OT: The WHO (finally) says to end the disastrous lockdowns

Theyre distorting the facts. Heres a fact check https://apnews.com/article/election-2020…

babydoc. i agree.
wear a mask if needed. otherwise open the economy.
let us Individually decide what to risk.

Do you comprehend the notion of public health? Public safety? We have a right to be protected from the fucking idiots who refuse to follow safety protocols

Sorry, but this had to be done

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgoj…

The WHO has no credibility. They should be defunded and denied access to US resources.

They put on one hell of a show when I saw them back in 1982.

WHO are you?

WHO's on first?

Who are you lyrically has one of the greatest starts to a rock song ever.

I don't know if you clicked my YouTube link, but it's Won't Get Fooled Again. Seemed appropriate.

@gammanu95 “The WHO has no credibility. They should be defunded and denied access to US resources.”


The WHO lost credibility long before Covid 19 and even before the Ebola crap show they put on. The problem stems from them being part of the United Nations. I say this as someone who once took the filthy lucre from that criminal enterprise until I couldn’t stand it no more and didn’t renew my contract. And that’s exactly what the UN and ALL its components are, a criminal enterprise. It is all about the money and dividing up the spoils among the corrupt.

That said there are professionals who know their shit and want to do the correct thing. I believe Dr. Nabarro is one of those.

Regardless, the world desperately needs an organization free of corruption to fill the role that the WHO is supposed to be doing. That means free of the UN and free on big money puppet masters.

If one were cynical, they’d think that this lockdown theater was all a crass political stunt intended to benefit the ruling class. Having been caught and revealed, the ruling class is pretending like the lockdown has been successful and may now end. Victory declared.

The initial 2 week shutdown made some sense as a shock absorber. The rest of it was the most deadly, costly bureaucratic mistake in decades. Hubris. Arrogance. Incompetence.

fucking WHO. by ending lockdown bill gates and that whole gang can't wait for mass demand for a shit vaccine that can potentially kill you after injected. isn't he already responsible for 10% for the WHO's funds?

For the last 6 months, cancer screenings didn’t take place, biopsies weren’t performed, treatments for deadly illnesses and conditions were delayed, people cancelled doctors appointments, people with chest pain refused to go to the ER. Not to mention a surge in teen suicides and an increase in drug use.

Thousands and thousands died as a result. None of this was even considered when our leaders decided to stop the world because of CoVid.

I agree that lockdowns are not good for anyone or anything. In a free society - lockdowns are never going to be 100% effective. I’m sure China can impose a highly stringent lockdown to stop virus spread - but that isn’t appropriate in other countries.

The fact is - the virus is prevalent everywhere - and now we must learn to live with it. We can’t stop our lives - and we must continue to live and follow certain simple guidelines.

Here’s the thing. The lock down didn’t fucking work. There is no statistical data showing that areas that locked down had a better CoVid outcome than those that didn’t lock down.

The lock down failed to do the one thing that all the experts said it would. It didn’t save lives. In fact, Sweden didn’t lock down and its Per Capita CoVid death rate is LOWER than surrounding countries.

Epic Fail.

@mark94

You are thinking nationally when you need to start thinking globally. The OVERWHELMING percentage of the world’s population were living hand to mouth, day by day before this shit even began. After 9 months many, many people around the world are now living in utterly desperate and dire circumstances unable to provide for themselves or their families.

I shouldn’t need to expound on the ramifications and I’m not going to try but I can’t support them all so somebody fucking end this shit already.

The actual quote from David Nabarro that spawned this thread:

“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus.”

“The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

Notice the nuanced use of the phrase "primary means of control" not the nutty, hysterical tone of @BabyDoc's title "The WHO says to end the disastrous lockdowns".

Sunetra Guptra has proposed that herd immunity occurs when 10%- to 20% of the population has been infected. That's been called nonsense by other epidemiologists. The loss of life created by throwing caution to the wind and waiting for herd immunity is unacceptable.

Don't get your news from TUSCL cranks like the @OP.

===> "Sunetra Guptra has proposed that herd immunity occurs when 10%- to 20% of the population has been infected. That's been called nonsense by other epidemiologists. The loss of life created by throwing caution to the wind and waiting for herd immunity is unacceptable."

It's always fun to see Randumb spin his uncorroborated and unqualified opinions as statements of fact. 😉

These are approximate, back-of-the-envelope numbers:

If herd immunity occurs when 60% of the population gets the virus and the infection fatality rate is 0.3%, that would give 594K deaths.

If you're a retired gheezer like the OP, insulated from the pandemic, then several hundred thousand deaths doesn't mean anything.

Randumb, your ASSumption is that the fatality rate will be .3% and that a full 60% of the population would get it. The latter is absurd and the former is unlikely if most of the infected are among less vulnerable groups.

Below is a link to the actual source document. Even knowing that your reading comprehension and data analysis skills are subpar at best, you might want to make at least a token effort to read from the source.

https://gbdeclaration.org/

If you actually process it, you'll find that they are not suggesting a free-for-all. Rather they are suggesting that we provide heightened protections for the most vulnerable and let the least vulnerable go about their business. FL has been doing this for months and it has been working out quite well overall.

... oh and thanks for quoting my most important sentence, Dugan. Everyone else has me on ignore.

Dugan. Didn’t you commit to stop posting on Corona?

David Navarro? We are taking advice from a guitarist from Janes Addiction?

He couldn’t even keep Carmen Electra locked down...

Those against lockdowns on here are the ones needing mitigation effprts the most

This came out today, an article by physician Tom Frieden who was the director of the CDC from 2009 to 2017. He uses a less optimistic assumption of 0.5% infection fatality rate and herd-immunity threshold of 60% (as I did) to come up with what he calls a best-case scenario of an *additional* half-million deaths with the herd-immunity approach.

The herd-immunity of 10%-20% assumed by Sunetra Guptra and the Barrington Declaration is on the fringes of the scientific community. Vast majority of epidemiologists have converged on a value of about 60%




"A half-million more people could die if America pursues a ‘herd immunity’ plan"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/…

"Less than 15 percent of Americans have been infected by the virus that causes covid-19. If immunity among those who have been infected and survived is strong and long-lasting (and it may well be neither), and if herd immunity kicks in at 60 percent infection of the population (and it might be higher), with a fatality rate of 0.5 percent among those infected, then at least another half-million Americans — in addition to the 220,000 who have already died — would have to die for the country to achieve herd immunity. And that’s the best-case scenario. The number of deaths to get there could be twice as high.

The route to herd immunity would run through graveyards filled with Americans who did not have to die, because what starts in young adults doesn’t stay in young adults. “Protecting the vulnerable,” however appealing it may sound, isn’t plausible if the virus is allowed to freely spread among younger people."

^^^Jesus Fing cripes dude, those extra half million people are going to die anyway within the next few years, so if they want to be protected they are the ones who need to lockdown, not the rest of civilization! The loss of lives due to hunger and other ramifications of the lockdowns will be determined to cause far much more damage to civilization than the actual virus, unless you end up politicizing it like the main stream media has. Randumb is proof why scientists and their ideaology has lost all credibility in our modern era, because those scientists suck at the teat of American taxpayers in order to justify their position in life. They over exaggerate. Fake news without the use of any god damn common sense. Your so blind to what you think is intelligence that you can’t even see the common sense approach. The old and infermed need to be isolated, not the productive and fruitful. Of course the liberal left leaning Democrats have always wanted to scare the emotionally triggered to their agenda. This will turn out to be the biggest farce in government history, the response to the coronavirus. Trump as an aging 74 year old has help show that to the nation, no matter if you think he is a loud mouth schnook.