4 ms·

> If they were effective, why do graphs show seasonality predominates? That doesn't follow. Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doub

> If they were effective, why do graphs show seasonality predominates? That doesn't follow. Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doubling rate between 5-7 days. Had this been ineffective we'd have all been sick by now and maybe 50-100M people would be dead worldwide. Clearly "lockdown" (which is a loaded term people tend to use for anything from stay at home orders to simple mask requirements) worked. The question is how well and to what extent the regimes were followed, and by which populations.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
> Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doubling rate between 5-7 days. Had this been ineffective we'd have all been sick by now and maybe 50-100M people would be dead worldwide. You know this isn't true because practically every local area that suffers an outbreak follows the same curve regardless of how they implement a strategy. It looks different at larger levels (town, city, state, country, globe) because it's the aggregation of multiple outbreaks.
- newacct583 6y ago
  > You know this isn't true because practically every local area that suffers an outbreak follows the same curve regardless of how they implement a strategy. That's just laughably wrong. Explain how these are the "same curve"? https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=countries-normalized&highlight=United%20States&show=highlight-only&y=both&scale=linear&data=cases-daily-7&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right&extra=Norway%2CUnited%20States%2CGermany%2CBelgium%2CJapan#countries-normalized https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=countr...
  - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
    Did you even read what I said? I said local outbreaks all follow the same spread curve. When aggregated at the country level you're looking at many separate outbreaks superimposed, hence the wide curves.
    - newacct583 6y ago
      And that too seems trivially falsifiable. You have something to cite?
viraptor 6y ago
It also ignores actual lockdown which brought cases down to 0 in Victoria. Holding up for a month or so already.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago

> Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doubling rate between 5-7 days. Had this been ineffective we'd have all been sick by now and maybe 50-100M people would be dead worldwide. You know this isn't true because practically every local area that suffers an outbreak follows the same curve regardless of how they implement a strategy. It looks different at larger levels (town, city, state, country, globe) because it's the aggregation of multiple outbreaks.

newacct583 6y ago
> You know this isn't true because practically every local area that suffers an outbreak follows the same curve regardless of how they implement a strategy. That's just laughably wrong. Explain how these are the "same curve"? https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=countries-normalized&highlight=United%20States&show=highlight-only&y=both&scale=linear&data=cases-daily-7&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right&extra=Norway%2CUnited%20States%2CGermany%2CBelgium%2CJapan#countries-normalized https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=countr...
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  Did you even read what I said? I said local outbreaks all follow the same spread curve. When aggregated at the country level you're looking at many separate outbreaks superimposed, hence the wide curves.
  - newacct583 6y ago
    And that too seems trivially falsifiable. You have something to cite?

viraptor 6y ago

It also ignores actual lockdown which brought cases down to 0 in Victoria. Holding up for a month or so already.