0.2%

rockontommy said:
I'd call that a rounding error. Kind of makes all of the nasty finger pointing and abuse for nothing.

nationalpost.com

Lockdowns only reduced COVID deaths by 0.2 per cent, Johns Hopkins study finds

'We find no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures, and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality'
nationalpost.com nationalpost.com
Click to expand...
According to Wikipedia

The National Post is a Canadian, English-language, conservative broadsheet daily newspaper. The paper is the flagship publication of Postmedia Network, which is 66% American owned by Chatham Asset Management, and is published Tuesdays through Saturdays. It was founded in 1998 by Conrad Black."

- the well known fraudster who was granted a pardon by Donald Trump.

For God's sake get some reliable sources.
 
Apologies. This was also reported by Fox News. It must be right.

Oh hang on. This was carried out by economists. What did George Bernard Shaw say? "If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclusion."

By the way the Researchers excluded nearly 83 studies for consideration — including some that supported the efficacy of lockdowns. The most notable of which is a study published in 2020 in the journal Nature that concluded that European lockdowns helped avert between 2.8 and 3.5 million deaths in the first months of the pandemic.

So who do I believe?

Right wing media outlets; "experts" on AVFTT, or the Nature Study above.
 
It seems like they threw a lot of studies out which showed the benefits, including one which estimated 3 million lives saved die to COVID. I may read this one again in more detail but a quick skim raises pretty big questions
 
Firstly, using the word "lockdown" is dangerous, because it isn't just one thing or one measure.

What the study seems to say is that if the restrictions were advisory rather than statutory then people's behaviour and movements would've been broadly the same and thus death rates would have been so likewise, but it's splitting hairs to say that non-statutory measures are not lockdown, and thus a stretch to reach the headline that lockdowns didn't work.

Some of the findings from the report:
  • Closing non-essential businesses was estimated to have lowered mortality by about 10.6 per cent, a fall largely driven by closing drinking establishments;
  • shutting schools probably also lowered deaths by 4.4 per cent;
  • asking people to stay at home prevented 2.9 per cent of deaths;
  • border controls roughly 0.1 per cent.
So all in the measures from the first wave probably saved about 20% of mortality by the reports own findings, which last time I checked was more than 0.2%. The final 0.1% on border controls I find interesting considering just how much heat the topic generated on here.

Personally I have my doubts about the idea that people will take responsibility for themselves and thus the measures did not need to be statutory, there are far too many people who IMO wouldn't.
 
The front of our office has been closed today due to a demo by anti vaxxers. Nice people.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Firstly, using the word "lockdown" is dangerous, because it isn't just one thing or one measure.

What the study seems to say is that if the restrictions were advisory rather than statutory then people's behaviour and movements would've been broadly the same and thus death rates would have been so likewise, but it's splitting hairs to say that non-statutory measures are not lockdown, and thus a stretch to reach the headline that lockdowns didn't work.

Some of the findings from the report:
  • Closing non-essential businesses was estimated to have lowered mortality by about 10.6 per cent, a fall largely driven by closing drinking establishments;
  • shutting schools probably also lowered deaths by 4.4 per cent;
  • asking people to stay at home prevented 2.9 per cent of deaths;
  • border controls roughly 0.1 per cent.
So all in the measures from the first wave probably saved about 20% of mortality by the reports own findings, which last time I checked was more than 0.2%. The final 0.1% on border controls I find interesting considering just how much heat the topic generated on here.

Personally I have my doubts about the idea that people will take responsibility for themselves and thus the measures did not need to be statutory, there are far too many people who IMO wouldn't.
Click to expand...
For God's sake.

Please don't post propaganda that lives were saved by closing drinking establishments.
 
Ollygon said:
Apologies. This was also reported by Fox News. It must be right.

Oh hang on. This was carried out by economists. What did George Bernard Shaw say? "If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclusion."

By the way the Researchers excluded nearly 83 studies for consideration — including some that supported the efficacy of lockdowns. The most notable of which is a study published in 2020 in the journal Nature that concluded that European lockdowns helped avert between 2.8 and 3.5 million deaths in the first months of the pandemic.

So who do I believe?

