COVID-19: Bad policy rules!


Genesis cover

On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.

 
The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit.

 
The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
 

"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs." --San Antonio Express-News

U.S. daily COVID-19 deaths through July 28

Though it appears in the past two weeks that we are presently experiencing in the U.S. a small uptick in COVID-19 deaths, as shown by the graph to the right [source], overall the data suggests that the disease is on the wan. Since its peak in late April the daily death toll has steadily dropped, even as the number of detected infections has skyrocketed. Many more people are getting the disease, but many fewer are dying from it.

What the data now tells us is that our leaders failed us in their response to the virus, in every way possible that can be imagined. Such incompetence and bad judgment should result in wholesale firings in every county, city, and state government that imposed lock downs come the November elections. No one should be immune in these local governments.

(Note: The two spikes on the graph of daily deaths on May 7 and June 25 are because New York and New Jersey suddenly added a whole slew of new deaths, under suspicious circumstances.)

The failed lock down policies

New York daily COVID-19 deaths through July 28

The graph to the right shows the daily death toll for New York state. It also indicates when Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo instituted his lock down and mask policies.

Based on this graph Cuomo will likely crow that his policies worked, that because of his lockdowns and mask policies the Wuhan virus was kept in check and eventually squashed.

Bah. First, because of Cuomo’s own policies the total death toll in New York has ended up far worse than it should have. He killed people by those policies because, during the epidemic’s worst period, he required that infected patients be returned to the long term nursing homes from whence they came. He did this because he believed his hospitals would soon be overwhelmed with Wuhan flu patients (something that never happened) and wanted to reserve space for them. Instead, he exposed his state’s most vulnerable population, the elderly sick, directly to the disease, resulting in the worst death totals of any state in the country. Rather than protecting the elderly sick, he acted to make them sick from COVID-19 and thus die.

California daily COVID-19 death and case totals

Arizona daily COVID-19 death, hospitalization, and case totals

Second, correlation does not prove causation. Just because the dates of Cuomo’s lock down line up with the rise and fall of the disease proves nothing. We need only look at the states of California and Arizona to illustrate this. The two graphs to the right not only show the daily death toll for each state, but the daily count of new cases and new hospitalizations (for Arizona).

Do you notice a correlation between the lock downs and the rise and fall? I don’t. The pattern is certainly completely different than in New York, and in fact is not really the same when you compare Arizona to California.

New York’s daily death toll immediately rockets upward following imposition of the lock down, and follows what appears to be the expected curve of this kind of virus. (The caseload numbers follow the same pattern, in sync, as shown here when you click on the full range option.)

Both California and Arizona however show no significant increase or decrease after imposition of their lock downs or mask orders, or when the lock downs are eased. Later when case numbers in California rise (but not deaths) and the lock down is reimposed, the restrictions do not seem to have any appreciable effect on either deaths or cases. Similarly in Arizona, the rise in cases, accompanied by relatively small rises in hospitalizations and deaths, does not seem to be effected significantly when the lock down is reinstated and masks become required.

At worst, it appears that the policies of these governors were completely irrelevant to the spread of the disease. At best, they served to slow its arrival (flatten the curve), but not significantly. Generally what the graphs tell us is that the virus was going to spread through the population, no matter what humans did.

(Note: The number of hospitalizations in Arizona today took a leap that does not seem statistically reasonable or possible. I suspect that either they have suddenly reassigned a bunch of hospitalizations to COVID-19, in order to punch up the total and thus justify Ducey’s draconian lock down policies, or this is an error that will be corrected in the coming days.)

The irrelevancy of these policies is also demonstrated by direct proof. In New York on June 12th hundreds gathered at St. Marks Place in Manhattan to party. Then on July 18th there was another such street party in Astoria, Queens, where I once lived. Thousands packed the streets, drinking and socializing, with no one wearing masks or practicing social distancing. Make sure you watch the video at the link.

In between, on June 15th, the city saw tens of thousands gather on the streets to protest Floyd George’s death.

According to all the experts, such gatherings should have resulted in an uptick in deaths in New York about ten days to two weeks later. It has not happened. In fact, New York’s daily death toll since late June has averaged just under 10 deaths per day (the majority still among the elderly sick), a tiny number for a place with a population of millions.

Masks or no masks, social distancing or not, this virus will run its course no matter what we do. And based on the numbers, it appears it is right now burning out, and poses relatively little threat to anyone, no matter what draconian policy any governor imposes.

