Is Covid-19 just a hype?

[borro]

Wow that is shocking... wonder what hospital that is...

Think it's somewhere in the Bronx. But not 100% certain.
Princess from Portland:

 

[Verde]

Economic damage could be worse without lockdown and social distancing, study finds

The worst thing for the economy would be not acting at all to prevent disease spread, followed by too short a lockdown, according to research based on US data.

phys.org

The linked paper is 56 pages long and goes through a lot of scenarios including herd immunity.

I wasted my time reading this paper. Another garbage in garbage out model.
The authors clearly consulted the fear mongers when setting their variables.
They assume 100% of working age population will get symptomatic illness with an average recovery time of 20 days. This results in 40% of workforce incapacitated at peak.

Bergamo shows it is as lethal to under 65s as average Flu (0.06% IFR or 6/10000).
We know a large % are not symptomatic.

It is self evident this disease will only keep a fraction as many working age people away from work as a hard lockdown.

 

[tetrasect]

Think it's somewhere in the Bronx. But not 100% certain.
Princess from Portland:

lol is she really complaining about getting fired because her hospital doesn't have enough patients? What a bitch.

 

[Sensorei]

It's a pretty alarming line to mess up on, if you dont know the difference between a DNA virus and an RNA virus.

100%. That was a big noob error by those docs. Enough to question their credibility.

 

[borro]

lol is she really complaining about getting fired because her hospital doesn't have enough patients? What a bitch.

Entitlement overflowing...
They did the patient(s) a big favor by letting her go.

 

[Hamish McPanji]

He's only interested in anti-lockdown propaganda.

You're right.

 

[Tun@]

Looked back & don't see mention of it but there was a 2nd Wittkowski vid released 29 April

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Looked back & don't see mention of it but there was a 2nd Wittkowski vid released 29 April

Does he address why his previous predictions were so woefully, catastrophically wrong?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

I wasted my time reading this paper. Another garbage in garbage out model.
The authors clearly consulted the fear mongers when setting their variables.
They assume 100% of working age population will get symptomatic illness with an average recovery time of 20 days. This results in 40% of workforce incapacitated at peak.

Bergamo shows it is as lethal to under 65s as average Flu (0.06% IFR or 6/10000).
We know a large % are not symptomatic.

It is self evident this disease will only keep a fraction as many working age people away from work as a hard lockdown.

Where does it say that?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

100%. That was a big noob error by those docs. Enough to question their credibility.

That would be bad enough, but the frankly amateur 'mistakes' they make are just embarrasssing.

Unless their intent was something else. Gee, I wonder what they could be up to...

Oh... there it is.

Cue the debunking: Two California doctors go viral with dubious COVID test conclusions

The doctor duo lit up social media with conclusions about their clinic’s coronavirus tests — but infectious disease modelers quickly assailed their claims as statistically flawed.

www.mercurynews.com

But already the Bakersfield doctors — who tout their support of President Donald Trump and refuse to wear masks in public — had become heroes on social platforms and conservative media outlets, with some commenters calling them “brave.” Others who support continuing to shelter-in-place described the doctors as self-promoters whose chain of urgent care centers would benefit from reopening.

 

[Tun@]

Does he address why his previous predictions were so woefully, catastrophically wrong?

I don't think his theory has changed - what did you pick up on that was so wrong?

Most of the scary looking graphs i see getting posted don't seem to like looking back too far.
If one looks at what @Verde posted here there's nothing exceptional going on versus what was seen previously in 1997/1999/2000.

Is Covid-19 just a hype?

:sleep: The numbers of deaths will always be smaller than the actual number of deaths because it hasn't been updated yet! Yet you are saying it's because the cdc revised their figures and that I'm implying a conspiracy?! Lay down the pineapple! I don't get the pineapple reference. Hasn't...

mybroadband.co.za

That more or less fits in with what Wittkowski has been saying

 

[OrbitalDawn]

I don't think his theory has changed - what did you pick up on that was so wrong?

Most of the scary looking graphs i see getting posted don't seem to like looking back too far.
If one looks at what @Verde posted here there's nothing exceptional going on versus what was seen previously in 1997/1999/2000.

Is Covid-19 just a hype?

:sleep: The numbers of deaths will always be smaller than the actual number of deaths because it hasn't been updated yet! Yet you are saying it's because the cdc revised their figures and that I'm implying a conspiracy?! Lay down the pineapple! I don't get the pineapple reference. Hasn't...

mybroadband.co.za

That more or less fits in with what Wittkowski has been saying

He said, at the start of April, that in 3 or 4 weeks the epidemic would be over with 10k dead.

They're now on 70k already with no sign of stopping.

