster was detected in Heilongjiang Province, which started with an asymptomatic patient returning from the United States and quarantining at home. The US CDC reported that the infections were initially spread through a shared elevator used at different times, and led to at least 71 cases by 22 April.

 

In June 2020, an outbreak with 45 people testing positive at Xinfadi Market in Beijing caused some alarm. 

 

On 26 July, China saw its highest number of daily cases since March, mostly from outbreaks in Xinjiang and Liaoning 

 

On October 11, officials in Qingdao urged to carry out contact tracing and mass testing after 12 new cases were found connected to the Qingdao Chest Hospital. On October 12, it was announced that Qingdao would test all 9 million of its residents.

 

In October, 137 asymptomatic cases were detected in Kashgar, Xinjiang and were linked to a garment factory.

 

On December 18, a local case was reported in Beijing. It was the first local infection in 152 days in Beijing. As of 27 December, thirteen more cases have been detected.

 

Another outbreak linked to a traveler from South Korea was reported in Liaoning late December.

 

On January 7, 2021, Dalian authorities reported 51 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 31 asymptomatic carriers.

 

On January 6, 2021, after reporting 63 new cases in the northern province of Hebei, of which 20 were infections and 43 asymptomatic cases locally transmitted, the local Government decided to lockdown the Capital city of Shijiazhuang, as most of the cases were detected there.

 

On January 14, Wangkui County of Suihua City, Heilongjiang Province moved into lockdown after reporting 40 confirmed COVID-19 cases.

 

Also on January 14, China reported the first death from the virus after eight months, a patient from Hebei.

 

On April 4, China saw the largest number of reported COVID-19 cases in over two months, with 15 new reported cases of local transmission in the city of Ruili on the Burmese border.

 

On 30 May 2021, authorities shut down Liwen district in Guangdong and Yantian port in Shenzhen due to an outbreak in Guangdong province.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_mainland_China

 

So you can post that Wuhan stopped the pandemic in China, but it's just not true. As I said, it may have stopped a certain number of transmissions. It did not stop the virus in China, or the world for that matter. Nor did any of the other lockdowns. Hard lockdowns in UK, Spain, Italy, none stopped the pandemic.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_mainland_China

Edited June 4, 2021 by Logosone

[Jeffr2]

28 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

Thanks for the big caps, but I've seen the studies. If you read your link you'll see this is merely mathematical modelling, ie pie in the sky conjecture, of the kind Neil Ferguson provided, who famously predicted 2 million dead in the US. We have to accept that mathematical modelling can be deeply flawed and is just not the real world.

 

In the real world 5 million people had left Wuhan before the lockdown took place. Incredibly more than 50% of the urban population of Wuhan. Why did they leave? Because the authorities put up a sign there would be a lockdown. Do you think 5 million Wuhan refugees spread the virus? They did. The lockdown directly helped spread the pandemic to other parts of China and the world.

 

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3047720/chinese-premier-li-keqiang-head-coronavirus-crisis-team-outbreak

 

In the real world China continued to have outbreaks long after the Wuhan lockdown was finished:

 

"On 9 April, a COVID-19 cluster was detected in Heilongjiang Province, which started with an asymptomatic patient returning from the United States and quarantining at home. The US CDC reported that the infections were initially spread through a shared elevator used at different times, and led to at least 71 cases by 22 April.

 

In June 2020, an outbreak with 45 people testing positive at Xinfadi Market in Beijing caused some alarm. 

 

On 26 July, China saw its highest number of daily cases since March, mostly from outbreaks in Xinjiang and Liaoning 

 

On October 11, officials in Qingdao urged to carry out contact tracing and mass testing after 12 new cases were found connected to the Qingdao Chest Hospital. On October 12, it was announced that Qingdao would test all 9 million of its residents.

 

In October, 137 asymptomatic cases were detected in Kashgar, Xinjiang and were linked to a garment factory.

 

On December 18, a local case was reported in Beijing. It was the first local infection in 152 days in Beijing. As of 27 December, thirteen more cases have been detected.

