3 ms·
> Yet at the same time these studies were happening, we were carrying out actions, ostensibly well informed and in good faith, that promised to be able to effe
by edanm 4y ago
> Yet at the same time these studies were happening, we were carrying out actions, ostensibly well informed and in good faith, that promised to be able to effectively eliminate COVID if we just e.g. shut down the country for 'x' weeks.
I don't think that's true. Pretty much within a month or two, most of the conversation was around "flatten the curve", which is explicitly not about stopping the total number of cases, but rather lowering the peaks of simultaneous cases.
And when the vaccines came out, it was clear fairly quickly (though maybe after this study? I don't know) that the major benefit of them would be to the severity of the illness, not to prevention of spread.
- somenameforme 4y agoThis study is looking at the data from the trials upon which the emergency authorization was granted. So you need to warp back to somewhere around August 2020 to December 2020. Extreme views at the time were more the norm than the exception at the time, both in terms of the potentially negative impact of the virus, and the potentially positive impact of various measures to combat it.
- wheljkh23 4y agoThe data was, but the paper was published this month. The reviewers should have made them make note of the issue above.