Sadly the lock down policies those governors imposed did have consequences, however, all bad, and all having little to do with controlling COVID-19. They bankrupted millions, causing an economic crash that destroyed whole industries, many of which will never recover. Millions lost their jobs.

Untold others suffered ill health because they could not get treatment because all medical facilities had been ordered to devote everything to Wuhan virus cases, even though the predicted number of cases never materialized, leaving many hospitals practically empty.

And of course, the damage to our freedom of speech and the rule of law cannot be measured. Beforehand, it would have been considered verboten for any elected leader to issue such edicts, some of which literally nullified the First and Fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. Now it is considered completely acceptable for them to do it, whenever they feel they need to. And woe to anyone who dares challenge them.

The failed mask policy

Even now, with it clear that the lock downs were a terrible idea, our bankrupt leaders are taking advantage of their new powers and are imposing more bad policy. Though some continue to try to maintain their foolish lock downs, such as Democratic governor Gavin Newsom in California and Republican governor Doug Ducey in Arizona, most have switched from draconian lock downs to demanding that everyone wear masks, even though there is no science to justify this and plenty of evidence that suggests the masks might actually be harmful.

Nor am I merely spouting my opinion. All three graphs show the pointlessness of the mask mandates. They have utterly failed in California and Arizona in stopping the spread of the virus. If anything, I believe they have helped spread it, because most people use their masks improperly and thus help to deposit pathogens like the virus on their masks, in the very place they breath.

In the end you are probably more likely to get sick wearing a mask. I myself feel far safer without it, as I refuse to wear one.

The overall death toll

And then there are those that will claim that the Wuhan virus killed this year 141,430 people, more than twice as many people as the flu did in its most recent worst season, 2017-2018, when the CDC estimated approximately 61,000 died from the flu.

Well, let’s take an honest look at the numbers, something no one in our vaunted mainstream press appears willing to do. First, that 2017-2018 CDC flu number is only an estimate, with the CDC’s real margin of error ranging from 46,000 to 95,000 flu deaths. In fact, the CDC never actually settles on any single number for its yearly flu death toll, as it is doing this year with COVID-19. Previously the agency recognized that these numbers were uncertain, and noted that uncertainty by listing the yearly death toll as a range, as much as 20% to 35% wrong, up or down.

With COVID-19 however we cannot have such doubts. No way. Every death (even motorcycle accidents) that might have the slightest connection with the Wuhan virus must be assigned to it, and only it. And we must not recognize any margin of error. Exactly 141,430 people have died from COVID-19 so far this year. And we know this exact number with certainty!

The CDC also recognizes that it is hard to separate these so-called COVID-19 deaths from other respiratory deaths. such as the flu and pneumonia. This is why in its weekly COVIDView summary it groups all these respiratory diseases together in assessing the state of this epidemic. And as they noted in the first sentence of the summary in their most recent update, through July 18:

Nationally, levels of influenza-like illness (ILI) are below baseline, but higher than typically seen at this time of year.

Overall it appears there have been fewer deaths from all these diseases this year. They are only higher now, in the summer, because we have attempted to flatten the curve. If we have had any success in this (though doubtful), all it has really done is lengthened the season for these diseases into the summer.

The consequences

In a nation of educated citizens the consequences for these terrible policies — that bankrupted millions while accomplishing nothing other than a nullification of our rights under the Constitution — would be wholesale defeats at the ballot box for these city and state officials at the very first subsequent election.

I fear we are no longer a nation of educated citizens. I think this every time I go out and find myself surrounded by people unquestioningly wearing masks in all sorts of ridiculous situations, alone in their cars or on the street, or half pulled down so their noses and mouths are exposed so they can talk or breathe.

They were ordered by their betters to wear masks, and like sheep they are doing it. A citizen would have demanded some data to back up the order, and getting none (as we have) would have done what I did and researched the data for themselves, only to discover (as I have) that mask use makes little sense, based on what is actually known. A citizen would have then refused the order, and told the idiot that made it to go jump in a lake.

But as I said, Americans no longer appear to be citizens but peasants and servants to their lords and masters. If ordered to do something they do it, blindly, no questions asked. Like sheep they allow themselves to be ruled.

And when the next election comes in a little over three months these peasants and servants will do one of two things: Either they won’t vote, or if they do they will flip the lever for those local lords and masters, gladly giving them more power.

How else can peasants and servants feel safe?

The problem will be that they will not be safe. They will be endorsing incompetent and power-hungry politicians, rewarding them for bad policy. The result will be more bad policy, and worse abuses of power.

