Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Around the world, both state and local governments looked at wildly exaggerated computer model projections of millions of virus deaths, declared a “State Of Emergency”, and foolishly pulled the wheels off of their own economies. This has caused pain, suffering, and loss that far exceeds anything that the virus might do.
The virus hardly affects anyone—it has killed a maximum of 0.1% of the population in the very worst-hit locations. One-tenth of one measly percent.
Ah, I hear you saying, but that’s just deaths. What about hospitalizations? Glad you asked. Hospitalizations in the worst-hit areas have been about three times that, about a third of one percent of the population. Still not even one percent.
But on the other hand, more than thirty million workers in the US are unemployed. That’s about twenty percent of the number of full and part-time employees. And that job loss affects the entire household, not just the workers.
And that doesn’t count the loss of life from increased suicides and from delayed medical diagnosis and procedures. Nor does it count the fact that some 20% of the lost jobs are not expected to return. And we have calls to mental-health hotlines skyrocketing, and domestic violence through the roof. In a most ironic outcome, we have hospitals and doctors going bankrupt, and thousands of nurses being furloughed, because “non-essential” medical procedures are forbidden. Then there are the huge financial losses, both to the economy and to the government.
And in a beautifully circular process, we have trillions and trillions of dollars borrowed by the government to try to offset some of the damages that the government just caused … these lockdowns are far, far more destructive than the virus. The virus damage is short-lived, but we and our children will be paying for decades for our stupidity in killing the economy.
It’s like … it’s like … well, about the only example I can think of which has equivalent idiocy is if a mosquito were to land on your head and you grabbed a sledgehammer to get rid of it …
So the first lesson of the emergency is, don’t kill your economy to try to delay or avoid a few deaths. It is possible to slow the spread of the virus without pulling the wheels off of the economy.
The next lesson of the emergency is, don’t put much trust in computer models.
The next lesson of the emergency is, don’t put doctors in charge of economic decisions. Especially Dr. Fauci. He’s been wrong about most aspects of this whole process. If you want someone to run a hospital, as a general rule you shouldn’t hire a doctor …
The next lesson of the emergency is the extreme importance of the ancient medical maxim of Hippocrates, a maxim that our dear Dr. Fauci apparently never heard of—“Primum non nocere”, which means “First, do no harm”.
The next lesson of the emergency is, quarantine the sick, protect the vulnerable, but do NOT quarantine the healthy. That’s madness.
Let me set aside what we’ve learned to return to the COVID19 emergency. The emergency everyone feared was exemplified by the reality that in some countries, the medical system was overwhelmed by the number of COVID-19 cases. The cause of this was that the cases came on too fast—the peak hospitalizations and deaths were packed into a week or two. Early on in the pandemic, this peak in the load on the medical system in Italy caused parts of the system to collapse under the weight of cases.
To prevent that peak load from crushing the medical system, it was decided in many countries to try to “flatten the curve” by slowing the spread of the virus. Note that the stated intention of flattening the curve was not to stop the virus. The declared goal was to decrease the number of new cases per day, not to decrease the total number of new cases.
Figure 1. The theoretical effect of “flattening the curve”.
In that manner, rather than having a sharp peak in medical need, the curve would be flattened out and hopefully the medical system would not be overwhelmed.
So … did this work? Hard to tell at this point. However, we do have one example of a modern country that did NOT shut down and kill their economy to fight the virus, which is Sweden. How are they doing? Here’s the comparison:
Figure 2. Deaths per ten million over time, for the hardest-hit countries.
As you can see, Sweden is in the middle of the pack—a bit better than the UK and Switzerland, same as the Netherlands and Ireland, and a bit worse than the US and France.
So if the lockdowns and the “shelter-at-home” orders are having an effect, you couldn’t tell it by looking at Sweden.
And to return to the question of lowering the peak and flattening the curve, here are the results from a number of countries. I’ll start with Sweden and the Netherlands, since per Figure 2 they are on the same path. I’m using the Complete Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition (CEEMD) method to remove the fluctuations due to incomplete data reporting on the weekends. See here and here for a discussion of the CEEMD method.
Figure 3. Daily deaths. The black/yellow line is the CEEMD “residual”, which is the value of the data with the weekly and other regular fluctuations removed.
Figure 4. Daily deaths. The black/yellow line is the CEEMD “residual”, which is the value of the data with the weekly and other regular fluctuations removed.
Both the Netherlands and Sweden are past the peak load on the medical system. Neither one was overwhelmed by that load. The difference is … Sweden did not pull the wheels off of its economy and drive millions into joblessness and despair. I know which path I prefer …
Here are the daily deaths of a number of other countries. I’ll start with Belgium, which is the hardest-hit country, and roll on down from there.
OK, so much for the countries. All are about a month past their peak. How about the US states? Here you go.
The spike in the New York data is from a single day’s reporting of a bunch of “overlooked” deaths in nursing homes. Bizarrely, Governor Cuomo ordered nursing homes to accept COVID-19 patients … so as you might imagine, the totally predictable nursing home deaths were concealed until their hand was forced.
I also note how resistant the CEEMD residual is to that single outlier data point of nursing home deaths. A better-guess solution would be to spread those deaths out over the earlier time, distribute by the number of non-nursing home deaths.
(In passing, let me note that Georgia started loosening the lockdown on April 20th, and there’s no sign of a “second peak” of deaths.)
Those are the hardest-hit states. However, not all of the hardest-hit states are past their peak. Here are the two states of the hardest-hit that are not past their peak.
Finally, to close the circle before discussing all of this, here are two views of the world deaths, one with and one without China. I left out China in one of them to see how much difference it made, because a) China’s numbers are big, and b) I don’t trust them one bit. Here are those two charts. It turns out that leaving out China makes very little difference.
So … given all of that, what can we conclude?
Well, first in importance, if medical care was outpaced by the virus in some location and there was an emergency, the peak of the emergency is over now. Yes, there are some states and countries yet to pass the peak. But by and large, and in particular for the hardest-hit countries as well as for the world as a whole, the peak of the medical load from the pandemic passed about a month ago.
And that means that in those states and countries, whatever chance we had to “flatten the curve” is GONE. The opportunity has passed. For most of the world, curve flattening is history.
And since we were sold this bill of goods on the basis of “flattening the curve”, and since we’re now well past any opportunity to do that, let’s remove the restrictions. Or as I’ve said for weeks, “End The American Lockdown Now”.
Of course, the local petty tyrants who have vastly expanded powers under the “emergency” want to hold on to them. So they’re now saying that we have something new to fear, a “rebound” or a “second peak” … me, I’ve said before that I think we will see very little in the way of any second peak, for a simple reason:
As Sweden has shown, the virus laughs at our pathetic western-style “shelter in place” regulations.
Too many people in “essential” jobs, too many deliveries, too many people coming and going from the households. Combine that with a very infectious virus, and the shelter in place will have little effect … and since it has had little effect when it was there, I say it will have little effect when it is removed.
Now, here’s my argument. The various local instant totalitarian rulers derive their power from the State of Emergency. But the emergency is past, we can’t flatten the curve now. We’re past that, which means there is no further emergency. So them holding onto that power now that the emergency is ended is illegitimate and illegal. It’s also in some cases unconstitutional.
Here’s what I’d do …
• In those countries and states that are past the peak, declare the emergency is over and open everything back up. Acknowledge that the chance to flatten the curve is gone, and revoke each and every emergency order. They are only valid for the duration of the emergency.
• Maintain some approximation of social distancing, on a voluntary basis.
• There are flareups in certain locations now, even with all of the regulationss. There will be flareups after the regs are removed. Get used to it. A flareup is not a second peak.
• Maintain personal sanitation on a voluntary basis. Wear a mask, wear gloves, wash hands, and for goodness sake, if you’re ordering bat soup, tell them to hold the bats …
• Once the majority of the pandemic deaths are over, establish a testing and contact tracing process to keep track of the virus.
• Test people entering the country. As far as I know, I get tested more going in to get my blood drawn than do people entering the US.
• Keep a close watch on the numbers to see if there is some kind of “second peak” developing. If and where that might happen, then in those areas that had trouble with the first peak, push policies that don’t kill the economy, and for heaven’s sake, quarantine the sick rather than the healthy.
• Encourage the vulnerable population (elderly with co-morbidities, immunocompromised, etc.) to self-isolate to some comfortable extent, to be extra vigilant in avoiding crowds, and to maintain a high level of personal sanitation.
Folks, the ugly reality is that every day we keep the now-useless lockdowns in place is another day of misery for a large chunk of the population. COVID-19 is now a part of the virus landscape. Let’s reclaim the power from the Federal, state, county, and city megalomaniacs who are issuing diktats and expecting everyone to obey.
END THE AMERICAN LOCKDOWN NOW!
Here, the unusual late rains have returned. We didn’t get one drop in February, which is usually wet, so these late rains are most wonderful.
Best to all, stay well,
w.
AFTERWORD: I note today that Matt Briggs, Statistician To The Stars, has a new post up entitled “There Is No Evidence Lockdowns Saved Lives. It Is Indisputable They Caused Great Harm“. His posts are always worth reading, and he actually is a statistician to the stars.
PS—When you comment, please quote the exact words you’re referring to. This prevents much misunderstanding and useless argumentation.
In Sweden, where I live, we have prohibited gatherings of more than 50 people, and a few other restrictions, but otherwise no other limitations to our freedom of movement, except the government urging us to keep distance, wash your hands and do not travel if you don´t have to. And, as Willis wrote, Sweden seems to do relatively well, when it comes to mortality in Covid-19, compared to countries with more or less complete lock-downs. But the media in Sweden are filled with reports of people dying en masse. So, what are the facts?
About 90 000 people die every year in Sweden. 2018 was a year with unusually many deaths, 92 000, and 2019 was a year with unusually few deaths, a bit under 89 000. So let us compare what has happened so far in 2020, with 2018. In the first quarter of 2020, 24442 people died, compared to 26577 in 2018. Then in April, we saw a sharp rise in the number of deaths, to 10198, compared to 7797 in 2018, which caused the mortality for the first four months of 2020 to rise to 34640 people, compared to 34374 in 2018, that is, an excess death of 266 people. Obviously not a catastrophic scenario.
What we don´t know is whether we have reached the peak in Covid-19 deaths in Sweden, or if we will see a continuing excess mortality in the months to come. The numbers for 2020 are still preliminary, so probably we will see an adjustment upwards in the coming weeks. But still, my feeling is that this pandemic, in Sweden, has not caused the death toll to rise above what is normal. What has probably happened, in March and April, is that people that would have died anyway in the coming months, died a little bit earlier. If that is correct, we should see a decline in the number of deaths, so that in a few months from now, deaths in Sweden will not be different from any other year. Only future will tell.
Scandinavian countries seem to be predominantly leftwing, so I imagine their media are about as objective as CNN and the UK Guardian.
