Did Chris do a 180?
His recent video on YouTube “COVID Lockdowns Doing More Harm Than Good?” has a slew of comments expressing shock and confusion over his apparent complete turn around.
Here’s one example: “Chris, up until now you’ve been promoting lockdowns and you’ve been very Persuasive with your reasoning. I remember you getting really angry with the uk and USA with their lack of action in this area. Why are you now promoting the opposite position? It’s very confusing. I truly hope it’s not political… I don’t know what ‘it didn’t have to be this way’ means anymore”
First, the damage is sort of done, So we have to move on to what is best now – with the evidence we now have. Chris has always said, you need be able to change if evidence supports reasoning for the change. Now whether there reason and cause for this is debatable.
I am pretty much in the camp where i started.. Which was lock down is not the answer , especially the halfa$$ way it was done. Its either all or nothing and it has to be complete and limited..in duration. If it worked it worked , if not move on.. Anyhow that is not what happened here.
for what we are doing or able to do , my thought was let the economy run. open up.. BUT put the mask on , and social distance when possible. Socializing is part of the economy. Let youngers go to the bars.. they will mostly be ok.. but dont go home to middle age dad or go home to grandparents etc. Most people in their 40s are working and not hanging out at bars.. they have responsibilities..
Let young people work if they live with young people. let young children go to school if they live with young people. If they live with someone older than 40-45 something else needs to be done..
Basically go about life for the young. Older people and sick people have to worry about a lot – but that is just life. I am older and accept that I cant do things I used to when i was young.
The only real thing to know is if this will cause some sort of ADE on second infection and if it causes some permanent harm even in mild cases. This should be known by now. But authorities are focusing on the wrong things. Focus should be more on treatments we have, and NPIs.. and not reliant on a “what if” like a vaccine. that WE DONT HAVE> WORK WITH what WE DO HAVE.
Chris had had never been pushing for lock-downs; and when compared to using other proper NPI measures, Chris has always indicated they were ineffectual and simply a delaying tactic.
Locks downs were never one of his recommended non-pharmaceutical interventions.
Proper mask-wearing has always been the primary NPI that Chris has recommended.
Locks-downs only delay the inevitable; sadly the hope that people would use Masks after the Lock-Down period was not the case, and it took countless unneeded infections & deaths to get people to adopt mask usage…
Sadly even now people are not using them consistently in the most affected areas – Florida, Texas, etc.
NYC residents seem to be wearing masks religiously now, I feel that is a stronger reason for the infection drop-off in NYC than the proposed XYZ theory.
On the XYZ theory, I think it will be proven tragically wrong once cold weather sets in. The thought that simply because there was a peak shape in the graph doesn’t negate the possibility of multiple successive peaks. Think SPANISH FLU and look at what its infection graphs look like. It peaked and then came back with a vengeance more the second time – people surely thought back then that there was XYZ affect after the first precipitous drop off in infection.
If I recall correctly, he stated that the initial quarantine period lost its benefits after about 30 days. He showed some germ models for this. Back in the old days in the medical field, everyone acknowledged that quarantine is a limited tool.
Sometimes terms are getting used that are inaccurate. Quarantine is everybody is segregated, but the sick are mixed with the well. Doesn’t have benefit after one disease cycle. A full cycle is where all those who will become infected have become symptomatic, recovered, and now have antibodies. It is the path to “herd immunity.”(BTW hate that concept and find it lacking.) Isolation is segregating just the sick from the well. Isolation of infectious virus patients when it is potentially dangerous is always a good idea. Even then, there are limits to the benefit and how much you can control.
I think the current lockdowns are to steal elections through mail-in ballots. People are now completely out of money, getting evicted, having cars repossessed, while coping with kids not being in school. Makes them frightened and desperate. Easier to do illegal acts as no one has the energy to watch while they’re fighting to survive. Throw in rioters and assaults, and becomes eerily similar to early Hitler’s Germany.
Mayors and Governors who have done these draconian tactics should by removed from office. I remember reading Solzhenitsyn: the one thing he and his friends in the Gulag noted was if they had fought harder at the beginning of the tyranny, they might have prevailed.
^Hohhot nailed it. Desire for lockdowns is also highly selfish, given how it plunges people into poverty.