Right wing media outlets; "experts" on AVFTT, or the Nature Study above.
Click to expand...
Its an economics paper, and a review of meta data of other studies not a paper on healthcare
 
Peer review on avftt. What a service 😂 and what do you know... The study which doesn't fit in with posters' existing views is rapidly debunked.

Maybe I should have played a game where I ask everyone to imagine it is true and to reflect on their own behaviour if it were.
 
rockontommy said:
Peer review on avftt. What a service 😂 and what do you know... The study which doesn't fit in with posters' existing views is rapidly debunked.

Maybe I should have played a game where I ask everyone to imagine it is true and to reflect on their own behaviour if it were.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should do a bit more research before you post.

You won't continually be embarassed then.
 
What can I say? John Hopkins University will be very disappointed with this thread 😂
 
Wizaard said:
The front of our office has been closed today due to a demo by anti vaxxers. Nice people.
Click to expand...
Protest has historically been an important tool in campaigns against authoritarian governments no matter how inconvenient it is for those pushing paper for the regime.
 

People attacked the initial article even through its done by a university.

Heres some more articles.

www.telegraph.co.uk

Covid lockdown ‘prevented only 0.2pc of deaths in first wave’

Researchers say the costs of lockdowns to society far outweighed the benefits and argue that they should be ‘rejected out of hand’
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk

www.dailymail.co.uk

New study says lockdowns only reduced COVID mortality by .2 percent

The review, led by a Johns Hopkins University professor, warned lockdowns caused 'enormous economic and social costs' and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument'.
www.dailymail.co.uk

Of course the mainstream won't cover it yet until its too big to ignore, as it shows them up for being wrong and helping cause tons of unnecessary damage.
 
JJpool said:

People attacked the initial article even through its done by a university.

Heres some more articles.

www.telegraph.co.uk

Covid lockdown ‘prevented only 0.2pc of deaths in first wave’

Researchers say the costs of lockdowns to society far outweighed the benefits and argue that they should be ‘rejected out of hand’
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk

www.dailymail.co.uk

New study says lockdowns only reduced COVID mortality by .2 percent

The review, led by a Johns Hopkins University professor, warned lockdowns caused 'enormous economic and social costs' and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument'.
www.dailymail.co.uk

Of course the mainstream won't cover it yet until its too big to ignore, as it shows them up for being wrong and helping cause tons of unnecessary damage.
Click to expand...
You've put links to the Telegraph and the Daily Mail. How mainstream do you want?
 
Wizaard said:
You've put links to the Telegraph and the Daily Mail. How mainstream do you want?
Click to expand...
Ignore a story until you can't (as it is being shared widely on social media). A few outlets publish it before the "main" ones steam in to smear it. Seems to be the playbook of the last two years.

Plenty of previously contentious issues have gone down this well-trodden path from lockdown harms (now an actual consideration) and the pointless callousness of restrictions. Cloth masks (now acknowledged to be useless), AZ heart problems (not an anti-vax propaganda but a reality for an unlucky minority). Takes a while for the truth to seed and bear fruit in this environment.

I'd say lockdowners' chickens are all coming home to roost - with the cost of living crisis and 50,000 missed cancer diagnoses to pick out the main two. Plenty of others to choose from though, from kids MH being in the bin and missed schooling but if it saves one life...

You might have noticed that I don't intend on being magnanimous on this.
 
rockontommy said:
Ignore a story until you can't (as it is being shared widely on social media). A few outlets publish it before the "main" ones steam in to smear it. Seems to be the playbook of the last two years.

Plenty of previously contentious issues have gone down this well-trodden path from lockdown harms (now an actual consideration) and the pointless callousness of restrictions. Cloth masks (now acknowledged to be useless), AZ heart problems (not an anti-vax propaganda but a reality for an unlucky minority). Takes a while for the truth to seed and bear fruit in this environment.

I'd say lockdowners' chickens are all coming home to roost - with the cost of living crisis and 50,000 missed cancer diagnoses to pick out the main two. Plenty of others to choose from though, from kids MH being in the bin and missed schooling but if it saves one life...

You might have noticed that I don't intend on being magnanimous on this.
Click to expand...
Professor last night on Newsnight (propagandist mouthpiece, no doubt), said the risk of heart problems was miniscule and invariably caused by underlying issues.

