Looking good!
Posted on 05/04/2020 3:42:42 AM PDT by gattaca
Professor Michael Levitt, who teaches structural biology at the Stanford School of Medicine, won the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for "the development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems." Ditch the fake news ==> Click here to get news you can trust sent right to your inbox. It's free! And according to Levitt, coronavirus data show that sweeping lockdown measures were an overreaction that may actually backfire.
Levitt has been analyzing the COVID-19 outbreak from a statistical perspective since January and has been remarkably accurate in his predications. The data show that the outbreak never actually grew exponentially, suggesting harsh lockdown measures, which have drastically impacted the world economy, were probably unnecessary.
According to UnHerd:
His observation is a simple one: that in outbreak after outbreak of this disease, a similar mathematical pattern is observable regardless of government interventions. After around a two week exponential growth of cases (and, subsequently, deaths) some kind of break kicks in, and growth starts slowing down. The curve quickly becomes "sub-exponential".
This may seem like a technical distinction, but its implications are profound. The 'unmitigated' scenarios modelled by (among others) Imperial College, and which tilted governments across the world into drastic action, relied on a presumption of continued exponential growth — that with a consistent R number of significantly above 1 and a consistent death rate, very quickly the majority of the population would be infected and huge numbers of deaths would be recorded. But Professor Levitt's point is that that hasn't actually happened anywhere, even in countries that have been relatively lax in their responses. Instead of strict lockdown orders, Levitt told UnHerd that developing "herd immunity" is a better strategy to fighting a virus like COVID-19.
"I think the policy of herd immunity is the right policy. I think Britain was on exactly the right track before they were fed wrong numbers. And they made a huge mistake. I see the standout winners as Germany and Sweden. They didn't practise too much lockdown and they got enough people sick to get some herd immunity," Levitt explained.
"I see the standout losers as countries like Austria, Australia and Israel that had very strict lockdown but didn't have many cases," he said. "They have damaged their economies, caused massive social damage, damaged the educational year of their children, but not obtained any herd immunity.
"There is no doubt in my mind, that when we come to look back on this, the damage done by lockdown will exceed any saving of lives by a huge factor," Levitt predicted.
Mr. President, PLEASE add this man to your task force. You desperately need a counterbalance to Fauci and Birx.
What I find really interesting is that there are some super smart people who understand numbers, and statistics, and epidemiology, and they will tell you that countries like Sweden are doing exactly the right thing.
And there are some super smart people who understand numbers, and statistics, and epidemiology, and they will tell you that countries like Sweden are doing exactly the wrong thing.
The shutdown needs to be shutdown yesterday.
Yes, Mr. President, stop this insanity now. It looks very much like you, not to mention the rest of the nation, has been had by some idiots or operatives disguised as “experts”.
Yes. As a Conservative, I make Liberty my core value, not Safety. If you want to keep your business open, that is OK with me. If I want to be a customer of your business, that should be OK too. Government mandated shutdowns are not OK. Ever. Under any circumstances. If someone thinks their Aunt Sally is in danger, then they ought to keep Aunt Sally in a safe location. That’s not my problem. It shouldn’t impact my Freedom.
Frankly, in my opinion, people who feel otherwise are just progressives, not Conservatives.
The prize since they gave it to obama for nothing is on par with the prize you get in a crackerjack box
Hindsight is 100% accurate, but decisions aren’t made on hindsight. Unfortunate, but true.
When reading any observations regarding must haves and should haves etc... it is important to note that hindsight is always 20/20.
I go to the Worldometer site and look at the graphs of the daily deaths for the countries and find that most of them are on the down slope of a bell curve. The efforts of these countries is paying off. However, looking at Canada’s daily deaths graph, they are going up. So is Brazil.
The overreaction would never have been possible without the hysterical media hyping the virus!
I love the Monday morning quarterbacking.
Bttt
some kind of break kicks in,
A miracle occurs?
Looking good!
At the time of the decision it was not understood the lethality was targeting the elderly and those especially with co-morbidity conditions. The error was on the side of caution because of THIS unknown and the rate of transmissibility without fatality or even symptoms during the entire course of the infection for most. Monday morning quarter-backing is always 100% accurate.
It is no longer a matter of hindsight. The lockdowns are largely still in place and will be for a long time to come in some states. The time for the government to admit its mistake and move on is here. Furthermore the time for review what to do in the future and to plan accordingly has also arrived. The same mistake will be made again unless sanity is restored.
This guy won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry.
Comparing the two is like comparing horse manure to a key lime pie.
Too late. Some are terrified to go outside their residences. My SIL for one. We were curious when they would come to visit and she said, well, not before the fall at the earliest. The only time they venture out is to go to the pick up lane at the supermarket where they have ordered their food by phone.
I guess you can do this till the money runs out. Another reason I am against all the free money flowing from DC to buy votes.
I could have added that it isn’t hindsight. There were many doctors and scientists who were stating lockdowns were counterproductive from the get go. But I didn’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.