Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study 21:36 - Feb 1 with 5643 viewsTrequartista

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jan/31/lockdowns-had-little-or-no-impa

Interesting...

Poll: Who do you blame for our failure to progress?

-3
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 21:47 - Feb 1 with 2620 viewsSarge

I’ve thought from the beginning that if a cost-benefit analysis was done they’d have been considered unviable because the financial and social cost was so high but I’m a little surprised the benefits were apparently so low particularly as cases certainly declined as a result of them and in the first half of the pandemic cases and deaths were closely linked.

This bit though comes as absolutely no surprise to me, I’m glad we never went full Australia on being so ridiculously strict on what people get up to outdoors.

“Lockdowns have limited peoples’ access to safe (outdoor) places such as beaches, parks, and zoos, or included outdoor mask mandates or strict outdoor gathering restrictions, pushing people to meet at less safe (indoor) places,” they wrote. “Indeed, we do find some evidence that limiting gatherings was counterproductive and increased COVID-19 mortality.””
0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:05 - Feb 1 with 2573 viewsGuthrum

Hang on, if I'm reading that right, they're taking their baseline from what must have been (given the date of May 2020) an early-stage 'prominent study' estimate of the number of deaths? How is that in any way rigourous? Compared with, say, looking at infection levels rising and falling against the timing of lockdowns.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

6
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:09 - Feb 1 with 2539 viewsElderGrizzly

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:05 - Feb 1 by Guthrum

Hang on, if I'm reading that right, they're taking their baseline from what must have been (given the date of May 2020) an early-stage 'prominent study' estimate of the number of deaths? How is that in any way rigourous? Compared with, say, looking at infection levels rising and falling against the timing of lockdowns.


Wasn’t the argument for lockdowns not on deaths, but reducing the numbers catching it and ending up in hospital.

Which it absolutely did.
6
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:15 - Feb 1 with 2519 viewsMattinLondon

Ok, I’m going to be the thick poster who asks the really simple questions.

Sweden didn’t have a lockdown as such (compared to other countries) and they had a very high mortality rate per capita regarding Covid. Australia and New Zealand had strict lockdowns and their death rates have been low even in the high density urban areas.

So how is this study viable?

Also, isn’t their findings all subjective? Simply as lockdowns happened rather than a hung-go herd mentality type of thing? to debate.

Stupidity over (well for now).
0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:15 - Feb 1 with 2515 viewsGuthrum

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:09 - Feb 1 by ElderGrizzly

Wasn’t the argument for lockdowns not on deaths, but reducing the numbers catching it and ending up in hospital.

Which it absolutely did.


Nmbers of deaths are obviously linked to hospitalisations (most likely to go through the latter before the other happens). I was more questioning their basis for claiming it had minimal effect.

Which might be down to a poorly-written article, rather than the actual research, to be fair.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:17 - Feb 1 with 2490 viewsElderGrizzly

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:15 - Feb 1 by Guthrum

Nmbers of deaths are obviously linked to hospitalisations (most likely to go through the latter before the other happens). I was more questioning their basis for claiming it had minimal effect.

Which might be down to a poorly-written article, rather than the actual research, to be fair.


Agree, that could be the end result of hospitalisations.

But lockdowns were always positioned as a way to reduce the spread first and foremost which it did

The study does appear to be given short shrift by the medical community
0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:20 - Feb 1 with 2463 viewsStokieBlue

So a study based on data on the least contagious strain of covid benchmarked against an estimated deaths of a model.

Given you hate models, why do you accept the model they are referencing with regards to deaths whilst rejecting most others?

I'm surprised John Hopkins have published this, we have clear evidence that lockdowns reduce spread and thus deaths, it's almost undisputable (even in this country we see the drastic reduction in R when lockdowns are introduced). Lets see how the rest of the scientific community respond to this report because lockdowns were introduced to reduce spread and deaths and they were effective at doing that.

SB
[Post edited 1 Feb 2022 22:39]

Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula

3
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:21 - Feb 1 with 2438 viewsXYZ

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:15 - Feb 1 by Guthrum

Nmbers of deaths are obviously linked to hospitalisations (most likely to go through the latter before the other happens). I was more questioning their basis for claiming it had minimal effect.

Which might be down to a poorly-written article, rather than the actual research, to be fair.


I recall that many thousands died in care homes in the UK without going to hospital.
0
Login to get fewer ads

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:26 - Feb 1 with 2416 viewsJakeITFC

I think a cost benefit of lockdown v not is probably a fairly viable analysis to happen at some point, but I don’t see how there can be any argument against lockdown being an effective way of stopping the spread of the virus (and therefore hospitalisations and deaths) because it reduces the transmission of it by its very nature.

The conclusion reached in the article linked is incredibly flawed and is not the first kind of revisionism that’s crept into public life of late.
2
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:30 - Feb 1 with 2379 viewsGuthrum

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:21 - Feb 1 by XYZ

I recall that many thousands died in care homes in the UK without going to hospital.


It was worse than that. Quite a lot of people were released from hospital into care homes, then died.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

3
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:34 - Feb 1 with 2352 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:20 - Feb 1 by StokieBlue

So a study based on data on the least contagious strain of covid benchmarked against an estimated deaths of a model.

Given you hate models, why do you accept the model they are referencing with regards to deaths whilst rejecting most others?

I'm surprised John Hopkins have published this, we have clear evidence that lockdowns reduce spread and thus deaths, it's almost undisputable (even in this country we see the drastic reduction in R when lockdowns are introduced). Lets see how the rest of the scientific community respond to this report because lockdowns were introduced to reduce spread and deaths and they were effective at doing that.

SB
[Post edited 1 Feb 2022 22:39]


I'm not sure he wrote the study!

Edit....lol, now that's one heavy edit you just did there. Probably for the best.
[Post edited 1 Feb 2022 22:37]

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

-1
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:45 - Feb 1 with 2278 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:26 - Feb 1 by JakeITFC

I think a cost benefit of lockdown v not is probably a fairly viable analysis to happen at some point, but I don’t see how there can be any argument against lockdown being an effective way of stopping the spread of the virus (and therefore hospitalisations and deaths) because it reduces the transmission of it by its very nature.

The conclusion reached in the article linked is incredibly flawed and is not the first kind of revisionism that’s crept into public life of late.


I wonder if all that QE money will go in the costs or benefits column....I guess it will depend on who you are!
[Post edited 1 Feb 2022 23:00]

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:53 - Feb 1 with 2242 viewsSwansea_Blue

Caution warning. It appears to be lead authored by a conservative libertarian think tank “special advisor” educated to Masters level, and published in a non-peer reviewed research paper series for students of Henke.

It may be sound and I’m not able to critique it, but I’d be interested to see what researchers in the field think of it.

Poll: Do you think Pert is key to all of this?

1
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:56 - Feb 1 with 2232 viewsRyorry

Only started watching this halfway thru ep 2/2 tonight, but it was riveting -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001441s/the-decade-the-rich-won-series-1-

Edit - sorry, should have been a reply to Bankster's last post re QE.

2nd edit - soz, just seen you posted it as separate thread, Bankster!
[Post edited 1 Feb 2022 22:59]

Poll: Why can't/don't we protest like the French do? 🤔

1
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:59 - Feb 1 with 2218 viewslowhouseblue

the conclusions are interesting. their real thesis is that voluntary behavioural changes have been more powerful than mandated behavioural changes. they don't seem to be saying that social distancing wasn't needed - just that for countries where communication etc triggered voluntary changes then mandated changes ("lockdowns") added relatively little. they say that the problem in sweden wasn't the lack of lockdown but poor communications from the government which essentially caused people not to take the risk seriously enough. the concluding section is worth reading - i have no idea if their method (essentially a trawl of a sub-set of previously published studies) is robust.

edit - and it's written by economists, so championing voluntary change over mandated change may be their built in starting point.
[Post edited 1 Feb 2022 23:01]

And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show

-1
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 23:02 - Feb 1 with 2197 viewsTrequartista

I merely commented that it is interesting (in that it goes very much against the grain of what we've been told).

I haven't looked at it in any detail at all so i have no opinion for or against this study yet, but some replies here have given me some good starting points to consider, thanks.

Poll: Who do you blame for our failure to progress?

0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 23:28 - Feb 1 with 2109 viewsStokieBlue

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 23:02 - Feb 1 by Trequartista

I merely commented that it is interesting (in that it goes very much against the grain of what we've been told).

I haven't looked at it in any detail at all so i have no opinion for or against this study yet, but some replies here have given me some good starting points to consider, thanks.


Out of interest, is the Washington Times one of the usual sources you browse or do you have a search setup just to find covid articles that may back your stance so you can post them (seemingly without bothering to read them from your own admission)?

It's an awful publication, it's list of controversies is longer than it's history on Wiki. Some highlights:

- Climate change denial
- Ozone depletion denial
- Second-hand smoke denial
- Publishing studies claiming covid was a Chinese biological weapon
- White nationalism
- Racism
- Neo-Confederatism
- Islamophobia
- Falsely accusing Russia of testing nuclear weapons

Now one should always look at the actual paper being cited but the publication is horrible and clearly has numerous agendas and that should also be considered.

