The lockdowns resulted from models that predicted 2.2 million deaths if we didn't lock down, based on an assumed fatality rate of 2.4% or higher. We now know, through the work of 1) Stanford University School of Medicine; 2) University of Southern California/L.A. County Public Health Dept.; 3) The University of Bonn in Germany; 4) Oxford University; 5) antibody studies done in Colorado, Massachusetts and New York, and 5) research printed in The Lancet that this rate is far lower than 1%, with some decent evidence it's no more lethal than the seasonal flu.
My brother postulated that Fauci, Birx, etc., know this rate doesn't justify keeping draconian lockdowns going, but to now admit that we don't need them would make them look bad and create such blowback and distrust that they are continuing with the party line.
To say that they are "professionals" at all times, the answer to that is that they are human beings with the same egos as the rest of us.
It is not just Fauci, Birx, etc, all other countries' government, regardless of governing systems, are looking at this number to make/change policy.
Policy can change R0, R0 in turn can make gov change policy.
It looks to me (and many other people) the lockdown policy in New York failed to lower R0 significantly enough. So NYC actually would be safe relatively say if the lockdown had been lifted. But, for the rural small towns and villages, the lockdown indeed could have lowered R0 and the equilibrium therefore could have been reached under the current lockdown policy. But, if they loosen lockdown policy, R0 will go up again and it will spread again. This is the fundamental flaw of the lockdown policy because it cannot be loosened, otherwise it will spread again from an imported seed. This is the epidemiological reason why I don't like this lockdown in first place. It makes America a hotel California, you can check in but you can't get out. Of course economic and social reason is another one I don't like lockdown.
The bottom line is Fauci, Birx, etc, are stuck in this situation. They have to monitor and calculate data very carefully to make policy change. Say, after you loosen some policies and R0 in your area go up back to 0.8 from 0.6, policy makers may think this rising is ok because R0 is still under 1. If it goes up back to 0.9, they will become nervous because R0 is close to 1 and they may get ready to tighten up the policy again. If R0 goes back to 1.1, meaning the virus start spread again, then they will definitely have to issue lockdown again. I don't like this. Again, I like Sweden's approach, once for all.
The other two numbers considered by your brother are also policy policy dependent, death rate (severity) ad case number. Although more and more evidences show the death rate tend to be lower than 1%, I understand Fauci, Birx, etc can't really make policy change based on these evidences. As for case number, I think I and you agree with your brother's rational.
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
You guys are the pits.
People are spending tons of time digging up obscure sources to support re-opening. Well, we are reopening, regardless of whether two docs-in-a-box from Bakersfield, Harman's niece's husband's mom, or Joe Exotic, have a compelling back-of-the-napkin rationale for reopening.
I guess people are bored.
media and posters expected Trump to lockdown the economy in January with China lying, WHO compliant and during impeachment. Yeah sure he would have been praised. Haha come on. Always Monday morning QB’s. But the Dem’s comments in late Feb are never mentioned.
Fauci again on the Today Show, February 29th, No reason to change lifestyle. The guy everyone loves. Trump should have fired him that day. Huh?
(no message)
(no message)
....just as I predicted that you would be.
Remember when I to,d you that the Left would be the biggest roadblock to our county surviving this disaster?
(Perhaps attack is the more appropriate word, we shall see about that).
consulting with.
Embarrassing!
Link: https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1256219083701444613
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
I know you keep saying "he is way better than Trump" but that is a reach. Maybe you are hoping for a good female VP pick knowing she will take over. I just don't like the pandering to get the female vote.
(no message)
I'm sure his camp will fight to have no debates because the more time he spends in front of the public, the worse he looks.
on a regular basis, sporting wood over this. Carry on.
(no message)
that happened on his watch. Yeah, they are all to blame. Orange, not at all. You guys are the bestest.
there are other more serious offenders in this pandemic that deserve most if not some of the blame.
China lied and covered up
WHO was the lapdog for China
CDC wanted total control and produced bad testing
The media and politicians downplayed the entire crisis through Feb look at the tape
Fauci undersold the concern all the way into March. Now he’s overselling it
So plenty of blame to go around.
But the press only attacks Trump.
Why? Because like you it’s TDS.
overplaying it in February and early March. This was a constant refrain that is easy to look up on the search feature here. Orange and you guys consistently downplayed it and he did almost nothing to prepare until it was simply undeniable that we were in a full blown pandemic. He was also praising Xi throughout February. Stop lying.
Pelosi, Cuomo and DeBasilo telling everyone to go to the China New Year festival. Do you remember that Joe?
media for ginning up the issue to hurt Orange if they were ignoring it?
you guys are insufferable and full of shit.
surgeries. The liberals on this Board obviously think they're wrong.
I'm sure you're going to see plenty of WaPo and CNN links. There will also be a few "experts" thrown into this thread.
(no message)
A good argument can be made that no or very few mitigation procedures would have been enacted if the true fatality rate was known originally to be more akin to flu's. So why continue with this? People are notorious for being loathe to change game plans when it's warranted. Brian Kelly isn't the only one to suffer from this. Maybe they just can't fathom a different path may be more feasible.
he said that could be the reason for perpetuating the lock down - not the original premise for the lock down.
now, sitting back waiting for frank to call me some childish name which is his way of vainly trying to prove a point.
would be the result if the lockdown doesn’t take place.
(no message)