You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy
July 23 2024 9.00am

Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 86 of 289 < 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 >

 

View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 08 Jun 23 12.06am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Sweden doesn't count then. We were told lockdowns were to "protect the NHS". How did that work out?

Interestingly Sweden has emerged as having amongst the lowest excess deaths total per population of all the European countries.

Considering how our media and elites behaved and the sheer amount of criticism that was levelled at Sweden's choices the fact that this isn't widely advertised isn't surprising. However, I did find it in the Telegraph.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (08 Jun 2023 12.16am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 08 Jun 23 12.17am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

And based on dodgy predictions too.


[Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 08 Jun 23 1.51am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

And based on dodgy predictions too.

[Link]

People on good money ruining the country's finances.

Ripping up the roots for future generations.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Eden Eagle's Profile Eden Eagle Flag Kent 08 Jun 23 6.43am Send a Private Message to Eden Eagle Add Eden Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I know how long it's existed and how influential it is in right-wing circles. Andrew Marr acknowledging that helps us to understand the way the right is operating these days.

Belittling the analysis in Wiki does nothing to undermine it. This is not a "think tank". It is a pressure group. Extracting the quote from Marr needs to be set against all the other things it has done and is doing before evaluating its reliability. So the whole of the Wiki analysis needs to be read.

I haven't read the "report" and won't now. I have another busy day ahead. Interestingly I could not now watch the Campbell video as it has been taken down. I wonder why? Perhaps you can explain?

I will though say this. Any report, let alone one produced by a right-wing pressure group with the reputation of the IEA, that claims that "Lockdowns have been proven a disaster" starts off from completely the wrong position.

Covid was the big disaster. Whatever we did was going to have disastrous consequences. We always knew that. The real question was which was the least worse. Expert opinion decided that locking down represented a better set of outcomes than not locking down.

Looking back now and suggesting that Lockdowns were disastrous only confirms what was predicted. What we don't know is what would have happened if we didn't lockdown. Because we didn't.

So this report looks like some juicy red meat being tossed into the mouths of the prejudiced. Maybe I am wrong and it makes those points. Maybe Campbell pointed it out. We cannot know that as his video has disappeared.


Your comment about “we don’t know what would have happened if we didn’t lockdown” is untrue - at the time I shared data with you comparing US states and in-particular those that had strict lockdown policies such as California with those that did not such as Florida - this data showed that health wise and from an economic point of view Florida fared better. At the time you dismissed this and, as usual, blamed the source of the report.

Right from the start of this fiasco you have been a lockdown fanatic and as such are unable to reflect and perhaps consider that this might have been the wrong strategy.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 08 Jun 23 9.47am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Sweden doesn't count then. We were told lockdowns were to "protect the NHS". How did that work out?

No Sweden doesn't count, for the reasons explained in these pages many times already. It's not like the UK. It tried something different and it failed. Eventually, they too followed a similar path to other European countries.

It did protect the NHS, which just about coped. Of course, it also caused huge problems, that we always inevitable.

Simply pointing at those problems and assuming things would have been better without the lockdowns is naive. It would almost certainly have been much worse and people would now be asking why on earth we didn't follow medical advice and lockdown for a while.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 08 Jun 23 9.57am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Eden Eagle


Your comment about “we don’t know what would have happened if we didn’t lockdown” is untrue - at the time I shared data with you comparing US states and in-particular those that had strict lockdown policies such as California with those that did not such as Florida - this data showed that health wise and from an economic point of view Florida fared better. At the time you dismissed this and, as usual, blamed the source of the report.

Right from the start of this fiasco you have been a lockdown fanatic and as such are unable to reflect and perhaps consider that this might have been the wrong strategy.

I am not a "lockdown fanatic" at all. I just prefer to trust those with the knowledge and skills necessary to make informed decisions than politically inspired know-it-alls sitting at a keyboard.

Comparing the experiences of US states and trying to draw conclusions relevant to us is a distraction. US states are different to one another and we are even more different to them. Florida may well have fared better economically, I haven't studied any figures but if we had not locked down here, with our crowded cities, climate and a health service already under stress who knows what the consequential loss of life might have been? I don't know, and nor do you. I trust those with a better understanding of the probable answers.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 08 Jun 23 10.07am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

And based on dodgy predictions too.


[Link]

As described by a dodgy right-wing magazine!

Government policy wasn't determined by Imperial College. They consulted widely and the Chief Medical Officer was the primary conduit for the provision of a consensus viewpoint.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 08 Jun 23 10.24am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Interestingly Sweden has emerged as having amongst the lowest excess deaths total per population of all the European countries.

Considering how our media and elites behaved and the sheer amount of criticism that was levelled at Sweden's choices the fact that this isn't widely advertised isn't surprising. However, I did find it in the Telegraph.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (08 Jun 2023 12.16am)

Of course, you ignore the key point in that report. Which is:-

“The lesson from Sweden is to invest in your population's health and have less inequality,”

You though immediately jump to the conclusion it was a "no lockdown" policy responsible.

A better health service available equitably across all sections of society, plus Sweden's very different demographics to our own, and a much lower population density, are almost certainly the real reasons.

You also ignore that Sweden fared worse than the other Nordic countries, who are by far better comparables than us.

No, you just allow your conclusion to find something to stand on by cherry-picking.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 08 Jun 23 10.43am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

As described by a dodgy right-wing magazine!

Government policy wasn't determined by Imperial College. They consulted widely and the Chief Medical Officer was the primary conduit for the provision of a consensus viewpoint.

What happened to look at the content not the provider?
The government themselves weren't overly bothered about the dire warnings since they broke their own rules on so many occasions.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 08 Jun 23 10.57am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

No Sweden doesn't count, for the reasons explained in these pages many times already. It's not like the UK. It tried something different and it failed. Eventually, they too followed a similar path to other European countries.

It did protect the NHS, which just about coped. Of course, it also caused huge problems, that we always inevitable.

Simply pointing at those problems and assuming things would have been better without the lockdowns is naive. It would almost certainly have been much worse and people would now be asking why on earth we didn't follow medical advice and lockdown for a while.

Where is the evidence "things would almost certainly have been worse"?
The NHS now has an incredible backlog which is still costing lives, education suffered, businesses closed, jobs were lost, mental health was adversely affected and the country spent well over 300 billion we didn't have.


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View eaglesdare's Profile eaglesdare Flag 08 Jun 23 11.00am Send a Private Message to eaglesdare Add eaglesdare as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

No Sweden doesn't count, for the reasons explained in these pages many times already. It's not like the UK. It tried something different and it failed. Eventually, they too followed a similar path to other European countries.

It did protect the NHS, which just about coped. Of course, it also caused huge problems, that we always inevitable.

Simply pointing at those problems and assuming things would have been better without the lockdowns is naive. It would almost certainly have been much worse and people would now be asking why on earth we didn't follow medical advice and lockdown for a while.

Yes they couldnt have done all thier Tik Tok dancing videos without the lockdowns. *Rolls eyes*

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 08 Jun 23 11.31am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Where is the evidence "things would almost certainly have been worse"?
The NHS now has an incredible backlog which is still costing lives, education suffered, businesses closed, jobs were lost, mental health was adversely affected and the country spent well over 300 billion we didn't have.


That's the point, isn't it? There is no evidence for something that didn't happen, which is why it's so easy to point at things that did and make assumptions.

We know all the things that you list. What we don't know is whether things would have been better, or worse, not doing them.

If the initial consensus of the experts was that locking down was the safest route, then that was the right decision. Experts almost certainly get more things right than non-experts.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 86 of 289 < 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy