>His proof is very limited, mostly hospital bed ocupancy being way bellow the predicted values. First, one question would be that maybe hospital bed occupancy

>His proof is very limited, mostly hospital bed ocupancy being way bellow the predicted values. First, one question would be that maybe hospital bed occupancy being way bellow the predicted values is because measures were taken. Similar to saying "The military is useless because nobody is attacking us" or "See? It wasn't necessary to vaccinate everyone. Nobody has polio in hospitals!" Second, the measures can be seen as too strict in retrospective. However, nobody wants to have a retrospective of lackadaisical measures that lead to many more deaths. In other words, when in doubt is it sane to roll the dice. Is it better to say "sorry, I pushed you because I saw the driver lose control and kill ten people already" or "sorry, I shrugged it off and now you're dead". Overzealous measures can be taken down a few notches. It can be hard to recover, especially with loss of employment, but loss of life is harder to recover from.. The consequences of lax measures lead to irrecoverable and irreversible states. Third, it would have been over-reacting if there were only one country dealing with it and there were no data, but I don't think it's easy not to over-react when you see countries that were hit really hard, even with no real data.