Somehow , not wanting to destroy peoples lives and livelihoods and make them lose their homes and jobs is perceived as “right wing” Trump like attitude as so to be opposed by all means necessary.
They seem oblivious to the need for a healthy economy to keep hospitals running, welfare payments going and to have the luxury to take care of the environment.
The numbers I quoted in my post are total deaths in Sweden, not Covid-19 deaths.
An excellent article Willis. One of the most informative and well articulated I’ve read on the subject. Many thanks.
There is an arrogance in making a recipe for how a country should react to the virus.
Many countries have been very lucky with their closedowns. Greece had very fast reactions, and kept the virus from spreading from the first day. So they spared thousand of lives among their elderly. A great contrast to Italy. Greece have 15 deaths pr million, Italy has over 514. This is the difference of a slow and a fast lockdown. Now Greece can open up in a controlled way, with testing and tracking.
But what do you do when the Government of UK had deliberately dismantled the Country’s Health service, so that it did not cope with business as usual.
Dismantling the NHS was a Government policy.
Expert mortality predictions ranged from hardly anybody to almost everybody, and they still do!
I keep hearing experts say children are least affected and we should not worry so much about them, but not one expert knows why. So we send them to school and cross our fingers?
Sweden is a special case.
We have one of the highest, if not the highest, number of single persons households in the world. That helps in pandemics. Also social distancing is part of our culture in Sweden, we avoid coming close to others especially strangers even without the pandemic. Also Sweden is a very sparsely populated country, we spread out. Also the graph comparing deaths is logarithmic on the death axis wich fools the eye. We will seee when this is over who was right Sweden or the others.
Sweden undoubtedly got it right for Sweden. That does not mean there is one right/wrong answer that everyone should be using.
Norway seem to be waiting for zero cases before they stop destroying their economy. New cases was below 100 per day there, over a month ago. That is a months worth of pointless damage.
Norway is rich. They sell oil and gas but are running mostly independent on that by wind and water. They will do just fine as soon as the others need oil and gas again. They can afford it. That is their whole secret behind their decision.
I agree, they have enough “carbon” wealth to one side to weather the storm, and can afford to shoot their economy in to foot for the virtue signalling it gains them.
It is still pretty dumb thing to do.
The Norwegians changed their government once from the Conservative party to the Socialdemocrats although everything was better than ever cause they believed the Socialdemocrats would distribute the wealth the Conservatives acquired in a more responsible way.
Any more questions?
Thanks Willis for a clear and sober article on this crucial subject. I am a teetotaller but what the Irish politicians, their advisors and Irish Media are continually spouting is enough to drive me to drink – and our head of state is a medical doctor by training! 🙁
Willis, I would love to see a graph for Ireland with the CEEMD residual but not being a Math person do not believe I could draw one. Would you be able to kindly help or one of your clever readers? Thanks.
Micheal, you don’t really need to filter the irish data, there is not the same weekly cycle.
If you want to know how to get the data extract and produce that graph, I’ll point to some info. You’ll need to adapt and do a little work but pretty simple.
Has anyone an explanation for the often seen sub-waves in the above diagrams? Why are deaths distributed in this way?
some cases like UK and US just look like low reporting at the weekend. Others, like Spain Italy and Germany do appear to have a genuine weekly cycle, rising and falling during the week and not necessarily having a trough on the weekend.
Having lived in a number of African countries I am puzzled by what is happening on the African continent – especially south of the Sahara. Africa has four times the population of the US but as I write they have 74,064 cases and 2,508 deaths. Compare this to the US with 1,430,348 cases and 85,197 deaths. This also does not rhyme with the claims that people of African origin in the US and UK are more vulnerable than those of European extract – for supposedly genetic reasons.
There may be a number of explanations:
1. It is early days and the virus arrived later in Africa. I find this strange because China has many projects in African countries and they have many Chinese working in these countries.
2. The real numbers of cases and deaths are being concealed. I also find his strange because despite poverty many Africans have mobile phones and are as avid about social media as in the West. Mass deaths would soon leak out. South Africa with the highest number of cases has only 12,074 while the next highest Ghana and Nigeria has less than this combined. Admittedly, the whole of Africa has slightly fewer tests than France.
3. The age demographics in Africa. Far smaller percentage of elderly and old people. Life expectancy in the EU is nearly 81 while in Sub-Saharan Africa it is 61.
4. Perhaps the numbers of those who die because of the virus are higher in Africa – but not diagnosed – but much lower in the US/Europe because of numbers inflated by those dying because of comorbidities.
5. Could the widespread use of Malaria medication, the BCG vaccine for TB and the MMR vaccine given to children plus the fact that few are given an annual flu vaccine – one or more of these – play a role in the lower numbers?
If these numbers stay low, it may soon prove that coronavirus is not the mass killer that the medical alarmists have predicted. I hope so.
“This also does not rhyme with the claims that people of African origin in the US and UK are more vulnerable than those of European extract – for supposedly genetic reasons. ”
It does though. The darker the skin the slower it is at producing vitamin D due to skin pigmentation filtering out UV. The sun is the same sun, but when in Africa, darker skins produce enough vitamin D due to the extra sun received, when compared to the amount of sun received at higher latitudes.
At this time of year Southern African nations have just had summer and so there is a naturally high level of vitamin D among the populations. Not the only reason but it needs to be considered
Thanks Chris. I did see a similar comment elsewhere but how much of a role vitamn D deficiency plays compared to adopting an unhealthy Western fast food diet – which many many Americans and Brits follow – and sedentary lifestyle. I recall reading that mixed race appears to have the lowest fatality rate. I wonder if it is not a combination of factors – including smoking – some which may be overlooked and hence the media misattribution to racial origin.