 

Another outbreak linked to a traveler from South Korea was reported in Liaoning late December.

 

On January 7, 2021, Dalian authorities reported 51 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 31 asymptomatic carriers.

 

On January 6, 2021, after reporting 63 new cases in the northern province of Hebei, of which 20 were infections and 43 asymptomatic cases locally transmitted, the local Government decided to lockdown the Capital city of Shijiazhuang, as most of the cases were detected there.

 

On January 14, Wangkui County of Suihua City, Heilongjiang Province moved into lockdown after reporting 40 confirmed COVID-19 cases.

 

Also on January 14, China reported the first death from the virus after eight months, a patient from Hebei.

 

On April 4, China saw the largest number of reported COVID-19 cases in over two months, with 15 new reported cases of local transmission in the city of Ruili on the Burmese border.

 

On 30 May 2021, authorities shut down Liwen district in Guangdong and Yantian port in Shenzhen due to an outbreak in Guangdong province.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_mainland_China

 

So you can post that Wuhan stopped the pandemic in China, but it's just not true. As I said, it may have stopped a certain number of transmissions. It did not stop the virus in China, or the world for that matter. Nor did any of the other lockdowns. Hard lockdowns in UK, Spain, Italy, none stopped the pandemic.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_mainland_China

I gave up after you dismissed mathematical modeling.  Guess you don't understand how it works and what it's used for.  You're totally missing the point, but being a covid denier, we understand.  Sadly.

[brewsterbudgen]

1 hour ago, Jeffr2 said:

We're in a lock down, right?  Guess where the cases are coming from?

 

https://thepattayanews.com/2021/06/04/chonburi-covid-19-cases-rise-to-101-as-two-new-clusters-found-one-death/

 

Most cases have come from small social gatherings according to authorities.

 

The details on today’s cases given were:

1. Cluster at Suksawat Pansadet ice factory in Si Racha, 49 cases. The factory will be ordered for a temporary closure from today.
2. Cluster Chinese party, 10 cases (district was not given)
3. Close contact from previous confirmed case from Rayong, 1 case
4. Close contact from previous confirmed case from Chachoengsao, 1 case
5. Contact from previous confirmed cases
   • In families, 8 cases
   • In work places, 12 cases

Are "we" in lock-down?  I'm at work right now, as are plenty of others; shopping malls are open, public transport is operating normally and restaurants are open.  Surely a lock-down can only be effective if it truly means people stay at home?  Thailand seems to think it's just a matter of closing bars, schools and parks!

[Jeffr2]

25 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Are "we" in lock-down?  I'm at work right now, as are plenty of others; shopping malls are open, public transport is operating normally and restaurants are open.  Surely a lock-down can only be effective if it truly means people stay at home?  Thailand seems to think it's just a matter of closing bars, schools and parks!

That's kinda what I was trying to say.  "we" are in a lockdown....supposedly.  But it's not really.  And thus, the virus is spreading.  No easy answers here and the world is still trying to figure out how to deal with this virus.

 

I had a friend in the US, a covid denier.  Complaining that lockdowns don't work (he gave up saying masks don't work! LOL).  I showed him where the cases were coming from.  This was a few months ago.  They were coming from younger people throwing parties, participating in sports, and then spreading the virus around from there, mostly to their families.  The young have this idea that they can't get sick, so why wear a mask or social distance.  They don't get it.  Like a few here...LOL.

[James105]

4 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

There are several reasons Peru is in trouble.  One being a low vaccinate rate, the other is a vast majority ignored safety standards.  Still going out despite curfews, not social distancing and not wearing masks.  From that article, which doesn't prove your point at all.

 

Peru's vaccination drive has been slow, with less than 4% of the country fully vaccinated.

 

These jobs are by their nature unpredictable, and mean many workers have to chose between going out to work or not having enough money to survive.

 

"Peruvians who went out to work had to use public transport, and to sell goods in very crowded markets," Peruvian economist Hugo Ñopo told the BBC.

