3 ms·

If the authors are going to argue that the common conclusion among epidemiologists is wrong, I am going to be more skeptical of their paper. The fact that they

by cowpig 5y ago

If the authors are going to argue that the common conclusion among epidemiologists is wrong, I am going to be more skeptical of their paper. The fact that they discarded 83 of 117 possible studies, including large notable studies that disagree with their results leaves a lot of room for selection bias. Plus they include non-peer-reviewed studies, despite being otherwise extremely prejudiced with their selections. I think this is the kind of thing where you should wait for some peer review at the very least before drawing any conclusions, or sending it to the front page of hacker news.

infamouscow 5y ago
This whole fiasco has me convinced that the medical industry suffers from the same hubris, profiteering, and strange collective delusion and ignorance that caused the 2008 financial crisis. I'm old enough to remember the financial crisis, when it was always assumed that things couldn't be as bad as they were because there's no way thousands of high paid bankers could all be so reckless and have it wrong at once. After all, these are the smartest people in the world, right? Surely they saw this coming. Surely they're not that foolish... Well, it turns out they didn't see it coming and they were that foolish. It turns out they were all consumed by arrogance and, collectively, were far more incompetent than anyone was willing to give them credit for. The inescapable fact is we don't know the long term effects of lockdowns.
- cowpig 5y ago
  My rule of thumb is that the more people who are educated on a topic agree on something, the less likely it is they're wrong. It happens, but not very often. Additionally, it would be very surprising to learn that lockdowns are ineffective given that covid spreads via human-to-human interaction, and lockdowns enforce a reduction in those interactions. So, while I believe it's not impossible you are right, I would be very surprised.
  - landemva 5y ago
    The larger picture is animal and human transmission.

by cowpig 5y ago

infamouscow 5y ago

This whole fiasco has me convinced that the medical industry suffers from the same hubris, profiteering, and strange collective delusion and ignorance that caused the 2008 financial crisis. I'm old enough to remember the financial crisis, when it was always assumed that things couldn't be as bad as they were because there's no way thousands of high paid bankers could all be so reckless and have it wrong at once. After all, these are the smartest people in the world, right? Surely they saw this coming. Surely they're not that foolish... Well, it turns out they didn't see it coming and they were that foolish. It turns out they were all consumed by arrogance and, collectively, were far more incompetent than anyone was willing to give them credit for. The inescapable fact is we don't know the long term effects of lockdowns.

cowpig 5y ago
My rule of thumb is that the more people who are educated on a topic agree on something, the less likely it is they're wrong. It happens, but not very often. Additionally, it would be very surprising to learn that lockdowns are ineffective given that covid spreads via human-to-human interaction, and lockdowns enforce a reduction in those interactions. So, while I believe it's not impossible you are right, I would be very surprised.
- landemva 5y ago
  The larger picture is animal and human transmission.