I think diet is crucial. General overall health is critical at times like these
If you drink too much your live/kidneys are overloaded, not what you need when there’s a virus in town, some covid patients end up with renal failure. But then again unhealthy people are getting ill every day.
We saw recently in the UK, ex Prime Minister Gordon Bloody Brown, make the case again for one world government (i think he’s planting seeds), and he would like the UN and the WHO to be the backbone
If you’re going to have a single government one thing you need is broad healthcare system, one which establishes the risk factors in different populations.
During lockdown right now we can establish the base rate of hospital attendance for ’emergencies only’ which is the sort of information I can only imagine is proverbial god dust to insurance companies.
From what I’ve read, about 2.5 billion people in the world don’t have access to banking services. It doesn’t make sense to open a branch in a rural area, but digital banking is another story.
When people have banking they can have loans. Good business, but to make sure the loan gets repaid there needs to be a basic minimum health level, which might require everybody vaccinated to the same standard first before an insurance policy can be written.
I think there’ a lot going on, China are introducing the first state backed digital currency next month, I wonder what plans lie ahead for the ordinary African
You’ve probably identified all of the most important factors. Age demographics is likely the most important or very close to it.
Thanks Willis for an informative post and all the work on the analysis and figures. Plotting figure 2 to a common baseline was eye opening for me, and the CEEMD method is really showing it’s worth – barely a wiggle from the outliers in the Belgian and New York data.
In the last week or so the Swedish death rate was one of, if not the fastest rising among the major affected European countries
http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/EuropeCV.htm
The mask-and-glove wearing, the 6-foot “rule”, and the obsessive-compulsive hand-washing and crazy sanitizing of, well, everything are all symptoms of a society that has gone off the rails with hysteria. To a great extent, it mirrors the hysteria about CO2, with the obvious exception, and further absurdity that the additional CO2 is actually beneficial, including any slight increased warming it may have caused. What a world.
They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. – Benjamin Franklin
Or, how about:
Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. – Ron Paul (1935- )
Living in Illinois – which apparently is not past its peak – where the governor has no legal emergency power beyond 30 days, we are supposedly locking down until a vaccine is developed. Meanwhile, over there in FL where they also haven’t completed a peak, they are opening up without significant damage. Hmmm.
Too early to tell. Keep your fingers crossed.
Madison County IL opened up yesterday by order of the Commissioners. That is just across the river from St. Louis. Pritzker with his comment about “Eradicating the virus” has revealed himself to be a complete moron getting very bad advice. The rest of Illinois will soon follow Madison County, I hope…
“The spike in the New York data is from a single day’s reporting of a bunch of “overlooked” deaths in nursing homes.”
This makes me wonder how the graph of reported deaths actually compares to a graph based on the actual date of deaths. For example, the Georgia graph in the post has a 4/7 spike of nearly 100 with a number of days over 60. In the graph at dph.georgia.gov, 4/7 has just 31 deaths, and the high is 52 deaths on 4/17.
Counting this way does make today’s brand new data unreliable, in the DPH graph data past 30 April is still “preliminary” and shows a steep drop-off that will certainly be less step as information comes in. But the alternative of tracking the difference in counted deaths reported without considering when the dates were have the effect of moving past deaths into the present, which will mask an actual decline in deaths.
The emphasis on saving lives over economic damage (even without good evidence that extending mandatory lockdowns will *actually* save lives long-term) reminds me of this classic Bloom County cartoon (a practice debate between Milo and VP candidate Opus)
Milo: I understand that my opponent supports the 55 M.P.H. speed limit.
Opus: Saves 500 lives a year! I fully support saving lives.
Milo: Then he’d support the saving of another 10,000 lives by lowering the limit to 40 M.P.H.
Opus: 40?
Milo: Or to 20 … Saving 30,000 lives a year.
Opus: Gee… 20 is pretty slow.
Milo: Apparently my opponent would send 30,000 men, women, and children to fiery, mangled deaths just so he can zoom along to his manicurist at 55.
Opus: I DON’T HAVE A MANICURIST!
Milo: He probably doesn’t. Most mass murderers don’t. Hitler didn’t.
About those questions for the “shutdowners,” safety is an illusory elusion.
Here in Aus on public transport train stations we get, every 30 seconds, announcements…”Blah blah blah! Do your BIT for a safer trip!” Seriously…
Willis, it would be interesting to see how the pandemic behaved in Abu Dhabi in the large buildings. Kind of another petrie dish like the Diamond Princess.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE LOCKDOWNS SAVED LIVES. IT IS INDISPUTABLE THEY CAUSED GREAT HARM
https://wmbriggs.com/post/30833/#comment-186097
Great job Matt – but the real trick is to get it right in the first weeks, with much less data. 😉
Best, Allan
Willis – I would add to your graphic’s response to those who want to remain shut down the following:
If you still want to feel safe there is nothing stopping you from a self-quarantine for your own protection.
Thanks for tracking all this and this summary.
“The #COVID19 Emergency Is Over!”
Not by a long shot, politically. The number of people I work with here in Aus are living in so much fear is mind boggling! Scared to walk outside, get some sun (24c+) and fresh air, y’know, the best things to beat a virus in most cases.
I am glad I volunteered to be the “resident office covid-19 monkey” (It was my best option at the time) that actually had to turn up and do physical work.
See “The Prisoner” starring Patrick McGoohan … imprisoned for ??? (We never really did find out.)