 

On top of this, the latest National Household Survey suggests 11.8% of poor households in Peru live in overcrowded homes.

 

Cramped housing makes social distancing harder and allows the virus to spread more easily.

 

This is why I deliberately did not use Peru in my earlier example, as someone like yourself will come along and claim different demographics, vaccination state etc and ignore the fact that when comparing 2 US states that did and did not lockdown there is no difference in outcomes. 

 

So how about we go back to why the lockdowns in California have made no difference to the outcomes compared to a non lockdown state like Florida.   These 2 states have similar demographics (although Florida has slightly older population so should actually be worse), healthcare, vaccine status etc.   If lockdowns worked as you say they do then why is there no difference in outcomes?  What do you say to a Californian who has had his business destroyed?   That lockdowns work?  What do you say to him when he points to Florida and says that they clearly don't and can back up his claim with cold, hard numbers by comparing the California outcomes with Florida?  

[Logosone]

58 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

I gave up after you dismissed mathematical modeling.  Guess you don't understand how it works and what it's used for.  You're totally missing the point, but being a covid denier, we understand.  Sadly.

 

No, you're missing the point, Jeff. Mathematical modelling is only symbols, it's not reality. Blind faith in mathematical modelling is foolish, as we saw when Neil Ferguson made his false predictions at the start of the pandemic, 2 million dead in the US and so on, all based on mathematical modelling.

 

The reality is that the covid pandemic continued long after the Wuhan lockdown. The Wuhan lockdown did not stop the pandemic. How could it, when 5 million of Wuhan's population, more than half its urban population, left the city? The lockdown announcement in Wuhan actually helped to spread the virus around China, as 5 million Wuhan residents spread across China.

 

What's sad is that people have this blind faith in lockdown, something which has self-evidently not stopped the pandemic, which is still ongoing.

 

I'm obviously not a "covid denier", but I understand ad-hominem is the last refuge for those losing an argument.

Edited June 4, 2021 by Logosone

[James105]

4 hours ago, Fromas said:

You can't argue with them Jeffr2, for most deniers their minds are made up. Any data you cite will be dumped with 10 questions what about this, what about that, ad nauseum.

 

Nobody on here who is a "lockdown believer" is able to explain why California (enforced lockdown/masks) and Florida (no lockdown, no mask), 2 states in the US that have the same demographics, climate, wealth, healthcare have the same outcomes for covid (although California is a little worse).    

 

It's difficult for me to believe that "lockdowns work" when I look at clear evidence to the contrary.   Perhaps you can help me understand these 2 US states and how lockdown is "working" in California even though they are doing a little worse compared to an equivalent state that hasn't locked down.     

[Fromas]

37 minutes ago, James105 said:

Nobody on here who is a "lockdown believer" is able to explain why California (enforced lockdown/masks) and Florida (no lockdown, no mask), 2 states in the US that have the same demographics, climate, wealth, healthcare have the same outcomes for covid (although California is a little worse).  

 

What is your basis for comparing the two states? Choice of time period? The exact same points of pandemic spread? Inbound-outbound population (especially international)?

 

Lockdowns don't work. In the absolute sense (they don't work at all, Covid is not an airborne disease) or in a practical sense (they were mandated but compliance was a problem, social cost is too high)? What do you mean by "work" or "don't work"?

 

 

References:
California Lockdown Suppressed Excess Pandemic Deaths | UC San Francisco  >>  Excess deaths among Latino people in California during the COVID-19 pandemic

 

 

 

Edited June 4, 2021 by Fromas

[thaibeachlovers]

On 6/3/2021 at 5:34 PM, Logosone said:

Obviously if they were done in a perfect way, at the perfect time then lockdowns would work, but the supposed lockdowns in most countries are not really lockdowns, people go out to buy food, commuters come into the country and usually were put in place far too late.

