CDN/US Covid-related political discussion
- Thread starter Jarnhamar
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 6,152
- Points
- 1,160
Do you seriously believe that? Or are you trying to be humorously hyperbolic again?
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,758
- Points
- 1,040
Research is accumulating that either kids are not fine, or that we've just recently gained an ability to accurately measure more emotional and mental distress than before.
- Reaction score
- 6,152
- Points
- 1,160
Our kids are educationally and socially stunted by two years. Remote learning was no where near effective as they said and kids require social interaction, both peer and otherwise, to develop properly. Facial expression is a huge part of that learning. Masks, effectively, killed that interaction and needed learning. Add in socialist CRT and LBGQALPHABET sex education in kids under ten, that took hold during and after the pandemic. We won't know the damage for years and it will be beyond fixing at that point.
Plenty of data shows increase in depression in some and decrease in others. For some certain stressors associated with school like peer rejection and bullying dropped. But that anxiety also increased as well due to missing out on 5heir main social setting: school.
While school socialisation decreased family resilience increased.
I fully expect to see the same old tired arguments from both sides who choose to ignore the entirety of the issue and focus on the things that support their view of the matter.
This thread is no exception.
While school socialisation decreased family resilience increased.
I fully expect to see the same old tired arguments from both sides who choose to ignore the entirety of the issue and focus on the things that support their view of the matter.
This thread is no exception.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,758
- Points
- 1,040
Much of the research has nothing to do with the short-lived effect of pandemic mitigation, and much to do with social media and changes in parenting habits (reflecting in part an increased age of parents).
- Reaction score
- 8,329
- Points
- 1,160
Britain may well repeat its lockdown blunders sooner than anyone thinks
From Sweden and the WhatsApp leaks, it’s clear what needs to be changed. But will anyone do it?
www.telegraph.co.uk
Which killed more? Covid? Or the Lockdowns?
- Reaction score
- 8,329
- Points
- 1,160
To heck with it..
Here's the entire article
FRASER NELSON9 March 2023 • 9:00pm
A true lockdown hero: Sweden’s Anders Tegnell CREDIT: Magnus Andersson/Shutterstock
Almost exactly three years ago, Chris Whitty explained the trouble with lockdowns. Pandemics, he would say, kill people in two ways: directly – and indirectly, via panic and disruption. It’s hard to measure the latter but you can count the total number of deaths, from all causes. Such figures are coming in now. The country with the smallest rise isn’t Australia or New Zealand, who closed their borders. Nor is it Italy or Canada, who had some of the toughest lockdowns. The winner, with the smallest rise in “excess” deaths since the pandemic began, is Sweden.
For those who had accused the lockdown-rejecting Swedes of pursuing a “let it rip” policy that left people to die, this is all rather baffling. And it raises some interesting questions. Australia had hardly any Covid: just lockdowns. So how did it end up with “excess deaths” – at 7 per cent – more than twice the level of the Swedes? If choosing lockdown was to “choose life” (as Matt Hancock put it) then where, in the world’s data, is the correlation between lockdown severity and lives saved?
It may suit the Government to delay the Covid inquiry reckoning until after the general election, but the conversation needs to be had now. There is more than enough evidence to update the pandemic plan, given that a new pathogen could emerge at any moment. And a harder, perhaps even more important question: how to restore trust in public health? What rules need to be in place to ensure that, next time, data is not misrepresented and science is not abused by politicians?
The Lockdown Files give three main insights into what went wrong. First, we have firm examples of “the science” being invoked to impose various measures that turn out to be politically motivated. Then we see the slapdash method in which major decisions were made: how WhatsApp replaces normal government. And finally, the tone. How after taking emergency powers, this group of men go from being thoughtful and open-minded to being flippant and gung-ho. Once again, we see how power corrupts – and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
There is one fascinating exchange where Ben Wallace, who as Defence Secretary has seen his share of emergencies, is roped into one of the WhatsApp decision-making groups. He seems appalled and explains that, if they don’t mind, he will leave them to it and keep operating through normal government methods. If others had reacted the same way, things could have been very different.
By showing us the psychology of a group in a crisis, the Lockdown Files explain why previous pandemic planning failed: it didn’t factor in human nature. The public panic was so deep that there was huge pressure to impose restrictions, whether they worked or not. This created a gravitational pull that sucked in the government, opposition and much of the media – crushing the normal safeguards (cost-benefit analyses, etc). No one wanted to go against it. Even academics found a huge pressure to be quiet if they had doubts. Oxford’s Carl Heneghan calls this the “silence of science”.