I watched the series in the 70’s, No. 6 was No. 1 too. As well as BBC’s “The Survivors”, I think you can view the whole series in YouTube. Here is an intro…
Here in Indiana, our government tested a random sample of 5,000 people, and found that only 2-3% of us have the virus or antibodies.
That’s worrisome. We should have been well on our way toward herd immunity at this point; instead, these Draconian measures mean we’re going to be vulnerable to another wave down the road.
Spend the intervening time getting yourself healthy and encouraging everyone you can to do so. The virus is no match for a healthy immune system.
How does a government-declared “emergency” end?
Dear President Trump,
The current emergency was declared in order to flatten the curve. The curve has flattened. No hospitals have been nor are expected to be overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients.
Please, sir, undeclare the emergency.
Regards,
George Steele
76, healthy and taking Quercetin and Zn.
Congrats Willis – you and I called it correctly in mid-March and the high-priced help got it dead wrong.
A dispassionate review of the evidence will conclude that the Covid-19 full-lockdown was a costly, destructive debacle.
At the beginning of the Covid-19 lockdown I wrote that it was a mistake. The Covid-19 illness was not significantly worse than a bad seasonal flu, but the authorities hugely over-reacted:
“Like swatting a fly on a glass table – with a sledgehammer!”
I think Trump was initially correct but was persuaded to change by his advisers. He wisely left the lockdown decision to the Governors, a few of whom actually got it right, but many more chose full-lockdown. Democrats in the USA love to abuse their powers – many are covert Marxists – that’s how they roll. Now the Dems are extending the lockdown to try to harm the economy – and Trump’s chances of re-election.
Speaking of Marxists, our “Little Dictator” Justin Trudeau illegally tried to seize unlimited spending power using Covid-19 as his excuse, but was stopped by the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition had earlier upbraided Trudeau, telling him that “George Orwell’s ‘1984’ was supposed to be a cautionary tale about the evils of big government, not an instruction manual for this Prime Minister.” Trudeau and his minions are destroying Canada.
Regards, Allan
____________________________________
[De-Linked per Anthony’s request.]
I recently sent the following note to the media and politicians in Canada and the USA:
THE FULL LOCK-DOWN OF THE ECONOMY MADE “THE CURE WORSE THAN THE DISEASE”.
As it becomes increasingly clear that the Covid-19 “pandemic” was similar in total fatalities to a bad winter flu season like 2017-2018 and less dangerous than the Hong Kong flu of 1968-69, rational voices have suggested that the full lock-down of the economy made “the cure worse than the disease”. While this was a tough call based on limited data, that was the conclusion I published early in the lockdown on 21March 2020 (below), and I was correct.
wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/21/to-save-our-economy-roll-out-antibody-testing-alongside-the-active-virus-testing/#comment-2943724
[excerpt- posted 21Mar2020]
LET’S CONSIDER AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH, SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION OF THE ABOVE CONCLUSIONS:
Isolate people over sixty-five and those with poor immune systems and return to business-as-usual for people under sixty-five.
This will allow “herd immunity” to develop much sooner and older people will thus be more protected AND THE ECONOMY WON’T CRASH.
rosebyanyothernameblog.wordpress.com/2020/03/21/end-the-american-lockdown/comment-page-1/#comment-12253
[excerpt- posted 22Mar2020]
This full-lockdown scenario is especially hurting service sector businesses and their minimum-wage employees – young people are telling me they are “financially under the bus”. The young are being destroyed to protect us over-65’s. A far better solution is to get them back to work and let us oldies keep our distance, and get “herd immunity” established ASAP – in months not years. Then we will all be safe again.
___________________
It is notable that Sweden sensibly rejected the full Covid-19 lock-down, and that strategy has been far more successful in total than the “full-gulag” adopted by Canada and many other countries and states.
euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/
I wrote recently:
wattsupwiththat.com/2020/05/06/using-excess-deaths-to-correct-chinese-virus-mortality-counts-coronavirus/#comment-2989783
The global data for Covid-19 suggests that deaths/infections will total ~0.5% of the total population – not that different from other seasonal flu’s – but dangerous for the high-risk group – those over-65 or with serious existing health problems.
Here in Alberta, the Covid-19 lock-down has resulted in a mismanaged debacle. Most of our deaths are in nursing homes – our policy seems to be “Lockdown the low-risk majority but fail to adequately protect the most vulnerable.” This was also true elsewhere in Canada (Montreal) and the USA (New York City) and in England (London).
“Elective” surgeries in Alberta were cancelled about mid-March, in order to make space available for the “tsunami” of Covid-19 cases that never happened. Operating rooms were empty and medical facilities and medical teams are severely underutilized. The huge backlog of surgeries will only be cleared with extraordinary effort by medical teams, and the cooperation of patients who die awaiting surgery – patients who were impatient… Alberta started to re-open on 1May2020, exactly to the day as I predicted one week before. Elective surgeries re-started on 4May2020.
Two doctors from Bakersfield California, Dr Dan Erickson and Dr Massihi doctors reached similar conclusions, and were censored by YouTube for expressing their honest views. Here is the Bakersfield doctors’ ~1.1 hour video that was repeatedly banned by YouTube, preserved elsewhere:
savedmag.com/dr-erickson-covid-19.mp4?id=0
The Bakersfield doctors were telling the truth – they were saying that Covid-19 was not more severe than other major seasonal flu’s and less severe than some.