Agree. NZ had a 4 week lockdown, but still allowed immigrants to come in, many of which have corona, but caught in quarantine. However, in a ( IMO ) barking decision allowed Australians to arrive recently without quarantine, and of course it's all gone wrong with the outbreak in Australia. That's with less than 50% of NZ vaccinated.

 

If they were going to put us through a lockdown, IMO they should have banned ALL ( including NZ citizens ) from entering till at least 70% vaccinated, and if that had taken 2 years so be it.

 

If going to allow people in without quarantine might as well not have bothered with the lockdown IMO.

[Logosone]

5 minutes ago, Fromas said:

 

they don't work at all, Covid is not an airborne disease

 

 

That's far from certain, Covid of course is the disease, but the virus that spreads it may well be spread through airborne transmission:

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00869-2/fulltext

[Fromas]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

the virus that spreads it may well be spread through airborne transmission:

 

 

Quite right. THAT IS WHY lockdowns (I mean it in a generic non-technical way) work.

 

With the method of transmission in mind, you would have to tailor "lockdowns" to the particular community or area.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2021 by Fromas

[Logosone]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Agree. NZ had a 4 week lockdown, but still allowed immigrants to come in, many of which have corona, but caught in quarantine. However, in a ( IMO ) barking decision allowed Australians to arrive recently without quarantine, and of course it's all gone wrong with the outbreak in Australia. That's with less than 50% of NZ vaccinated.

 

If they were going to put us through a lockdown, IMO they should have banned ALL ( including NZ citizens ) from entering till at least 70% vaccinated, and if that had taken 2 years so be it.

 

If going to allow people in without quarantine might as well not have bothered with the lockdown IMO.

 

Yes, lockdowns would work, but only if they are done at a time when there is very little spread of the virus and the whole area where it has spread is contained in the hard manner you have described. So essentially only in the very early stages.

 

Due to the nature of lockdowns of huge cities and countries, they have always been done too late. Witness the Chinese Wuhan lockdown, where the Chinese helpfully put up a notice that a lockdown would come, thus enabling 5 million residents of Wuhan to escape, more than half the 8 million urban population.

 

Or in the West, like Germany, they were done imperfectly, allowing commuters, air travel, etc. In effect a lockdown ALWAYS has to allow people to go buy food, let trucks in for food supplies. So it is questionable if a real lockdown is even possible.

Edited June 4, 2021 by Logosone

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, Fromas said:

 

Quite right. THAT IS WHY lockdowns (I mean it in a generic non-technical way) work. 

 

 

They don't work, if "work" means ending the pandemic. They can stop a number of transmissions, but whether those numbers are sufficient to stop a pandemic is still to be shown. Doesn't look like it so far.

[Fromas]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

So it is questionable if a real lockdown is even possible.

 

So lockdowns "don't work" because they "can't work" in the real world.

 

Then we're stuck in a semantic debate. You're in your corner, I in mine.

 

I'd encourage you to look at real world data. The pandemic is not yet over and humankind has work to be done.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

In effect a lockdown ALWAYS has to allow people to go buy food, let trucks in for food supplies. So it is questionable if a real lockdown is even possible.

So true.

All through the 4 week NZ lockdown people were going to the local supermarket, mixing less than 1 meter apart, and most didn't wear masks, yet how many caught corona locally- ZERO.

 

NB Luckily I don't live in Auckland.

[Fromas]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

They don't work, if "work" means ending the pandemic.

 

You're not quite right. Good lockdowns stop the spread. Imperfect lockdowns can slow down the spread.

 

Lockdowns do NOT end the pandemic. Vaccines, and preventative/therapeutic cures are needed too.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, Fromas said:

 

So lockdowns "don't work" because they "can't work" in the real world.

 

Then we're stuck in a semantic debate. You're in your corner, I in mine.

 

I'd encourage you to look at real world data. The pandemic is not yet over and humankind has work to be done.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure if Sweden was doing really badly it would be used as a stick to beat us that don't believe in lockdowns.

However, as no one even mentions it anymore I guess it's doing just fine.