The Mailonline is the most widely read online newspaper in the world, so ignored by MSM is a conspiracist's pile of shite.
 
Bamber said:
Protest has historically been an important tool in campaigns against authoritarian governments no matter how inconvenient it is for those pushing paper for the regime.
Click to expand...
I think most people can see the difference between protesting a government policy outside a government office and deliberately disrupting the lives of the general population including the emergency services.
 
Wizaard said:
Professor last night on Newsnight (propagandist mouthpiece, no doubt), said the risk of heart problems was miniscule and invariably caused by underlying issues.

The Mailonline is the most widely read online newspaper in the world, so ignored by MSM is a conspiracist's pile of shite.
Click to expand...
If you told me that a Professor would be on Newsnight tonight to discuss vaccine side effects, I could immediately tell you what he was going to say. The same is true on a number of other issues, we all know this.
 
Bamber said:
If you told me that a Professor would be on Newsnight tonight to discuss vaccine side effects, I could immediately tell you what he was going to say. The same is true on a number of other issues, we all know this.
Click to expand...
As I was saying, the get out clause is its all a conspiracy.

You're quite happy to quote bogus scientists who have no standing at all, of course.
 
Wizaard said:
Professor last night on Newsnight (propagandist mouthpiece, no doubt), said the risk of heart problems was miniscule and invariably caused by underlying issues.

The Mailonline is the most widely read online newspaper in the world, so ignored by MSM is a conspiracist's pile of shite.
Click to expand...
Plenty of less-than newsworthy stories go much further than the Mail, Wiz. As you well know.
 
Wizaard said:
You've put links to the Telegraph and the Daily Mail. How mainstream do you want?
Click to expand...
That's the only 2 its been in AFAIK.

The mainstream media is the BBC, Sky channel 4, ITV, the Guardian, independent as well, etc etc.

You'd think this would be big news, as if true would spell an absolutely disastrous policy decision thats cost more lives than it took and crippled the country.

But of course we know a lot of the media mentioned above were just as culpable in lockdowns.

This report is but the start I reckon.

How many time do people have to be on the wrong side of something to realise they were wrong and will be wrong again?
 
JJpool said:
That's the only 2 its been in AFAIK.

The mainstream media is the BBC, Sky channel 4, ITV, the Guardian, independent as well, etc etc.

You'd think this would be big news, as if true would spell an absolutely disastrous policy decision thats cost more lives than it took and crippled the country.

But of course we know a lot of the media mentioned above were just as culpable in lockdowns.

This report is but the start I reckon.

How many time do people have to be on the wrong side of something to realise they were wrong and will be wrong again?
Click to expand...
Didn't someone point out yesterday that the report is based on false logic?
 
JJpool said:
That's the only 2 its been in AFAIK.

The mainstream media is the BBC, Sky channel 4, ITV, the Guardian, independent as well, etc etc.

You'd think this would be big news, as if true would spell an absolutely disastrous policy decision thats cost more lives than it took and crippled the country.

But of course we know a lot of the media mentioned above were just as culpable in lockdowns.

This report is but the start I reckon.

How many time do people have to be on the wrong side of something to realise they were wrong and will be wrong again?
Click to expand...
Just because you keep posting misinformation, it doesn't mean it will eventually be true.
 
Seasider3610 said:
RoT you should rather post on the JHU messageboard rather than AVFTT if you need a different outcome for your original post. 😂😉
Click to expand...
Deboonked in record time. We truly have some very smart posters. The boffs at JHU will be disappointed 😂
 
Wizaard said:
Didn't someone point out yesterday that the report is based on false logic?
Click to expand...
No idea, but the bigger issue is its fairy easy to figure out lockdowns caused far more harms than good.

They were never part of pandemic plans and the first lockdown was influenced by the predictions of Neil Ferguson, who has been wrong most the time. Given how wrong he was on freedom day, this Xmas need to lockdown or 5k deaths a day etc its only right to be sceptical of his 500k deaths prediction that scared the government into lockdown.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Experts say modelling that predicted 500,000 Covid-19 deaths is a mess

Professor Neil Ferguson's Imperial College London computer coding that predicted half a million people could die if Britain didn't go into lockdown has been described as 'totally unreliable,' by experts.
www.dailymail.co.uk
 
Ollygon said:
Just because you keep posting misinformation, it doesn't mean it will eventually be true.
Click to expand...
Your the only one posting misleading info, like the deaths figure you posted the other day.

