8 thoughts on “Effects Of Lockdown”

  2. I think everyone has recognized that, by now. “Flattening the curve” was always about taking a total number of deaths and stretching out the time period over which they occurred, so that hospitals wouldn’t be “overwhelmed.” Well, hospitals are going out of business because they’re not only not overwhelmed, they aren’t performing the volume of routine care they normally would.

    1. Absurd, isn’t it? ‘We had to bankrupt the hospitals in order to save them’.

      And all to ensure there would be enough ventilators available for 90% of those who were put on them to die.

  3. I am just bringing this up because a bunch of others will bring this up.

    What is the explanation for the Charlie Foxtrot that is the NYC metropolitan area? It cannot all be that Wilhelm dude?

    Is New York that foxtrotted every flu season?

    1. If I remember correctly, 50% of deaths in New York have been in care homes. I’ve heard the same for parts of Canada; I think Quebec is actually over 50%.

      Once Chinese Flu gets into a care home which doesn’t lock it down, it will spread through a highly vulnerable population and kill many of them. Which makes the death rates look very bad, when it’s really just that the death rates in care homes are very bad.

  4. The first confirmed death was February 6. She was infected in January. By the time we locked down, millions were already infected. So, no, the lockdown was too late to save anyone. But we didn’t know it then.

  5. Is no one else here concerned by how six minutes into the video Dr. Dan Erickson extrapolates a 39% positive NY COVID-19 test rate into 39% of the entire state population being exposed, when those tested were not from a random sample but were instead mostly from those thought to likely be infected? (We’re talking antigen testing, not the antibody test study released last week.)

Comments are closed.