Under such rule no one is ever safe.

Readers!
 

My July fund-raiser for Behind the Black is now over. The support from my readers was unprecedented, making this July campaign the best ever, twice over. What a marvelous way to celebrate the website's tenth anniversary!
 

Thank you! The number of donations in July, and continuing now at the beginning of August, is too many for me to thank you all personally. Please forgive me by accepting my thank you here, in public, on the website.
 

If you did not donate or subscribe in July and still wish to, note that the tip jar remains available year round.


 

Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


 

If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
 
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

20 comments

  • Clay

    The only way we’re going to get the leftist progressive, liberals and RINOs to end the lockdowns and mask requirements before the election is to make use of TDS. To start, all freedom loving Americans should start wearing bright red MAGA masks. Businesses that are locked down should put up signs stating that they are temporarily closed so that they can campaign for Trump, and furloughed workers should be out doing just that. The Democrat party and their fascist supporters will be screaming to end the shutdowns and everyone get back to work immediately.

  • LocalFluff

    Statistics from Italy, where the panic began in Europe March 2020 if you remember, shows that 0.04% of those age 40-49 who got such a bad cold that they visited a hospital died. And 0.01% of those age 30-39. That’s a fraction even of the poor fellows who suffer from bad asthma or such illnesses or treatments that reduces their immune system in this respect.

    The whole corona phenomena is a political construct. Medically nothing unusual has happened. So this virus kills our old friends, then protect them! It’s got nothing to do with people of working age. It was much much worse in the 1950s and 1960s with the Hong Kong and Asian flue that primarily killed children under the age of 6. A virus killing only people who already are at their life expectancy, well, they know that their time is up soon one way or another.
    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.15.20067074v3

    @Clay Great ideas!

  • Andrew_W

    From LocalFluff’s link:

    We estimate that the number of COVID-19 deaths in Italy is 49,000-53,000 as of May 9 2020, as compared to the official number of 33,000. The Population Fatality Rate (PFR) has reached 0.26% in the most affected region of Lombardia and 0.58% in the most affected province of Bergamo. These PFRs constitutes a lower bound to the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR). We combine the PFRs with the Test Positivity Ratio to derive a better lower bound of 0.61% on the IFR for Lombardia. We further estimate the IFR as a function of age and find a steeper age dependence than previous studies: we find 17% of COVID-related deaths are attributed to the age group above 90, 7.5% to 80-89, declining to 0.04% for age 40-49 and 0.01% for age 30-39, the latter more than an order of magnitude lower than previous estimates.
    …………..
    We predict an IFR lower bound of 0.5% for NYC and that 27% of the total COVID-19 fatalities in NYC should arise from the population below 65 years.

    Nothing there is surprising or unexpected, and I don’t see those findings as supportive of claims that Covid-19 is nothing to worry about; 27% of deaths are people younger than 65. A lower bound IFR of 0.61% combined with the popular herd immunity estimate of 60% would mean at least 1.2 million deaths to reach herd immunity in the US. Though, as I’ve said, I’m confident steadily improving treatments and a vaccine will interrupt that eventuality – assuming that with social measures a rapid increase in cases is avoided over the next few months.

  • Craig Austin

    StatsCan reported 8,511 influenza/pneumonia deaths in 2018.
    The number was used to scare people into getting a flu shot.
    This year the count is approximately 120, they bury this number very deep in the report, only suggesting a “significant decrease” this year. We have had approximately 8,300 “COVID ” deaths thus far, does anyone see a snow job?

  • Cornfed

    “I fear we are no longer a nation of educated citizens.”

    That nails it. I have always been skeptical of this virus nonsense. Yet I find most (not all) of my fellow citizens unquestioningly obedient to the authorities because they are terrified of getting sick. It’s like Alice in Wonderland.

  • F16 Guy

    I hope everyone has had a chance to see this recently banned video.
    Please be sure to see the impassioned talk by Dr. Stella Emmanuel:

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/07/hcq_censorship_cubed_social_media_giants_shut_down_doctors_testifying_from_experience_that_hydroxychloroquine_works.html

  • gmmay70

    “I don’t see those findings as supportive of claims that Covid-19 is nothing to worry about.”

    Leading off with a strawman isn’t a strong start.

    “A lower bound IFR of 0.61% combined with the popular herd immunity estimate of 60% would mean at least 1.2 million deaths to reach herd immunity in the US.”

