4 ms·
> That would have been abut 5x as much, or 1.5 million Is this some sort of scientific fact or your opinion? Frankly if you look at say the death rate differe
by cloutchaser 5y ago
> That would have been abut 5x as much, or 1.5 million
Is this some sort of scientific fact or your opinion?
Frankly if you look at say the death rate difference between Florida, Texas (hardly any lockdowns), and California, or New york, your 5x number makes no sense. There were nowhere near 5x as many deaths in Florida, despite an older population.
Peru had massive lockdowns, and they've topped the deaths per million list. Australia are creeping up the list despite being locked down the no covid, and fully vaccinated.
China are struggling to keep omicron under control with lockdowns. Their death rate will probably rise a lot soon.
It is not at all obvious that lockdowns do actually help with the death rate.
- ethanbond 5y agoIn what alternate universe did Texas have “hardly any lockdowns?” They shut down restaurants, bars, gyms, social events just like everywhere else. And yes it is obvious (derivable from germ theory) that lockdowns are effective at slowing the spread of disease exactly in proportion to how complete/total/rigid the lockdowns are. Whether they were worth the cost is obviously more complex to answer.