In Europe, Total Deaths from All Causes peaked in week 14, the week of 30Mar2020-5Apr2020, suggesting that the lockdown was too late to be effective. The exception was England, which has the worst Covid-19 death rate in Europe. Here is why:
Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, a Scottish physician, wrote:
drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/04/21/the-anti-lockdown-strategy/
“Unfortunately, it seems that COVID-19 has infected everyone involved in healthcare management and turned their brains into useless mush.
In my view, if we had any sense, we would lockdown/protect the elderly, and let everyone else get on with their lives.
However, the hospitals themselves have another policy. Which is to discharge the elderly unwell patients with COVID directly back into the community, and care homes. Where they can spread the virus widely amongst the most vulnerable.
This, believe it or not, is NHS policy. Still.”
___________________________
GOVERNOR ANDREW “CUOMO KILLED MY MOM”
bizpacreview.com/2020/05/10/giant-cuomo-killed-my-mom-sign-erected-on-bridge-as-heartbroken-new-yorkers-grieve-on-mothers-day-919031
Many New Yorkers are ushering in a grim Mother’s Day this year amid accusations that Governor Andrew “Cuomo killed my mom” thanks to his deadly policy that forced nursing homes to admit coronavirus patients.
The bone-headed move resulted in the deaths of thousands of senior citizens living in nursing homes.
Cuomo mandated that nursing homes must accept coronavirus patients even though older people are the most at-risk to die from COVID-19. Making matters worse was the fact that nursing homes did not have personal protective equipment or COVID testing capability.
Shockingly, the mainstream media not only gave Cuomo a pass on the scandal, but lionized him as a hero.
___________________________
IN CONCLUSION, the full-lockdown was a huge error – we should have followed the Swedish model and taken precautions but not shut down the economy, which harmed so many young people. We have over-protected the huge low-risk majority from a virus that typically does not harm them, and severely under-protected the high-risk elderly and infirm.
This is not 2020 hindsight. I reached my conclusion in mid-March 2020 and published it on 21-22Mar2020, based on data from the Diamond Princess cruise ship, South Korea, and total mortality in Europe. Iceland data was examined later.
_________________________
THE BEARER OF GOOD CORONAVIRUS NEWS
Stanford scientist John Ioannidis finds himself under attack for questioning the prevailing wisdom about lockdowns.
By Allysia Finley, Wall Street Journal
Updated April 24, 2020 5:14 pm ET
wsj.com/articles/the-bearer-of-good-coronavirus-news-11587746176
Stanford scientist John Ioannidis finds himself under attack for questioning the prevailing wisdom about lockdowns.
_________________________
SACRIFICED IN THE NAME OF COVID PATIENTS’: TENS OF THOUSANDS AFFECTED BY SURGERY CANCELLATIONS
Almost 200,000 surgeries and other procedures were shelved indefinitely, as hospitals braced for a deluge that never quite materialized
National Post, 9May2020, Tom Blackwell
nationalpost.com/health/sacrificed-in-the-name-of-covid-patients-tens-of-thousands-affected-by-surgery-cancellations
**********************************
“Now the Dems are extending the lockdown to try to harm the economy – and Trump’s chances of re-election”
Surely a dangerous game to play.
If the non- lock down areas thrive that will harm them badly at election?
Sorry Willis, I disagree with your statement:
>So the first lesson of the emergency is, don’t kill your economy to try to delay or avoid a few deaths. It is possible to slow the spread of the virus without pulling the wheels off of the economy.
The experiment of Lombardy , England ( where even the prime minister would have died without the NHS) and a number of others made prudent governments take early measures in order to save the health and funerary systems.
The basic question not answered by all the plots is :
can a modern economy survive without a working public health sector?
If people are dying in the corridors, if doctors and nurses are dying from overwork and the virus, if euthanasia is effectively chosen and still all the emergencies cannot be attended medically, will the economy of that society survive, lockdown or no lockdown? Suppose in Lombardy they did not try to flatten the curve , as you say, would they have a working economy with no medical care? How was the economy in Lombardy when they almost collapsed before the lockdown? Healthy?
These are the crucial questions, not answered by your assuming that the economy would have survived if no measures were taken. It needs a different type of study than just counting deaths . It will be probably several economics phds in the future, because one has to dig up data with a time dependence. for example : “how many industries were still working when the funeral parlors in Lombardy were overrun, and the hospitals over full , before lockdown?”
Decisions were made with the assumption that the economy was caput anyway without a medical system, and trying to save the medical system was the objective of lockdowns . The reduction of deaths due to lock down is only true if all the other deaths, from heart and apoplexy and accidents could be avoided too, because the health system would work.
I do not say that there was not overkill in the lockdown , maybe for some countries that had already taken early measures it was not necessary to be so strict, but it is not true that it was deaths on one side and economy on the other. I think that further study will show that economy was ruined either with a lockdown or without.
Anna wrote:
“can a modern economy survive without a working public health sector?
If people are dying in the corridors, if doctors and nurses are dying from overwork and the virus, if euthanasia is effectively chosen and still all the emergencies cannot be attended medically, will the economy of that society survive, lockdown or no lockdown? Suppose in Lombardy they did not try to flatten the curve , as you say, would they have a working economy with no medical care? How was the economy in Lombardy when they almost collapsed before the lockdown? Healthy?”
Hi Anna,
What you describe was NOT what happened, except is a few locations where gross mismanagement of the health system was probably to blame. That was certainly the case in England and New York, where they sent sick patients back to old folks homes to infect the rest of the population.
What really happened in Calgary and in so many other locations in the world was the opposite – hospitals were emptied of patients, elective surgeries were cancelled, and then the hospitals were near-empty for ~6 weeks awaiting the “tsunami of Covid-19 cases“ THAT NEVER ARRIVED.