Sweden had the unflappable Anders Tegnell as chief epidemiologist, who went all-out to argue against what he saw as populism: lockdowns that were not backed by science and could cause more harm than good. He never stopped arguing, giving television interviews while waiting on train platforms and publishing study after study. He won people over. Sweden ended up with middling Covid but among Europe’s least economic damage and lowest increase in deaths. In an interview last week, Tegnell offered advice for his successor: “Have ice in your stomach.”
Must our next pandemic response be so dependent on personality? Must the fate of nations depend on musical chairs – whether the seat is held by a 63-year-old epidemiologist like Tegnell (whose CV included hands-on experience with Ebola) or a couple of WhatsApping 41-year-olds like Matt Hancock and Simon Case? Safeguards can – and should – be put in place now. There is no need to wait for an inquiry.
The Prime Minister can, at any time, order that from now on modelling needs to follow Treasury standards of transparency and robustness, stating main assumptions and uncertainties. Likely trade-offs (long and short-term) must be clearly acknowledged for every public health response. Complexity must be recognised. Critics should be welcomed, not hounded. Sage, whose very name is now synonymous with spin and bungling, should be disbanded.
It could all be needed sooner than we think. Some 130 million birds now are understood to have died from the latest variant of bird flu, which has already jumped to mammals with a human fatality in Cambodia. We can imagine what could very well happen next: Public Health England starts to do some “scenario” planning for it becoming a human pandemic, with a bias towards the worst case. Sage is exhumed. Professor Neil Ferguson comes up with some doom graphs. The whole merry-go-round could easily start again.
But will politicians be taken seriously next time they say “trust the science”? Polls in the US show that trust in public health bodies has taken a major hit since Covid. While no similar studies have been done here, we do see worrying signs in falling rates of childhood vaccination. Overstating the scientific case during Covid – where the science was genuinely mixed – risks reducing confidence in other areas where the science really is clear.
And the brutal truth? The science on Covid still isn’t clear. On masks, on social distancing, even school closures – it’s hard to say what difference they make to the spread of a virus. The UK hasn’t commissioned a single high-quality study into what works and what doesn’t. Even the excess deaths count is complicated – but Sweden is at or near the bottom, whichever way you cut it. But even now, no one seems very interested in the actual science, or learning lessons any time soon.
It’s now 20 years since the boring old coronavirus mutated into a killer in the Sars epidemic. Asian countries updated their pandemic emergency plans – but Britain didn’t, sticking with its flu-based approach. Are we seeing the same complacency yet again? We have now seen, in the Lockdown Files, much of what went wrong. We have also seen, in Sweden, what can go right. We will now see whether Rishi Sunak can put the two together.
Here's the entire article
Britain may well repeat its lockdown blunders sooner than anyone thinks
From Sweden and the WhatsApp leaks, it’s clear what needs to be changed. But will anyone do it?FRASER NELSON9 March 2023 • 9:00pm
A true lockdown hero: Sweden’s Anders Tegnell CREDIT: Magnus Andersson/Shutterstock
Almost exactly three years ago, Chris Whitty explained the trouble with lockdowns. Pandemics, he would say, kill people in two ways: directly – and indirectly, via panic and disruption. It’s hard to measure the latter but you can count the total number of deaths, from all causes. Such figures are coming in now. The country with the smallest rise isn’t Australia or New Zealand, who closed their borders. Nor is it Italy or Canada, who had some of the toughest lockdowns. The winner, with the smallest rise in “excess” deaths since the pandemic began, is Sweden.
For those who had accused the lockdown-rejecting Swedes of pursuing a “let it rip” policy that left people to die, this is all rather baffling. And it raises some interesting questions. Australia had hardly any Covid: just lockdowns. So how did it end up with “excess deaths” – at 7 per cent – more than twice the level of the Swedes? If choosing lockdown was to “choose life” (as Matt Hancock put it) then where, in the world’s data, is the correlation between lockdown severity and lives saved?
It may suit the Government to delay the Covid inquiry reckoning until after the general election, but the conversation needs to be had now. There is more than enough evidence to update the pandemic plan, given that a new pathogen could emerge at any moment. And a harder, perhaps even more important question: how to restore trust in public health? What rules need to be in place to ensure that, next time, data is not misrepresented and science is not abused by politicians?