I've been far more right than many on covid and were only just out of it, lots more to come out I'm sure.

I bet many will reflect differently on the last years as time passes and people realise the cock up.
 
Ollygon said:
According to Wikipedia

The National Post is a Canadian, English-language, conservative broadsheet daily newspaper. The paper is the flagship publication of Postmedia Network, which is 66% American owned by Chatham Asset Management, and is published Tuesdays through Saturdays. It was founded in 1998 by Conrad Black."

- the well known fraudster who was granted a pardon by Donald Trump.

For God's sake get some reliable sources.
Click to expand...
Ollygon - I’m confused by you. Are you pro vax, anti vax, conspiracy theorist, pro science or what? I’ve been following your threads and I haven’t got a bloody clue what you are on about! 🤔
 

The Flawed COVID-19 Model That Locked Down Canada | Montreal Economic Institute

Restrictions continue to be gradually eased in Canada, but as there is talk of a second wave, it is more important than ever to question the case for lockdown. This MEI publication provides a critique of Professor Neil Ferguson’s epidemiological model, which led to lockdown in this country.
www.iedm.org www.iedm.org

An old article now but still has some interesting info on Neil Fergusons influence with his crap modelling.

Gives a flavour of just reacting to that first variant at the time too.
 
Lost Seasider said:
You know nobody's listening to you don't you?
Click to expand...
You know the irony of replying to my post saying that don't you?

Also I posted it under this thread so it's under a relevant thread, adding to the discussion. If you don't like it don't reply.

It's OK, as people will realise the more we look into it and will want the people who made these damaging decisions held to account, for the deception and incompetence shown at times.
 
Lockdown does not work? 0.2% difference. Preposterous. It depends on how effectively a country enforces it.

New Zealand, full lockdown inc borders and travel, track and trace working, immediate local isolations = just 53 Covid deaths in 2 years.

COVID-19 cases | WHO COVID-19 dashboard

The latest data for coronavirus (COVID-19) cases from the WHO COVID-19 dashboard.
covid19.who.int covid19.who.int

UK, late decisions failing to recognise severity, incoming air travel in the tens of thousands from Italy/Europe, India, South Africa, failed £39 Billion T&T which has never worked properly, eat out to help out etc triggering each successive wave = 170,000+ Covid deaths and still rising at ca 1,800/week. And the public health ineptitude from Bozo has driven the economic chaos.

It all depends upon leadership and competence. The disparity is unarguable.
 
Last edited:
Archibald Knox said:
It all depends upon leadership and competence. The disparity is unarguable.
Click to expand...

Geography also plays a bit of a role, NZ being 2,000 miles away from anywhere and 12,000 miles from Europe might've helped just a bit.

The real comparison is to Europe, and there we're fairly middle of the pack despite being one of the hardest hit in the first wave.
 
They are talking about “mortality rate”. Is that deaths per 100,000 of all population or deaths per 100,000 Covid cases?
If the latter, then the discussion is pointless, the UK locked down the stable door after the horse had bolted.
If the former, then the conjecture of just 0.2% difference in deaths is rubbish and unsustainable. Especially before vaccines were available.
 
Last edited:
Lost Seasider said:
Geography also plays a bit of a role, NZ being 2,000 miles away from anywhere and 12,000 miles from Europe might've helped just a bit.

The real comparison is to Europe, and there we're fairly middle of the pack despite being one of the hardest hit in the first wave.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, NZ is a lot closer to China than we are and trades with it. But NZ made best use of all possible advantages inc distance and time delay to understand the risk, while Bozo went around shaking hands with Covid patients even after hundreds had died in Italy.
Whatever the distances, a death difference factor for the UK of ca 3400x over 2 years, even taking into account a population ratio of 14 times, is striking.

Edit: Apparently Bozo has kicked the Covid Public Inquiry to the bottom of his To-Do list. I wonder why? He promised it would start this Spring. It might open, but then likely will be suspended for months or years.
 
