31–40 of 312 posts
AIER seems to be a Conservative/Libertarian think tank that's anti-climate science, among other stances, including anti-lockdown (what this article is about). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Institute_for_Economi...
Besides the economic harm and potential developmental harm induced by closing schools for kids, I think lockdowns did incalculable social harm to society. It gave huge swaths of the population a grudge against the system, a chip on their shoulder that won't go away anytime soon. It burned up goodwill and trust for experts and politicians (who generally didn't have much to spare in the first place.) And coupling this…
I don't know about society, but this was the straw the broke the camels back for me. I have not been the same since, I don't think I ever will be. The first lockdown in my province was when things really started to go wrong for me mental health wise in a major way and it only got worse as they continued.
What's really been maddening is that people get angry when I mention the affects it all had on me, they assume I'm taking a political stance first and foremost, they tell me it wasn't that bad, and they try to tell me I didn't experience what I experienced or do what I did.
I used to think things could get better, but I really don't see a happy ending for myself anymore.
So Covid was only ten times deadlier. But certainly we should have had the same response. Those "libertarian" organizations are getting less and less veiled about their hatred of humanity. Sometimes I wonder if they are some extra-terrestrial cockroaches in human shells out of Philip K. Dick story out to wipe out all humans.
Note that the above is understating things because the 1% Covid CFR number is dilluted by a lot of later covid cases when people were vaccinated and the later less potent virus strains were out. In the beginning with the original strain and the deadly delta strain and no vaccines Covid was much deadlier than that 1% number.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957%E2%80%931958_influenza_pa... 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8451339/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Excess mortality....the number of deaths * from all causes* during a crisis My friend killed himself because of lockdown. I guess he is a covid victim. Very convinient.
Unless you believe that 90% of the excess deaths were not directly related to COVID, your implied point falls flat. Edit: There were 1.1 million COVID deaths in the USA alone. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
Besides the economic harm and potential developmental harm induced by closing schools for kids, I think lockdowns did incalculable social harm to society. It gave huge swaths of the population a grudge against the system, a chip on their shoulder that won't go away anytime soon. It burned up goodwill and trust for experts and politicians (who generally didn't have much to spare in the first place.) And coupling this…
There was like the initial 6 weeks to stop the spread.
I still went to the grocery store, not locked down, i still went to the park, not locked down.
What lockdowns? please be specific.
When people say lockdown, they mean:
"I was forced to wear a mask when i went to the grocery store and i felt like a loser"
Thats the whole issue.
Besides the economic harm and potential developmental harm induced by closing schools for kids, I think lockdowns did incalculable social harm to society. It gave huge swaths of the population a grudge against the system, a chip on their shoulder that won't go away anytime soon. It burned up goodwill and trust for experts and politicians (who generally didn't have much to spare in the first place.) And coupling this…
There already was a chip on the shoulder of a large number of American and that has been fed and grown by certain media and social channels specifically to undermine trust in institutions and checks on power. The lockdown (that wasn't locked down) was just more fuel on that well-feed fire.
Ideologues are always saying that anybody who doesn't agree with them must be brainwashed. They can't imagine that could actually choose to hold a different point of view from their own. Well let me tell you it ain't necessarily the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you believe that 90% of the excess deaths were not directly related to COVID, your implied point falls flat. Edit: There were 1.1 million COVID deaths in the USA alone. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
We still have excess deaths in year 2023. Birth rates are 15% lower. New diabetes 30% higher...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are any of those things bad by themself or in combination?
It's not necessarily that they're bad it's just that they're likely not a valuable source of acquiring information outside of what supports a specific position. Like I wouldn't necessarily trust an oil baron to tell me about how global warming doesn't really exist, or I don't necessarily believe Disney's Iger to tell me about how the writing and acting strikes are entitled whining nonsense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Excess mortality....the number of deaths * from all causes* during a crisis My friend killed himself because of lockdown. I guess he is a covid victim. Very convinient.
Unless you believe that 90% of the excess deaths were not directly related to COVID, your implied point falls flat. Edit: There were 1.1 million COVID deaths in the USA alone. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
Pink is total; orange is COVID; blue is non-COVID attributed excess.
https://zmichaelgehlke.com/images/mortality/covid-mortality-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, but given limited time, it makes sense to evaluate whether a source is ( edit: heavily) biased or a crackpot before spending attention on them.
There's no such thing as unbiased. The pertinent question is whether they're telling truths or lies.