[05:44.05]	JOHN:And how many, in your estimation, would have died? Would it have been that much?
[05:48.25]	WITTKOWSKI:Okay. We have, right now, let’s take realistic numbers in the United Sates: we have about 25,000 cases every day, that is probably the upper limit—make it 30,000—who knows? But let’s talk about 25,000. 2% of them will actually have symptoms—that is 500 cases a day. Maybe a third or a fifth—let’s say half of them—will need to be hospitalized. That’s 250 patients a day. If they have been hospitalized for about 10 days, that means that we will have—our hospital system will have to deal with 2,500 patients every day for a certain period of time—that could be 3 or 4 weeks, and then the number will dramatically decrease again and the whole epidemic will be over.
[06:51.20]	JOHN:And of those hospitalized cases, what, in your estimation, how many would die?
[06:59.15]	WITTKOWSKI:2% will die—
[07:03.00]	JOHN:Of the hospitalized cases?
[07:05.19]	WITTKOWSKI:Of all cases.
[07:06.26]	JOHN:Of all symptomatic cases.
[07:06.26]	WITTKOWSKI: Of all symptomatic cases. 2% of all symptomatic cases will die. That is 2% of the 250,00 a day. So that is 500 people a day, and that will happen over 4 weeks. So, that could be as high as 10,000 people.

And I have no idea how you can think the chart Verde posted there shows it's "nothing exceptional". It shows the worst years on record and this is going to blow past that shortly. How is that not exceptional?

 

[Tun@]

He said, at the start of April, that in 3 or 4 weeks the epidemic would be over with 10k dead.

They're now on 70k already with no sign of stopping.

And I have no idea how you can think the chart Verde posted there shows it's "nothing exceptional". It shows the worst years on record and this is going to blow past that shortly. How is that not exceptional?

Hmm ok - We'll ignore the new death recording methods their using & say he never knocked it out of the park there but i think his overall view with 35 years in the game is worth a listen to. Ditto what he has to say about vaccine.

I don't see it as exceptional versus other years looking at that UK data - maybe it will blow past it & maybe it won't but the lockdown damage is certainly going to be exceptional

 

[Verde]

Where does it say that?

On page 15-16:
In agreement with recent papers by economists on the spread of the COVID-19 disease, we set ..... the recovery rate γ at 1/20 implying a duration of illness of 20 days.

And this graph on pg 41 shows 100% susceptible at start (green) and 100% removed (red) (ie dead or immune after illness) at end.
It shows 40% absent from work at peak- this is clearly garbage.

 

[tetrasect]

View attachment 834358

Covid hyper walks into barber

Barber - what ya want fam ?

Hyper - just eff my lockdowns up.

Barber - gotcha covered

You're not comparing with their neighbours?

Here's the reason:

 

[Jabulani22]

Here's the reason:
View attachment 834680

View attachment 834682

Now do Tokyo

 

[tetrasect]

I really feel like it's time for the "lockdown is worse than the virus" crowd to provide some evidence of this claim.

So far 250,000 people have died from this virus globally (that's with lockdowns in effect, we can easily assume multiple times more deaths without lockdowns).
How many people have died from the lockdowns?
What predictive model are you using to support your claim that lockdowns kill more people than if we go back to normal and let the virus "do it's thing"?

I think it's only fair to take into account the deaths the lockdowns have actually prevented so far (murders, accidents, flu deaths etc) and subtract those from the number of deaths due to the lockdowns.

 

[Temujin]

I really feel like it's time for the "lockdown is worse than the virus" crowd to provide some evidence of this claim.

So far 250,000 people have died from this virus globally (that's with lockdowns in effect, we can easily assume multiple times more deaths without lockdowns).
How many people have died from the lockdowns?
What predictive model are you using to support your claim that lockdowns kill more people than if we go back to normal and let the virus "do it's thing"?

I think it's only fair to take into account the deaths the lockdowns have actually prevented so far (murders, accidents, flu deaths etc) and subtract those from the number of deaths due to the lockdowns.

With that line of thinking, we should never open up, hard lockdown forever, virus or not #policestatesaveslives

 

[Nicodeamus]

150 000 people die each day. So far its not even two days of excessive deaths worldwide. That hardly justifies all of these measures.

 

[tetrasect]

Now do Tokyo

Do what with Tokyo?

With that line of thinking, we should never open up, hard lockdown forever, virus or not #policestatesaveslives

That's not true and I think you know that lol

150 000 people die each day. So far its not even two days of excessive deaths worldwide. That hardly justifies all of these measures.

I didn't ask if you thought it was justified, I asked for evidence showing that the lockdown will kill more people than the virus would do without a lockdown.
Also, using that logic where do you draw the line? Is it fine to murder someone cause "it's nothing compared to how many people die each day"?