Last edited:
Archibald Knox said:
On the other hand, NZ is a lot closer to China than we are and trades with it. But NZ made best use of all possible advantages inc distance and time delay to understand the risk, while Bozo went around shaking hands with Covid patients even after hundreds had died in Italy.
Click to expand...

Cherry picking at it's finest, pick the country with the lowest death rate in the developed world, ignore the fact that the amount of international travel is orders of magnitude lower than the UK and to infected areas even more so, and then pretend all of the differences in outcome are down to the government response.

You know the NZ gov't didn't act any quicker than us BTW, they closed the borders to non-residents on 19 March, by that point the virus was already here in large numbers and we were in lockdown within 4 days.

Playing the same game, Bulgaria was virtually unaffected by the first wave but ended up with x4 excess mortality, the difference is that we built a world class TEST and trace system, led the world in vaccine and treatment developments, got the vaccine rollout spot on, developed the information systems necessary to inform decision making and as a result got almost every major decisions right after the first few weeks with the information available at the time.

The relentlessly negative story you like to tell yourself is party propaganda, not accurate reporting.
 
About Three Thousand Four Hundred TIMES (3400x) the number of deaths NZ has had. For a population only 14 times bigger. No matter the advantages that NZ had, in time and distance, they took full advantage of them. The UK did not at all. The UK also restricted travel to and from certain countries but in such a haphazard delayed fashion it was too late to stop variants proliferating. Close your eyes to it then... perhaps you didn’t have any friends or relatives die?
 
Archibald Knox said:
About Three Thousand Four Hundred TIMES (3400x) the number of deaths NZ has had. For a population only 14 times bigger. No matter the advantages that NZ had, in time and distance, they took full advantage of them. The UK did not at all. The UK also restricted travel to and from certain countries but in such a haphazard delayed fashion it was too late to stop variants proliferating. Close your eyes to it then... perhaps you didn’t have any friends or relatives die?
Click to expand...

I'm sure that NZ took full advantage of it's isolation by banning foreign travellers at about the same time as we went into full lockdown, the UK being one of the most interconnected countries on earth simply never had the same advantages in the first place.
 
I thought we had “taken back control” of our borders a few weeks beforehand? Nothing to stop us disconnecting from the travelling super-spreaders then. But no, Bozo dithered, let thousands in from Europe etc for weeks. Liverpool-Atletico Madrid? I agree, NZ saw exactly how NOT to run public health policy from the UK and took full advantage of the few weeks breathing space given them. Lucky people. 53 dead cf. our 170,000+ deaths. And still climbing at 1500 per week.
 
Archibald Knox said:
I thought we had “taken back control” of our borders a few weeks beforehand? Nothing to stop us disconnecting from the travelling super-spreaders then. But no, Bozo dithered, let thousands in from Europe etc for weeks. Liverpool-Atletico Madrid? I agree, NZ saw exactly how NOT to run public health policy from the UK and took full advantage of the few weeks breathing space given them. Lucky people. 53 dead cf. our 170,000+ deaths. And still climbing at 1500 per week.
Click to expand...

On the 19th March, when NZ did it, it would've made no difference whatsoever, and everything you say about the flow of thousands (of mostly UK citizens) from Europe in the weeks before that date ignores the fact that by the time the facts were known, or even suspected, the die was already cast.

All of this of course was exactly in line with the scientific advice that was being given by SAGE, and which can be seen in their minutes by anyone who's remotely interested in what really happened.

Realistically, to have had a chance of being effective, we would've needed total border closure from about 31 January, thus your argument is that the government was at fault for not acting two months before the rest of the world.

Of course, you also ignore the obvious differences in the flow of goods into the countries, which means that even if we tried to close the borders there's still a huge back door that would be hard to plug.

Finally, there are arguments to be made that if we'd tried the NZ approach it could well have made things worse.
 
Oh well, even if you were right about early days (which I dispute) your opinion completely ignores Bozo’s response to the Delta (India) and Omicron (RSA) variants. We have taken back control of our borders... welcome in !!!
170,000+ deaths and still rising at ca. 1500 per week. The highest cumulative total in Europe. Not a lot to crow about. But then again, if no-one you loved snuffed it with Covid then I suppose that makes it easier to defend the cretin in No.10
When is the Covid Public Inquiry? Like to put a predicted date on its report? ... I thought not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top