What is?

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

As I said, I had no way of knowing how mentally fragile the American public is. I don't find it funny at all that people lost their ******** minds over wearing masks, or keeping 6 feet apart in public places, etc. It's actually quite depressing that so many people are actually on the verge of some sort of mental break down.

It is odd that you don't seem to place any of this blame on Trump or the anti-maskers who contributed just as much to the hatred and divide as the pro-mask/vax crowd and spread much more misinformation. Strange how that works. Just like the mandates get no credit for the lives they saved, only blame for the things that got phucked. Just like the vax gets no credit for the lives saved, just the ones lost. Just like the CDC gets no credit for transparency, unless "you guys" can spin their data to match your narratives.

You don’t understand, because you lack empathy. You don’t understand all of the other obvious consequences that have come from all the covid measures. The nation would’ve been much better off just letting society to continue to function as normal, as covid was never that deadly. It’s f*cking absurd what all we did to destroy the country over a virus that isn’t that deadly, whatsoever. It’s illogical. Covid spread quickly, wasn’t that deadly. People confuse a quick spread with being super deadly, which covid isn’t, therefore the lockdowns made no sense, not to mention all the illegality of so many of the measures.

Tell me more, Jim, about how much you love to lick on your master’s toes:

“A new Johns Hopkins University study published this week found that COVID-19 lockdowns toward the beginning of the pandemic had “little to no effect” on the COVID-19 mortality rate and “should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy.””

“In other words, the lockdowns were a failure that might have cost more lives than they saved.”

New study confirms COVID-19 lockdowns did more harm than good

A new Johns Hopkins University study published this week found that COVID-19 lockdowns toward the beginning of the pandemic had “little to no effect” on

www.washingtonexaminer.com

And I’ve said before that I can’t trust Trump because of Warp Speed.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

@Jimi77

““When it comes to COVID, epidemiological models have many things in common: dubious assumptions, hair-raising predictions of disaster that miss the mark, and few lessons learned,” he said. “The lives saved were a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs imposed.””

“After comparing government interventions of varying strictness levels, the researchers estimated that the average lockdown imposed across Europe and the U.S. in the spring of 2020 reduced mortality by just 3.2%.

“This translates into approximately 6,000 avoided deaths in Europe and 4,000 in the United States,” they said, describing lockdowns as having had “a negligible effect” when it came to quashing COVID-related deaths. “In comparison, there are approximately 72,000 flu deaths in Europe and 38,000 flu deaths in the United States each year.””

‘The Money Doctor’ slams COVID lockdowns as the biggest policy mistake in modern times

Former Reagan advisor Steve Hanke co-authored a paper that found the average lockdown reduced COVID-19 mortality rates by 3.2%.

finance.yahoo.com

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

@Jimi77

You have to keep in mind any covid measure has negative consequences completely unrelated to covid:

““This study is the first all-encompassing evaluation of the research on the effectiveness of mandatory restrictions on mortality,” according to one of the study’s co-authors, Dr. Lars Jonung, professor emeritus at the Knut Wicksell Centre for Financial Studies at Sweden’s Lund University, “It demonstrates that lockdowns were a failed promise. They had negligible health effects but disastrous economic, social and political costs to society. Most likely lockdowns represent the biggest policy mistake in modern times.””

“In each case, the restrictions did little to reduce COVID-19 mortality:

• Shelter-in-place (stay at home) orders in Europe and the United States reduced COVID mortality by between 1.4 and 4.1 per cent;
• Business closures reduced mortality by 7.5 per cent;
• Gathering limits likely increased COVID mortality by almost six per cent;
• Mask mandates, which most countries avoided in Spring 2020, reduced mortality by 18.7 per cent, particularly mandates in workplaces; and
• School closures resulted in a between 2.5 per cent and 6.2 per cent mortality reduction.”

“This negative conclusion is amplified by the significant economic and social costs associated with lockdowns, which include:

• stunted economic growth;
• large increases in public debt;
• rising inequality;
• damage to children’s education and health;
• reduced health-related quality of life;
• damage to mental health;
• increased crime; and
• threats to democracy and loss of freedom.

The research concludes that, unless substantial alternative evidence emerges, lockdowns should be ‘rejected out of hand’ to control future pandemics.”

Lockdowns were a costly failure, finds new IEA book

A new systematic review and meta-analysis published by the Institute of Economic Affairs finds that Covid lockdowns failed to significantly … Continue reading "Lockdowns were a costly failure, finds new IEA book"

iea.org.uk

Please tell me more about how you’re saving people by boot licking…

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

“An analysis of each of these three groups support the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average. SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.

While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.”

https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

I don't wear my seat belt and my 3rd brake light got yanked when I was deadening my rear gate...I will say seatbelts do save lives though...3rd brake lights and masks were more along the lines "feel good" solutions so politicians public figures could appear to be doing something...

Third brake lights work and and they cost nothing.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

@Jimi77

You have to keep in mind any covid measure has negative consequences completely unrelated to covid:

““This study is the first all-encompassing evaluation of the research on the effectiveness of mandatory restrictions on mortality,” according to one of the study’s co-authors, Dr. Lars Jonung, professor emeritus at the Knut Wicksell Centre for Financial Studies at Sweden’s Lund University, “It demonstrates that lockdowns were a failed promise. They had negligible health effects but disastrous economic, social and political costs to society. Most likely lockdowns represent the biggest policy mistake in modern times.””

