Johns Hopkins study: "Lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument."

DanM wrote:

joed||rt wrote:

It's funny how every time a new variant comes around New Zealand decides it's going to wait another six months to open its borders. They said they were going to learn to live with COVID in October, now, they are saying they will start letting in foreigners from other countries in July of 2022. I think Omicron may accelerate the process as it is starting to kick up there in a significant way. Considering even the vaccinated and boosted are getting COVID and they already have Omicron, it is only a matter of time before it runs through the populace.

Australia and New Zealand are Orwellian societies. I will never visit those countries.

New Zealand wine is crap. No wonder the price is so low.

New Zealand is a beautiful country but it is unfortunately a country that has been forever changed by COVID PTSD (which is weird because COVID never hit them hard). Even the July "reopening" is still with the caveat that the foreigners entering the country have to quarantine when they arrive.

DanM wrote:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/lockdowns-reduced-covid-19-mortality-by-2-study-finds-lockdowns-should-be-rejected-out-of-hand

The researchers – Johns Hopkins University economics professor Steve Hanke, Lund University economics professor Lars Jonung, and special advisor at Copenhagen's Center for Political Studies Jonas Herby – analyzed the effects of lockdown measures such as school shutdowns, business closures, and mask mandates on COVID-19 deaths.

"We find little to no evidence that mandated lockdowns in Europe and the United States had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality rates," the researchers wrote.

Until we flatten the curve. Of course. The Science has been clear on this

thankfully most right wing rubes are too poor/ lazy to visit NZ. They are wowed by the capital building in Lincoln.

Dan M promising not to vist NZ is like Don Jr promising never to join Mensa. It was never going to happen.

hmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:

Your arc is actually pretty sad. Nothing more than an overly verbose troll. You’ve always added nothing to the conversation, now you’re just transparent.

Harambe also frequently expresses animus towards Boomers.

A123 wrote:

hi there wrote:

I wear a mask and I haven’t been sick in two years

I din't wear mask all my life and got sick very rarely once in several years

last year I wore mask, got to vaccines and still gov covid - despite scince saying it's almost immpossible as mask protects and vaccine is safe and effective

well maybe I will ignore science for now and will not wear mask anymore and skip all future boosters

You sure you got covid, and not covfefe?

Most people value safety and security more than freedom and liberty, even if said ‘safety’ is merely an illusion.

A few points:

1. In academic research, it is not standard operating procedure for grant-providers to review papers in advance of publication. Nearly all journals require to make a conflict of declaration where you state funding bodies and attest they did influence the work.

2. You need to use observational data here and so there is no pure "unmitigated covid" control possibility. Everywhere in the world had covid, and there are zero places with no mitigation. Economists, epidemiologists, and others qualified to do these analyses are faced with how to estimate causal impacts in the face of these conditions. If you do an economics PhD, this is why you learn econometrics. Other fields just call it statistics.

3. The basic goal of causal inference is to weigh data measuring conditions under one circumstances vs. conditions where that circumstance did not exist to estimate a causal effect. Weighing death rates vs. "imaginary death rates if there were no lockdowns" is what you have to do to estimate a causal impact of lockdowns. Economists are going to do what they can to exploit heterogeneity in covid policies to get a handle on how different policies lead to different results. It's challenging work and no economist would stake their lives on the results being 100% true.

When things work right, everyone does as clever of analyses as they can with the observational data available to them. This appears to be a good faith example of this process at work.

Noyankee wrote:

Harambe wrote:

You just have a terrible immune system, probably because you're a boomer

And you are a punk and a coward, and incredibly stupid.

Are you allowed to directly call people stupid on this website?

hmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:

Your arc is actually pretty sad. Nothing more than an overly verbose troll. You’ve always added nothing to the conversation, now you’re just transparent.

I don’t even read his posts. Just a waste of time.

New Zealand leadership should have charges brought against it at the International Criminal Court after unleashing Barry Manilow music on its population in a desperate attempt to silence dissenting voices.

Barry Manilow music blasted to disperse vaccine protesters (msn.com)