SB

Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula

2
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 07:57 - Feb 2 with 1881 viewsDanTheMan

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 23:02 - Feb 1 by Trequartista

I merely commented that it is interesting (in that it goes very much against the grain of what we've been told).

I haven't looked at it in any detail at all so i have no opinion for or against this study yet, but some replies here have given me some good starting points to consider, thanks.


It's always worth reading the actual study before sharing links to papers that are reporting on the study.

Poll: FM Parallel Game Week 1 (Fulham) - Available Team

2
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:24 - Feb 2 with 1813 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 07:57 - Feb 2 by DanTheMan

It's always worth reading the actual study before sharing links to papers that are reporting on the study.


There was plenty of evidence about the South African experience of omicron that many on here preferred not to see.....so this 'agenda' thing can swing both ways. Personally I see no problem with reading stuff from across the spectrum to come to an informed position.

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

1
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:30 - Feb 2 with 1780 viewsgordon

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:15 - Feb 1 by MattinLondon

Ok, I’m going to be the thick poster who asks the really simple questions.

Sweden didn’t have a lockdown as such (compared to other countries) and they had a very high mortality rate per capita regarding Covid. Australia and New Zealand had strict lockdowns and their death rates have been low even in the high density urban areas.

So how is this study viable?

Also, isn’t their findings all subjective? Simply as lockdowns happened rather than a hung-go herd mentality type of thing? to debate.

Stupidity over (well for now).


They dealt with the problem of the successful lock-downs in Australia, New Zealand and much of South-East Asia by restricting their analysis to Europe and the US.
1
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:31 - Feb 2 with 1776 viewsgordon

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:20 - Feb 1 by StokieBlue

So a study based on data on the least contagious strain of covid benchmarked against an estimated deaths of a model.

Given you hate models, why do you accept the model they are referencing with regards to deaths whilst rejecting most others?

I'm surprised John Hopkins have published this, we have clear evidence that lockdowns reduce spread and thus deaths, it's almost undisputable (even in this country we see the drastic reduction in R when lockdowns are introduced). Lets see how the rest of the scientific community respond to this report because lockdowns were introduced to reduce spread and deaths and they were effective at doing that.

SB
[Post edited 1 Feb 2022 22:39]


It's also not peer-reviewed, it's just a working paper from some economists.
2
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:33 - Feb 2 with 1766 viewsZXBlue

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:24 - Feb 2 by BanksterDebtSlave

There was plenty of evidence about the South African experience of omicron that many on here preferred not to see.....so this 'agenda' thing can swing both ways. Personally I see no problem with reading stuff from across the spectrum to come to an informed position.


Utter nonsense.

People quite properly accepted the scientific consensus that it was too early to reach firm conclusions on omicron based on early SA experience, especially when their demographics are so different.
0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:35 - Feb 2 with 1751 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:30 - Feb 2 by gordon

They dealt with the problem of the successful lock-downs in Australia, New Zealand and much of South-East Asia by restricting their analysis to Europe and the US.


China would be another one. Tbh any sort of supposed cost/benefit analysis of such an issue seems riddled with problems! Let's face it for the usual elites and the comfortably better off the free money train has been chugging along bountifully before and during covid.

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:37 - Feb 2 with 1744 viewsCheltenham_Blue

Absolute twaddle. Of course they did.

Poll: Smooth Mash or Mash with Lumps?

0
Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 08:41 - Feb 2 with 1731 viewsChurchman

Lockdowns don't work according to John Hopkins University study on 22:09 - Feb 1 by ElderGrizzly

Wasn’t the argument for lockdowns not on deaths, but reducing the numbers catching it and ending up in hospital.

Which it absolutely did.


This is the point isn’t it? Surely it was always about slowing the rate of infection to keep as many people out of the hospitals as possible, or at least for as long as possible. Surely avoiding a situation like say Mexico and Brazil where chaos reigned was a good thing? The articles and pictures published at the time didn’t make for good reading and I doubt anyone has the faintest idea how many people died from this dreadful virus there.

Even America with its patchy healthcare provision wound up with body bags in corridors, cupboards and meat freezers. The article is interesting and it’ll be interesting what other studies say on this given its obvious that lockdowns did have awful side effects/fallout.

At the moment, given the unknowns at the time, I believe they were justified and Johnson’s first failure was actually to delay the first lockdown by a couple of weeks. He had the information about what was happening in places like Italy and instead of doing something, presumably slapped on the party hat and cracked open the Bolly.
1
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024