It is incredible that the US economy was shut down on the basis of the predictions of a faulty model, as discussed here. Not just one, but ALL of the doomsday predictions from that model were wrong!
Who knows how many lives and livelihoods were destroyed as the “unintended consequences” of authoritarian policy decisions of largely Democrat governors? Missed elective surgeries and treatments, suicides, mental depression, increased drug and alcohol use, etc., etc. The lives affected are merely speed bumps on the road to Democrat political hegemony in America.
And then there is the evidence emerging that all efforts should have been focused on risk groups instead of slamming the general population and destroying the economy, as reported here:
2.1 million Americans, representing 0.62% of the U.S. population, reside in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
(Nursing homes are residences for seniors needing help with activities of daily living, such as taking a shower or getting dressed, who also require 24/7 medical supervision; assisted living facilities are designed for seniors who need help with activities of daily living, but don’t require full-time on-site medical supervision.)
Among states reporting their death totals, 42% of COVID deaths have taken place in long-term care facilities; we also estimate the share as 42% for the full U.S. population, based on incorporating the demographics of the non-reporting states.
Let that sink in: 42% of all COVID-19 deaths are taking place in facilities that house 0.62% of the U.S. population.
In other words, if 43% of deaths from the ChiCom virus are from nursing home and long-term care facilities, then that amounts to 43,000 of the 100,000 deaths of Americans in nursing home and long-term care facilities. That simple statistic never gets reported by the legacy media because it doesn’t fit the doomsday narrative.
Furthermore, if you believe a published study from Johns Hopkins University on the number of US deaths per year believed to be caused from medical errors by doctors, hospitals, and health care facilities, where more than 500,000 deaths per year are caused by medical error in diagnosis, treatment, and other miscellaneous errors like choice of drug for treatments (e.g., Remdesvir versus hydroxychloroquine), then how can the “experts” (and Democrat governors) argue that the epidemic statistics endless touted by the media are so severe for the general population that they justify lockdown, masks, and the catastrophic loss of business revenue that we’ve seen over the past three months?
There is more on the hydroxychloroquine front and associated statements by the “experts,” as opined by Paul Craig Roberts here:
Despite 65 years of safe use, HCQ is alleged to be dangerous and to cause heart attacks. Its use is officially approved only for “adolescent and adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19.” Generally, by the time a patient is hospitalized the virus has progressed to a later stage in which treatment is less successful. Studies of HCQ’s effectiveness, such as the VA one and apparently the more recent one reported in The Lancet, are limited to later stage hospitalized patients and seem to exclude the essential zinc component of the HCQ treatment. In other words, the studies seem to be designed to exclude from official approval the treatment that doctors have found most effective. It is not easy for a layperson to know what the studies actually say as the media report the studies in an anti-Trump manner. For the media, what is most important is criticism of Trump, not the effectiveness of a treatment.
In contrast, the untested investigational antiviral drug, Remdesivir, which has no record of safe use and is extraordinarily expensive compared to HCQ, has been given the same clearence for use. The media is not interested in the effectiveness and safety, or lack of, of this new and untested drug. Trump isn’t taking it, and it is a potential profit-maker for Big Pharma. If Remdesivir fails, the failure will be used to dispose of the hope for cures and to focus on vaccination.
And just like that, “The Lancet issued a correction on a large observational study that linked use of anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine with increased death risk in Covid-19 patients, after more than 100 scientists and medical professionals raised questions about integrity of data analysed in the study. …. The open letter lists 10 major concerns about statistical analysis and data integrity,” as reported here just today.
We have been hoodwinked by the “experts” and the usual suspects in the Democrat-media complex – for political reasons. This is all a continuation of the Democrat Party and Deep State push to get rid of President Trump. The economy is his greatest strength, and this whole charade was intended to torpedo it for political purposes.
Note that the legacy media have shifted focus from the virus to the staged “Floyd protests” by Antifa and other paid rioters now that states – and indeed various countries in Europe – are opening up their economies, and the doomsday predictions by the “experts” of a virus resurgence as certain consequence are not happening.
Our experts conveniently “forgot” lessons-learned from past pandemics. At the first indication of an outbreak, the doors of the hospitals are locked, and the intensive care units (ICU) are moved to satellite locations. Then, the hospitals are opened for critical care only. Intensive care is hydration, pain management, oxygen, and antibiotics. Critical care is obstetrics, heart, pulmonary, and major disease treatment/surgery. Everything else is pushed to “street to treat” facilities. Care for the most vulnerable or compromised (i.e., for the elderly and those with prior conditions including compromised immune systems) is treated as a special case with isolation. That means quarantining the infected, not the uninfected in the general population, except for the at-risk groups. The experts had it bass-ackwards.
Had we implemented these measures we would have had far fewer deaths. Because of the highly contagious nature of the virus, we would not have had fewer overall cases, as many do not need full treatment and are in fact asymptomatic, but we would not have had all of the unintended consequences of the lockdown, either. The “experts” failed us BIGLY.