Now there is a huge backlog of medical cases that will take many months to clear, and some patients will die awaiting treatment… and the economy is trashed, and low-income people are too, and small businesses are destroyed, and their employees are as well, and… and… and…
The lockdown was a completely unnecessary debacle – a self-inflicted injury of colossal proportions.
This lockdown was not just “shooting ourselves in the foot” – this was “emptying the clip into both feet, both kneecaps, and both gonads”.
Let’s not do it again.
anna v May 14, 2020 at 6:14 am
You disagree with not killing the economy to avoid a few deaths? Say what? That would mean that you think we SHOULD destroy the economy to delay or possibly even avoid a few deaths. Really?
My point is simple. The virus is not the economy, and we can fight the virus without fighting the economy.
Before the lockdown we had something just above the normal unemployment in the US.
After the lockdown, we have well over 30 million additional unemployed in the US.
So no, future study will NOT show what you claim, unless you think that a few unemployed is the same as 30 MILLION unemployed.
We also had no government bailout before the lockdown, didn’t need one.
Now, we’ve spent TWO TRILLION DOLLARS repairing the lockdown damage and are discussing wasting THREE TRILLION MORE on the same quixotic task.
So no, future study will NOT show what you claim, unless you think that $0 in new debt is the same as $5 trillion in new debt.
Sorry, Anna, but I fear you haven’t thought this all the way through.
w.
Willis, may be I am not clear in my english. I am saying that the western economy would have lost the trillions anyway, whether with lockdown or not. An economy cannot work with sick people and the fear of illness and rumors of death. It depends too much on the stock exchanges, on imports and exports, on tourism etc.
The choice the governments had between “save the health and funeral system” from the explosive behavior of the virus” and go for “herd immunity with limping health system”. They took the first choice. They did not have much data, they had the terrible example of Lombardy .
The choice was not between “deaths” and the “economy”, because they believed the economy would go equally bad with lockdown or not. History will judge whether they over did it or not.
My estimate is that they were right, that for high population areas herd immunity would lead to a lot of deaths of most executives in all branches of companies (large age groups), and government agencies, leading to a shot economy anyway, so it is better to save the health system.
anna v May 14, 2020 at 11:45 am
And I’m saying that immediately after the lockdowns were ordered millions of people were put out of work in a single day, with huge present, ongoing, and future costs. Estimates are that 20% of those unemployed won’t have a job to go back to, the business will have gone under.
I’m sorry to be so blunt, anna, but the idea that all of that would have happened without the lockdowns, that we would have “lost the trillions anyway”, doesn’t even begin to pass the laugh test.
w.
I am also sorry Willis that your “black or white” statements do not pass the laugh test of my view. The loss of jobs happened rapidly with lockdown , and in the herd immunity deaths would have happened rapidly, (as the Lombardy experiment showed) but in my opinion, when everything is weighted as it should statistically, within the year the end result would be the same for the economy, in heavily populated regions.
Anna: You said “but in my opinion, when everything is weighted as it should statistically, within the year the end result would be the same for the economy, in heavily populated regions.”
Well you did not make the point you think you just made. Please read again what you wrote. You think heavily population regions would still have a hurt economy. So the rest, 95% of the country should also injure their economy for no reason according to you.
You post statements “do not pass the laugh test of my view.” Your words not mine!
Willis writes
Certainly that will have depleted the savings of many and imposed additional burden on social security adding to the national debt which will have to be paid back eventually.
But I’m interested to know exactly what you mean by destroying the economy?
After all tourism was destroyed irrespective of any lockdowns. Pubs and clubs and all large gatherings really, needed to be shut down for everyone’s sake and I’d expect a considerable proportion of the population would want to self isolate anyway.
Is it your expectation that in the absence of lock downs, people would be ordering building construction as per normal (knowing this is your “day job”) ?
In a pandemic, the economy is going to “suffer” as supply and demand all shifts around.
I work for a regional bank, and know many of the local contractors. Some have been turning away business because they are all booked up for the next 3-4 months. In fact, I was trying to help a coworker find a contractor for an addition she needs to have built this Summer, and all of my contacts said the earliest they could get to her would be in 3 months. Her only option was to go with a less than optimal outfit, in order to get the job done before Fall.
re: “In a pandemic, the economy is going to “suffer” as supply and demand all shifts around.”
Yeah, mismanagement.
We should have worked to isolate the vulnerable, get them masks and hand sanitizers etc. EARLY ON … but we didn’t, b/c mismanagement (foolishness in NY didn’t help either; myopic vision on peach mint OVER Christmas didn’t help, and I could go on …)
You’re NOT even going to look at the demographics of WHO DIED are you Tim? AND contributing factors like intubation (use of ventilators) that killed people, ‘stacking the stats’ with death certs that cited Covid-19 WHEN THAT WAS NOT THE DIRECT CAUSE! Again, I could go on …
This was NO pandemic. Not by a long stretch.
Mismanagement. There’s your key factor.
TTTMan. You’re about chicken little fear mongering that is causing the lockdowns and fear. You have a one-track confirmation bias that is unhelpful –no, it’s worse than that, it’s hurtful.
We all know too well what you wish. You wish to only look at evidence that supports your cause. So let’s strike you down, case closed.
