That was due to flattening the curve. It worked and yet we still have over 1m cases and 100k death over a 2m period, and counting. Yea definitely there could have been better solution. Look at Taiwan as an example. Being well prepared and having test, trace and isolation system in place in Jan or even Feb would have reduced the number of cases, death and less of a need for a shutdown, reducing the impact on the economy. An ounce of preparation is worth a lbs of gold.
the curve likely would have remained flat without a lockdown, except perhaps in the most dense city - NYC. Also shouldn’t have sent positive patients into nursing homes! Cuomo had the worst results in the country. The lockdown was absurd, fear driven, and virtue-signaling driven. There’s a reason you don’t put so-called medical experts in charge of running a country - they have zero risk tolerance. They failed.
No, that's not how virus work. The failure is basic here - the US were not prepared as she should have been. Everything else was reactionary and secondary.
The real failure was the economic destruction. I'm not sure how many of the virus deaths could have been prevented - the hospitals were never overrun. We should have protected the nursing homes (50% of the deaths?) far better. ...and in comparison, actually the US came out far better than many European countries when you look at deaths per million people (Spain, Italy, Belgium, France, UK, etc.). Texas has a lower death per million people than every Western European country except for Norway.
Again, the "success" of hospital systems not "overrun" is due to the lockdown. You aren't sure is absolutely normal. You aren't a scientist or virologist or someone that understand virus well. And as we speak, some part of Arizona health system is approaching critical with ICU bed at 100% capacity with Covid19 patient. The places that did better were due to acting earlier and more aggressively relative to how widespread the virus was. Most of EU was late. Most of Asia was faster. There is no magic to this. Virus spread. Shut it down. You can do it in lockdown manner like China, in manner like quick isolation as in Singapore and Taiwan, something in between, and eventually with a vaccine and herd immunity. Whatever the methods, it's best to do it early and aggressively. We were so blind, we didn't even know if we were early or late. That's the price we pay (economic destruction, 100k+ death) for not being well prepared.
The scientists didn't have a clue. Remember they told us masks didn't help, then a few weeks later told us to wear masks? Remember when they said to disinfect surfaces and then backtracked on that? They didn't have a clue, yet told us to do the most primitive solution possible - lockdown. Where's your proof that the lockdown worked? Is that what really kept hospitals from being overrun? Or was it the fact that people stopped going in for elective surgeries? Or the fact that people stopped going in for preventative measures? I haven't seen evidence the lockdown was the reason that hospitals weren't overrun. And please stop with the China references - you cannot believe anything they say. They're proven liars, they suppressed news and information on the virus, and lied about their deaths. They are the shame of the world.
When people are dying, you overdo it. Lockdown made sense to do at the time. Im not on the extreme side of where some people are like @deb4rockets . But saying the lockdown was medieval and overboard when people were dying is nonsense. Now the fact that the lockdown lasted this long.... Thats the part I am against. Its over.
No, they were the one with the knowledge of virus. Scientists aren't god - they don't know everything about a new virus instantly. As they learn more, they tell us more and as they tell us more, policy changes. Masks were recommended once they have new data that a major driven of spread can be due to people showing no symptoms for days. "Lockdown" is loose. Before even the lockdown started, people were starting to be careful. Lockdown or not, it's what people do. If you have ZERO lockdown, but people just stayed home, the virus spread slower (and the economy still tank). The reference to China is simply how they locked down. No one else is doing that crazy lockdown method.
I kind of agree with you, but people die from economic destruction as well. Probably in much higher numbers (stress leading to heart attacks, suicides, homelessness, etc). Remember heart disease kills 650,000 people in the US each year alone - and stress increases the chances of those deaths, as does lack of preventative health care (which people were avoiding). I still haven't seen proof the lockdown slowed the spread of the virus. Remember it wasn't a full lockdown - it was a partial lockdown, and then everybody was driven to the same location - the grocery store - only to then bring whatever they contracted there back home to their families. You couldn't have scripted it up worse. In hindsight the better option in my view would have been no lockdown, but enforce social distancing and masks.
All you have to do is look at the data. Increases in hospitalization correlate with reopening and lifting restrictions. Conversely I am not aware of any data supporting your supposition that restrictions have actually caused more deaths. But the relevance of things like facts and data depends on person I guess.
I’m confused. So.... Trump was able to prevent a ton of deaths according to @bigtexxx but the lockdown didn’t work? You shouldn’t do drugs sir. They’re illegal
UPDATE | June 4, 2020, 6:30 p.m.: There’s been a new increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations and cases credited to the reopening of businesses and Memorial Day weekend gatherings, according to new data. https://www.tmc.edu/news/2020/06/coronavirus-connection-a-texas-medical-center-continuing-update/ But, what does the Medical Center know....LOL The Texas Medical Center, which publishes daily statistics from hospitals in the Houston region, warned on Thursday that COVID-19 cases are growing quickly enough that they could overwhelm the amount of intensive care beds available in two weeks — though on Friday the center updated that estimate to five weeks and listed the possibility as a “moderate concern.” https://www.houstonchronicle.com/ne...ases-hospitalizations-spiking-in-15321171.php
He's just like Trump. Medical data laid out in front of him straight from the Texas Medical Center and only remarks about a Democratic tweet in the midst of it. I had already included the Medical Center link.