    First off, Herd immunity is not determined by mortality rate. Secondly, you’re extrapolating a predicted death rate in NY to the rest of the country, when data from other states rubbishes such a wild hypothesis before you reach the end of the sentence. We don’t even have to get into the myriad other variables you’re failing to consider.

    The bottom line is, if you’ll allow me to correct your strawman, is that this virus is nowhere near as bad as its been promoted to be. Thus the actual thesis of the original post – promoting panic is bad policy. It’s even in the title.

  • Andrew_W

    Leading off with a strawman isn’t a strong start.
    Except it’s not a strawman, many people have been claiming it’s nothing to worry about, that medically nothing unusual has happened, some even claim the virus is a hoax.

    First off, Herd immunity is not determined by mortality rate.
    Where do I say or imply that herd immunity is determined by mortality rate?
    I don’t, so: Strawman.

    when data from other states rubbishes such a wild hypothesis before you reach the end of the sentence.
    No credible data from other states refute IFR rates of around 0.5%.

    . . this virus is nowhere near as bad as its been promoted to be.
    And it’s no where near as benign as it’s been promoted to be. Actual IFR’s are around the 0.5%, higher without treatment when patients need it and when the vulnerable aren’t shielded from infection, perhaps lower with good treatments and when the disease is kept away from the most vulnerable.

    promoting panic is bad policy.
    Promoting policy that is disconnected from reality is always bad policy, I see plenty of such disconnect from everyone being driven by their politics/ideology, left and right.

  • Rose

    LocalFluff: Statistics from Italy … shows that 0.04% of those age 40-49 who got such a bad cold that they visited a hospital died. And 0.01% of those age 30-39.

    No, that is not what your source say. Those figures (calculated from excess mortality analysis) are for IFR (Infection Fatality Rate), not HFR (Hospital Fatality Rate) as you suggest. Given how mild the illness usually is for people of those age ranges, you should expect their IFR and HFR to differ by a few orders of magnitude.

  • janyuary

    Andrew … I remember the Hong Kong flu very well, among many wicked flu seasons. Much of it was when domestic and international air travel could be as easily spontaneous as hopping a bus. It’s been 20 years since my last bad flu — I have an aggressive health protocol when I feel one coming on that seems to work. When I get the same flu that has had my colleagues out for two to three weeks, I am only ill for three days. Every single flu season, serious or so-so, I knew at least half a dozen people personally, myself included like as not, who were made ill. Some flu seasons it was very ill, and every flu season one could predict who among me would get sick: those who ate foolishly, and those who had allowed themselves to get badly out of shape.

    Every single flu season, well over half a century’s worth at my age, I remember people who were exposed to a lot of public, taking care to stay away from older relatives, kids, and the workplace. Every single flu season where I worked in an office, I remember people making it very clear that only the rudest came to work sick.

    Each individual is responsible for his or her own immune system. However, one full generation’s worth of many billions of dollars in aggressive marketing and advertising to a perfectly healthy populace, by a medical establishment determined to alert them to the fact that they are very likely walking dead but just don’t know it, or won’t until they subscribe fully to the Western medical “preventative model” idea that a large part of “medicine’s” job is to prevent your need for a doctor’s services in the future … marketing to perfectly healthy people day in and day out, online, in billboards, on TV, on radio ….. the power of suggestion combined with confusion as to what is entitlement-thinking and what is respecting rights …

    Bottom line, Andrew: I have zero personal knowledge of any individual who has been made ill from, let alone been diagnosed with, this virus. What I know is entirely hearsay. It seems to me that quite a lot of what YOU know is entirely hearsay. I expect the virus is real enough. The hoax, pretty obvious to me since I first looked on April 7, is that it represents any kind of significant threat. In my county, it is like raising holy hell because someone stained (not stole, but stained) $28 out of $280,000 crisp dollar bills. For this people are on house arrest and businesses are going under, but worse, people are revealing true colors that … well, may not be so becoming in another year.

    I have a lot of personal knowledge of flus, working closely among “the hordes” in flu season in large cities. With this C 19 hysteria, I have a lot of personal knowledge of cruel deprivations put upon good people because of people who accept hearsay as fact. Curiosity and math skills are a much better way to find the truth. You can believe politicians and doctors if you want. But while you’re at it, it’s a fascinating thing to read Michael Crichton’s “Travels” to discover why, although he was an MD, he decided not to be a doctor. Doctors are as fallible as your average auto mechanic.

    I will believe my own lyin’ eyes and math.

  • Ed

    I often see references to “reaching herd immunity.” Apparently people do not understand the concept. Maybe I can help.