“In each case, the restrictions did little to reduce COVID-19 mortality:

• Shelter-in-place (stay at home) orders in Europe and the United States reduced COVID mortality by between 1.4 and 4.1 per cent;
• Business closures reduced mortality by 7.5 per cent;
• Gathering limits likely increased COVID mortality by almost six per cent;
• Mask mandates, which most countries avoided in Spring 2020, reduced mortality by 18.7 per cent, particularly mandates in workplaces; and
• School closures resulted in a between 2.5 per cent and 6.2 per cent mortality reduction.”

“This negative conclusion is amplified by the significant economic and social costs associated with lockdowns, which include:

• stunted economic growth;
• large increases in public debt;
• rising inequality;
• damage to children’s education and health;
• reduced health-related quality of life;
• damage to mental health;
• increased crime; and
• threats to democracy and loss of freedom.

The research concludes that, unless substantial alternative evidence emerges, lockdowns should be ‘rejected out of hand’ to control future pandemics.”

Lockdowns were a costly failure, finds new IEA book

A new systematic review and meta-analysis published by the Institute of Economic Affairs finds that Covid lockdowns failed to significantly … Continue reading "Lockdowns were a costly failure, finds new IEA book"

iea.org.uk

Please tell me more about how you’re saving people by boot licking…

It's all a bunch of guesswork. And according to that guesswork, the masks were pretty effective.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

It's all a bunch of guesswork. And according to that guesswork, the masks were pretty effective.

Lol, gtfo with that nonsense. Covid lockdowns and related measures didn’t work, and they overall did more harm than good.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Lol, gtfo with that nonsense. Covid lockdowns and related measures didn’t work, and they overall did more harm than good.

According to a bunch of guesswork. Furthermore, that article piles on stuff that wasn't related to lockdowns like the out of control spending.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

More conspiracy theories. Nothing was going to "STOP" covid, nothing. You act like we shouldn't have done anything to try and "CONTROL" covid. The whole World was trying to slow the spread of covid. It wasn't just the United States. We didn't have to wear a mask 24/7. It really wasn't that big of a deal. If it only helped 1% then it was worth it IMO. I would wear them again.

I'm with you. I faced some minor inconveniences for ~1.5 years to save thousands, probably more lives - doesn't seem like a huge sacrifice. Masks are a minor inconvenience. How were you or I or Fauci or CDC or WHO, et al supposed to know it would cause people to completely freak out and lose their minds? We had reason to believe we'd see minor increases in *******. I think it was easy to predict an negative impact on education, etc. But people completely losing their minds? The POTUS using the mask as a wedge issue and stoking/igniting a culture war - how we were supposed to see that coming (odd somehow Trump never gets any blame for the fallout of his actions). And that said if the American Psyche is so fragile that minor inconveniences resulted in this shyt show, how can we actually put the blame on Covid? Covid just happened to be the trigger, but if we're so mentally fragile, then who's to say something else wouldn't have triggered this craziness? Dylan Mulvaney is perfect example, they put his/her pic on a can beer and complete freak out. How could Bud predict a little inclusiveness would result in 1/2 the country wanting to destroy an American Icon? IMHO, for many, perhaps most Americans, they're sitting there on there verge of a mental meltdown at any moment and who knows WTF will trigger it.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

I'm with you. I faced some minor inconveniences for ~1.5 years to save thousands, probably more lives - doesn't seem like a huge sacrifice.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I don't wear my seat belt and my 3rd brake light got yanked when I was deadening my rear gate...I will say seatbelts do save lives though...3rd brake lights and masks were more along the lines "feel good" solutions so politicians public figures could appear to be doing something...

And you obviously have peer-reviewed studies that back up this information.

Can you share them here?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

More conspiracy theories. Nothing was going to "STOP" covid, nothing. You act like we shouldn't have done anything to try and "CONTROL" covid. The whole World was trying to slow the spread of covid. It wasn't just the United States. We didn't have to wear a mask 24/7. It really wasn't that big of a deal. If it only helped 1% then it was worth it IMO. I would wear them again.

It's all conspiracies. If "they" did nothing, then there'd be a narrative about trying to maximize the body count and making sure corporate cash flows weren't interrupted. If the virus was benign from the start, then Q-crowd would have claimed it's a dry run for a future depopulation of the planet. If the vax was the brick wall that the Q-crowd claimed "we" said it would be, then they would have gone with a we had a vax at the ready all along narrative. That's the great thing about conspiracies, there's always a conspiracy and you never need any proof, just a plausible narrative.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

View attachment 50439

More like arguing fact against conjecture, personal opinions, conspiracy fantasies, wishes, beliefs.

Your argument against masks because of CO2 poisoning is fully contrary to your argument that CO2 has no effect and is even good for the planet, along with your fallacious argument that the mask won’t stop moisture vapors and droplets, but traps CO2 that “hurts” people.

Care to explain how hospital workers wearing them for 8-16 hour shifts day in and day out somehow survived, yet Joe Smith couldn’t handle wearing one to go buy his Marlboros at the 7-11?

The problem with slinging bullshit like you do is that it’s easy to tear apart with basic logic.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]