It’s simple enough. Humans that thrive are ones who deal with risk of death all the time and do rational things to mitigate risk to thrive, stay healthy and do things to benefit themselves and their loved ones. Your version of things would have us all hiding in the corner, inside a bubble from all risk, while reaping exactly zero rewards. Your version of the world is one full of blight and no one doing a thing to advance abundance. Your world only works if someone else gives you sustenance. That does not end well, never has.
It’s not that you are not educated, it’s that you’re mis-educated and I hope no one takes you seriously.
TimTheToolMan May 17, 2020 at 7:29 am
Tim, if I thought you’d asked that in good faith rather than your usual “gotcha” question, I’d answer it all in one-syllable words and simple pictures so you could understand it.
But no, in this case if you haven’t figured out what I meant, put on your big-boy pants and figure it out for yourself. In the past, all that handholding you to see some totally obvious point did was get my hand bitten. Not interested. Go play your tricks on someone else.
Sorry, amigo, but you’ve well and truly burned your bridges with me.
w.
Tim, if you need someone to talk to about this loss……
Social shaming ceased being effective in…..well it was probably when Win 7 superseded XP….
Mario
I dont have a side. People automatically put me on some sort of “side” and then hate on me. I hope that occasionally they self reflect.
What I’m doing is asking questions they simply dont want to answer.
You said it yourself, the younger people who are at lower risk have parents, And they dont want to see their parents suffer and die. Who would. So they’ve molded the world so that the risk to their parents is minimized.
Willis wont even answer what he sees as destroying the economy when I think there is an argument that the economy is at most stalled, not destroyed. Why should all the demand that existed before the virus simply disappear so that there is no need for the supply anymore once everything gets moving again?
I can definitely see a strong argument that individuals’ financial positions will have been worsened by needing to spend down savings over this period. But that’s not exactly destroying the economy.
TTTMan: You have incorrectly characterized what I said, when you said “You said it yourself, the younger people who are at lower risk have parents, And they dont want to see their parents suffer and die.”
The rest of your drivel, directly exposes that you do have a side.
Further you said “I dont have a side. People automatically put me on some sort of “side” ”
This is a lie, YOU have put you on a side. Let me explain what you really do that you can understand how we see you.
You reframe what people have said, then create a strawman, and then slash the strawman that you created.
Then you show up to promote your side which I had previously laid out for you.
You are a fraud, but I don’t hate you whatsoever.
Mario says
Then if not to save the people at risk (who are most often going to be their parents) why so you think people have done what they’ve done with self isolation?
TTTMan: You have not responded to what I wrote. Why did you claim I said something I did not, then construct a response to that claim. You are largely talking to yourself, while falsely attributing the questions you pose to other people.
I am now responding to this latest post where you wrote, “Then if not to save the people at risk (who are most often going to be their parents) why so you think people have done what they’ve done with self isolation?”
Your question, is not grammatically cogent. So let’s zoom in on the question part:
You ask: “…why so you think people have done what they’ve done with self isolation”
Your question is so poorly constructed, that it raises more questions.
Please ask a more precise question.
Mario
I quoted you. Here it is again.
And what the humans have done is to self isolate as much as possible. None of that is controversial. Or at least I did think it was…
The key line is “do things to benefit themselves and their loved ones.”
But apparently me saying “they dont want to see their parents suffer and die. ” incorrectly characterized what you said so I’m genuinely at a loss at to what you meant.
And finally “Your question is so poorly constructed, that it raises more questions.”
Not from where I’m sitting, but sure, if you like. Dont answer if you’re not comfortable discussing. There is nothing mandatory about forum discussion.
TTTMan: Evidently you do not know what the term “quote is”. What you said that I said, is an interpretation mashed into an in-cohesive declarative/interrogative and I now have had enough of your weird interchanges.
You are a complete waste of time.
Anna wrote:
“Can a modern economy survive without a working public health sector?”
Because of the Covid-19 lockdown debacle, hospitals in the USA are laying off professional staff and even going bankrupt – how’s that health sector working for you?
PORTLAND NURSE IF FURIOUS ABOUT BEING LAID-OFF.
https://youtu.be/6auVdw7g65Q
Hi Willis,
Could you restore your dropbox with the code?
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/96723180/Amazon%20Flow.R gives 404 Not Found error
Thanks
Try this one:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/trzh97gc2al91gd/amazon%20flow.r?dl=0
w.
ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrr code! Thanks.
One’s opinion of the CV-19 risk depends on one’s age, health, and financial condition IMO. If you are over 60 w/ secondary health condition(s) or if you have debt and no savings, the risk can be catastrophic. It’s not “one risk fits all.”
In my State, TN, the CV-19 death rate has been about the same as the annual traffic fatality rate. This year traffic fatalities to date are essentially the same as 2019 so there’s been no reduction due to CV-19. The catcher is that if you are older, the risk of death is several times that of auto fatalities. 81% of CV-19 related deaths have been those over 50.
From a financial standpoint, if an individual has debt w/o savings, their whole perspective of the lock down is different than one who is w/o debt and w/ savings. The debt issue is likely to harm the younger population more. I speak w/ experience as I have made it to the other side of the debt divide. The bankers are now off my payroll.
Willis – Thanks for your plots and analysis. A couple items for you:
1) The plots above would be more useful if the y-axis were deaths/unit population. That way we can see the magnitude of deaths compared on an apples-to-apples basis.
2) If the lock downs end, is it appropriate to hold those who are found to have spread the disease liable for the damage caused? i.e. hospital costs/deaths etc. similar to what is done in the case of auto crash medical costs & fatalities? There is an argument to be made that for a certain portion of the population, the CV-19 risk of harm is far greater than for harm by auto crashes. Both can be prevented (or reduced).