    TLDR: The key takeaway is that herd immunity has already happened long ago nationally and has happened, or is happening, piecemeal, state-by-state and community-by-community. There is a clear signal when herd immunity has been reached – it is when the number of infections reaches a maximum. Deaths are proprtional to infections but lagged by an infection period. So when death rates (e.g. weekly deaths) maximize, herd immunity is already past. In those early, hard hit places like NYC, maximum weekly deaths happened in mid-April so they reached herd immunity in early April. Their crisis is long past.

    By definition, herd immunity is when every infected person will infect just one other person on average during their own infection. If they infect more than one person, the disease is spreading exponentially. If fewer than one, the disease is dimishing exponentially. At herd immunity, the number of infected will neither increase nor decrease in time as each infected person infects just one more – the epidemic is in a steady state.

    Diseases are often characterized by a so called reproductive rate, R. It represents the number of other people who’ll be infected by an infected person very, very early in the epidemic. At that time, each infected person will meet only other people vulnerable to infection. Often R is written as R0 but I’ll just use R here.

    To take an example, suppose R is 2. Then, very early on, each infected person will infect two others while infected. Consequently, at that stage, the number of infected people will about double over the course of an infection period (about two weeks for covid).

    In time, as the epidemic progresses, infected people will start also encountering people who’re either currently infected or have had the disease and recovered and are now immune (I’m ignoring loss of immunity). Those folks can’t be infected. The number of new infections per infected person will now be smaller than R and proportional to the number of folks still vulnerable to infection. If you let V be the fraction of the population that’re still vulnerable to infection, then every infected person will now cause RV new infections. Intuitively, that’s the effective reproductive rate at that point in the epidemic.

    Continuing the example, suppose the R=2 epidemic has spread so that altogether one quarter of the population is either infected or has recovered and is immune. The vulnerable fraction is now 3/4 so the effective reproductive rate is now RV = 2*3/4 = 3/2 = 1.5 – each infected will infect one and a half other people intead of two like before. At this point, the number of infections is growing 50% every infection period. That’s still fast and exponential but not nearly as fast as doubling every infection period.

    The number of infected will continue to increase but slower and slower as V becomes smaller and smaller. At some point, as the still vulnerable population decreases, the effective reproductive rate, RV, becomes one. At that point, infections are neither increasing nor decreasing because each infected person will now only infect one other. IOW, herd immunity has been reached. Applying a little algebra, if RV=1 then V=1/R. You may recognize that as the so called herd immunity threshold. Sometimes it’s expressed in terms of the infected+recovered and then it is written as 1-1/R.

    At that point, there are still a lot of infected people. In a simple model I made, with R=2 the number of infected at its peak would be about 16% of the population. (Note: V=1/R, so 50% of the population would still be vulverable and therefore the other 36% would have previously been infected and now recovered). Those 16% would go on to infect 16% more and so the epidemic will shoot past herd immunity and V will continue to decrease and become smaller than 1/R. Since V < 1/R now, the effective reproductive rate, RV will be less than one. Each infected person will infect fewer than one other on average and the number of infected will decrease and will do so exponentially. The number of infected rapidly goes to zero and the epidemic is over.

    To sum up. When infections are increasing, the population hasn't yet reached herd immunity. When infections are decreasing, herd immunity is past. That is, the signal for herd immunity is when infections are at a maximum.

    Our testing data isn't nearly good enough to know how many infected there are now or have been before. But a good assumption is that deaths are proportional to infections but lagged by an infection period (or a little less, folks succumb before they recover obviously). Sure the death data isn't completely trustworthy but it's hard to fake a death whereas it's quite easy to fake "cases." So I think the weekly deaths as published by, e.g., the CDC are a pretty good indicator of the number of infections a couple weeks before.

    Take a look at the NYC weekly deaths (state by state deaths are available in the CDC download). Weekly deaths peaked at 4841 in the week of April 11. Consequently herd immunity was reached in that community around the beginning of April or end of March. New Jersey is similar with a peak of 2477 in the week of April 18 so their herd immunity was in the first or second week of April.

    By contrast, California had a peak in early May/late April. As expected deaths went down afterward but have gone back up. It's a big state are there are multiple somewhat isolated communities compared to, e.g. New York City. The epidemic affected one that reached herd immunity in late April. It's now ravaging another that may not have yet reached herd immunity – we won't know until we clearly see that maximum weekly deaths have passed.

  • Ed: Excellent explanation. I had wanted to note that right now I consider New York and New Jersey probably the safest places in the U.S. if you are worried about the Wuhan virus. Arizona less so, but hardly something to fear.

