Johns Hopkins study says 'ill-founded' COVID lockdowns did more harm than good

[cyril evans awaydays]

A little more context Bob.

Sorry Jon!

[Heathblue]

Sorry Jon!

When the excitement reached you to get your alternative report Infront of your peers, and after rushing out from under the bed, your fingers were typing before you got the 3rd mask off which has contributed to a little faux pas
we've all done it (well not the three face masks bit!!!).

[cyril evans awaydays]

When the excitement reached you to get your alternative report Infront of your peers, and after rushing out from under the bed, your fingers were typing before you got the 3rd mask off which has contributed to a little faux pas
we've all done it (well not the three face masks bit!!!).

It's ok Nels. I already knew you had an incredibly fertile imagination unconstrained by facts.

Now that you have the fact that this is not a John Hopkins study, indeed John Hopkins School of Public Health couldn't have put more distance between it and the authors; that it is a rehash of a discredited non-peer reviewed study of 15 months ago published instead as a book by the Liz Truss supporting Institute of Economic Affairs.

Do you still think that you linked a study from what you believed to be a credible source and if so, apart from the confirmation bias to your beliefs, why?

[TWGL1]

It's ok Nels. I already knew you had an incredibly fertile imagination unconstrained by facts.

Now that you have the fact that this is not a John Hopkins study, indeed John Hopkins School of Public Health couldn't have put more distance between it and the authors; that it is a rehash of a discredited non-peer reviewed study of 15 months ago published instead as a book by the Liz Truss supporting Institute of Economic Affairs.

Do you still think that you linked a study from what you believed to be a credible source and if so, apart from the confirmation bias to your beliefs, why?

What evidence do you have that suggests lockdowns were a more positive outcome as almost everything I’m reading suggests otherwise in terms of the economic, social and general health ( see excess deaths on the ONS website ).

Perhaps they were used in lockstep to test the impact of climate change and the policies that are currently being implemented at pace.

[cyril evans awaydays]

What evidence do you have that suggests lockdowns were a more positive outcome as almost everything I’m reading suggests otherwise in terms of the economic, social and general health ( see excess deaths on the ONS website ).

Perhaps they were used in lockstep to test the impact of climate change and the policies that are currently being implemented at pace.

I have previously given you the excess mortality graphs on Page 2 of this report. They show the exponential increasing number of excess deaths covid related leading up to lockdowns before they return to some reduction following it. Probably a similar picture in all the countries, democratic, authoritarian, east, west, north or south who imposed restrictions before vaccines became widely available.

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrI...Y2NiIsImMiOjh9

As you may have heard so many times, deaths are the tip of the iceberg. For each death there are many more hospitalisations and deprioritisation of routine preventative surgery and treatment. Nobody I know liked lockdowns, most sane people understood their purpose.

But in between there was social distancing, broken record from you on how irrelevant that was, coupled with the vaccination programme that eliminated the need for lockdowns but to0 you was the devil incarnate delivered by the WEF, Gates and the WHO.

And then you finish a reasonable question with some vague Reset bollocks straight out of the Gluey playbook.

If you could source the "every thing you are reading" from your peer reviewed twitter feed that should give enough laughs for the rest of the evening.