The Lockdown Files give three main insights into what went wrong. First, we have firm examples of “the science” being invoked to impose various measures that turn out to be politically motivated. Then we see the slapdash method in which major decisions were made: how WhatsApp replaces normal government. And finally, the tone. How after taking emergency powers, this group of men go from being thoughtful and open-minded to being flippant and gung-ho. Once again, we see how power corrupts – and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
There is one fascinating exchange where Ben Wallace, who as Defence Secretary has seen his share of emergencies, is roped into one of the WhatsApp decision-making groups. He seems appalled and explains that, if they don’t mind, he will leave them to it and keep operating through normal government methods. If others had reacted the same way, things could have been very different.
By showing us the psychology of a group in a crisis, the Lockdown Files explain why previous pandemic planning failed: it didn’t factor in human nature. The public panic was so deep that there was huge pressure to impose restrictions, whether they worked or not. This created a gravitational pull that sucked in the government, opposition and much of the media – crushing the normal safeguards (cost-benefit analyses, etc). No one wanted to go against it. Even academics found a huge pressure to be quiet if they had doubts. Oxford’s Carl Heneghan calls this the “silence of science”.
Sweden had the unflappable Anders Tegnell as chief epidemiologist, who went all-out to argue against what he saw as populism: lockdowns that were not backed by science and could cause more harm than good. He never stopped arguing, giving television interviews while waiting on train platforms and publishing study after study. He won people over. Sweden ended up with middling Covid but among Europe’s least economic damage and lowest increase in deaths. In an interview last week, Tegnell offered advice for his successor: “Have ice in your stomach.”
Must our next pandemic response be so dependent on personality? Must the fate of nations depend on musical chairs – whether the seat is held by a 63-year-old epidemiologist like Tegnell (whose CV included hands-on experience with Ebola) or a couple of WhatsApping 41-year-olds like Matt Hancock and Simon Case? Safeguards can – and should – be put in place now. There is no need to wait for an inquiry.
The Prime Minister can, at any time, order that from now on modelling needs to follow Treasury standards of transparency and robustness, stating main assumptions and uncertainties. Likely trade-offs (long and short-term) must be clearly acknowledged for every public health response. Complexity must be recognised. Critics should be welcomed, not hounded. Sage, whose very name is now synonymous with spin and bungling, should be disbanded.
It could all be needed sooner than we think. Some 130 million birds now are understood to have died from the latest variant of bird flu, which has already jumped to mammals with a human fatality in Cambodia. We can imagine what could very well happen next: Public Health England starts to do some “scenario” planning for it becoming a human pandemic, with a bias towards the worst case. Sage is exhumed. Professor Neil Ferguson comes up with some doom graphs. The whole merry-go-round could easily start again.
But will politicians be taken seriously next time they say “trust the science”? Polls in the US show that trust in public health bodies has taken a major hit since Covid. While no similar studies have been done here, we do see worrying signs in falling rates of childhood vaccination. Overstating the scientific case during Covid – where the science was genuinely mixed – risks reducing confidence in other areas where the science really is clear.
And the brutal truth? The science on Covid still isn’t clear. On masks, on social distancing, even school closures – it’s hard to say what difference they make to the spread of a virus. The UK hasn’t commissioned a single high-quality study into what works and what doesn’t. Even the excess deaths count is complicated – but Sweden is at or near the bottom, whichever way you cut it. But even now, no one seems very interested in the actual science, or learning lessons any time soon.
It’s now 20 years since the boring old coronavirus mutated into a killer in the Sars epidemic. Asian countries updated their pandemic emergency plans – but Britain didn’t, sticking with its flu-based approach. Are we seeing the same complacency yet again? We have now seen, in the Lockdown Files, much of what went wrong. We have also seen, in Sweden, what can go right. We will now see whether Rishi Sunak can put the two together.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,461
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 775
- Points
- 1,240
Maritimers are proud, NS in particular of all of the rights they surrendered or cheered at being trampled, "to follow the science". I have a chronological list of news reports showing the decline of rights and then reversals as governments changed or arrived challenges before the courts.
During the height of COVID lockdowns, the amount of messaging was unavoidable, through MSM and the internet. I would suggest reaching propaganda levels , to influence public support.
20 to 30 years from now, when all of the key decision makers are free and clear, we may learn the full scope of how badly the system was abused.
Demonize, denounce, and control. These actions were present in most government actions throughout COVID. The cats out of the bag and we will continue to see versions of this for years to come.
During the height of COVID lockdowns, the amount of messaging was unavoidable, through MSM and the internet. I would suggest reaching propaganda levels , to influence public support.
20 to 30 years from now, when all of the key decision makers are free and clear, we may learn the full scope of how badly the system was abused.
Demonize, denounce, and control. These actions were present in most government actions throughout COVID. The cats out of the bag and we will continue to see versions of this for years to come.
Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,686
- Points
- 1,260
I feel like they are a gullible bunch, they believe everything the gov and the tv box tells them. "follow the science", but only if the science aligns with your views.
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,220
- Points
- 1,010
Because the propaganda persists.
- Reaction score
- 8,329
- Points
- 1,160
Get the subscription. For the Lockdown Files alone it is worth it.
www.telegraph.co.uk
BLUF - we can only rely on the behaviour of everyone to get us through
Short form - "Now that we have rushed through a law the law is the law and must be followed - or what else is the law for?"
"And if we can't rely on the law and our own actions then we will be forced to rely on the actions of the multitude - and that would be unthinkable."
The Lockdown Files
The Telegraph has obtained more than 100,000 WhatsApp messages sent between the then health secretary Matt Hancock and other ministers and officials at the height of the coronavirus pandemic. In the Lockdown Files we reveal the contents of those messages – and the serious questions they raise
www.telegraph.co.uk
BLUF - we can only rely on the behaviour of everyone to get us through
Short form - "Now that we have rushed through a law the law is the law and must be followed - or what else is the law for?"
"And if we can't rely on the law and our own actions then we will be forced to rely on the actions of the multitude - and that would be unthinkable."
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,758
- Points
- 1,040
OT for thread, but Johnathan Haidt discusses underlying reasons other than COVID affecting mental health of, predominantly, young people.
- Reaction score
- 1,531
- Points
- 1,260
Saw this in a CAF COVID thread,
My former employer ended mandatory COVID-19 vaccination on 1 Dec., 2022.
But, they require those who remain unvaccinated for COVID - or Influenza - "to wear full PPE on all respiratory illness calls."
Those who were fired on 5 Jan., 2022 for non-compliance with the vaccination mandate were offered their jobs back this year.
My former employer ended mandatory COVID-19 vaccination on 1 Dec., 2022.
But, they require those who remain unvaccinated for COVID - or Influenza - "to wear full PPE on all respiratory illness calls."
Those who were fired on 5 Jan., 2022 for non-compliance with the vaccination mandate were offered their jobs back this year.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 15,723
- Points
- 1,260
Because the Liberal governments in Ottawa continue to bribe them
- Reaction score
- 4,744
- Points
- 1,160
Probably should have stayed there as it definitely didn't need to be posted twice.
- Reaction score
- 1,531
- Points
- 1,260
Deleted from All Things - CAF - and Covid/ Covid Vaccine, - before - putting it here, where it belongs.
Anyway, "freedom" is awesome.
Especially for the partner who is vaccinated, and therefore not required to wear gloves, gown, apron, surgical face mask, protective eyewear and face shield on all respiratory illness calls.
- Reaction score
- 1,531
- Points
- 1,260
Saw this in a CAF COVID thread.
Politics aside,
www.montefiore.org
Montefiore Health System
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Fire Department of the City of New York
Politics aside,
COVID-19 Pandemic Dramatically Increased Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Cases and Deaths in New York City
COVID-19 Pandemic Dramatically Increased Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Cases and Deaths in New York City | Montefiore Einstein
Study Based on New York City EMS Calls Finds Cases Nearly Tripled From Previous Year
www.montefiore.org
Montefiore Health System
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Fire Department of the City of New York
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,220
- Points
- 1,010
Saw this in a CAF COVID thread.
Politics aside,
COVID-19 Pandemic Dramatically Increased Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Cases and Deaths in New York City
COVID-19 Pandemic Dramatically Increased Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Cases and Deaths in New York City | Montefiore Einstein
Study Based on New York City EMS Calls Finds Cases Nearly Tripled From Previous Year
Montefiore Health System
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Fire Department of the City of New York
Interesting that there are two camps:
1. The respiratory virus, C19, caused increased cases of cardiac arrest; or
2. MRNA jabs caused increased cases of cardiac arrest.
Which one is catastrophic to governments, mandates, pharma companies?
Similar threads