  • Edward

    Robert,
    You wrote: “In the end you are probably more likely to get sick wearing a mask.

    The uptick in deaths occurs a couple of weeks or so after masks were mandated in many places. Although correlation is not causation, as you point out, the universal misuse and abuse of masks means that each mask wearer breathes in all the contaminants that he put onto his mask all those times that he touched it, or wore it as a chin mask (on his chin rather than over his nose and mouth), or stored it in his pocket or her purse or wherever. Breathing this contaminated air for hours on end makes a useless mask worse than useless, spreading whatever disease the wearer touched. We are not supposed to touch our mouth or nose, yet our masks now do the equivalent day after day, week after week. The magnitude of the cluster [bleep]-ness is impossible to overstate.

    This analysis has some logic that suggests this correlation may indicate some causation. It is only a hypothesis, an educated guess, but it would be interesting if someone were to do a study on the phenomenon. Perhaps masks turned what would have been minor exposures into major exposures and more severe infections.

    Our rulers’s bad decisions at every point of this panicdemic certainly make it look like they have been intentionally [bleep]ing us.

    William Briggs has an interesting take on the Wuhan virus and the reaction to it. The following is his 24th essay updating his audience on the progress of the reaction, but the graph at the end of his essay is interesting.
    https://wmbriggs.com/post/31960/

    I fear we are no longer a nation of educated citizens.

    The government educated most of us. Apparently we were (mis)educated exactly how our rulers want us.

  • Andrew_W

    The key takeaway is that herd immunity has already happened long ago nationally and has happened, or is happening, piecemeal, state-by-state and community-by-community. There is a clear signal when herd immunity has been reached – it is when the number of infections reaches a maximum.

    By definition, herd immunity is when every infected person will infect just one other person on average during their own infection. If they infect more than one person, the disease is spreading exponentially. If fewer than one, the disease is dimishing exponentially. At herd immunity, the number of infected will neither increase nor decrease in time as each infected person infects just one more – the epidemic is in a steady state.

    That’s great news, using that definition means that the US population gained herd immunity against Ebola in 2014.

    And herd immunity against Covid-19 was apparently reached, using Ed’s definition, in the US in early April – there was a peak in the number of new infection at that point, followed by a decline in the number of new infections . . . but then in late June the number of new infections in the US started to rise again . . . how can that be – if herd immunity was reached in the US in early April as Ed claims, how is it that a few weeks later the number of new infections was again rising? Did the immunity obtained by the population against the disease disappear? Are we condemned to never be able to get the virus under control because the immunity gained by people that had been infected only lasts for a few weeks??

    Ah, no, because as Ed knows the rate of transmission is affected by social behavior, and measures people take to reduce the rates of transmission. And as we’re all well aware, but some are too blinked to acknowledge, societies and individuals have undertaken huge changes in the way people interact to reduce the rates of transmission.

    So if Ed’s claim that herd immunity has been reached in the US is valid, it’s only under the conditions that were adopted to restrict transmission rates. The US does not have herd immunity against Covid-19 under the conditions of social interaction that existed prior to the introduction of social distancing and lockdowns intended to reduce transmission rates.

  • pzatchok

    I don’t think Ed ever said the whole of the country had immunity, just specific pockets.

  • Andrew_W

    The key takeaway is that herd immunity has already happened long ago nationally and has happened, or is happening, piecemeal, state-by-state and community-by-community.

    I have to admit I’m not sure how to interpret a claim that it’s happened nationally . . . but sort of hasn’t.
    If he’d said the reverse – that it’s happened in some states and communities, but not on the national scale – that would make sense.

  • commodude

    And not being satisfied with the chaos he’s caused to this point, the fascist continues to push his expanding power:

    https://www.foxnews.com/health/fauci-suggests-goggles-eye-shield-for-better-protection-against-coronavirus

    “Theoretically you should protect all of the mucosal surfaces [eyes, nose, mouth], so if you have goggles or an eye shield, you should use it,” he said in an interview with ABC News on Instagram Wednesday.

    They will never be satisfied that we’re doing ENOUGH, which is why unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats should never be in charge of making or implementing policy. Once they have a little power, it’s never enough. Like a drug high, the first hit causes an ever expanding need for more.

  • Craig Austin: Can you provide the url or location where the 120 number is cited? I can’t find it.

  • m d mill

    Note: Sweden has reached nearly 1 death per day. Well done Sweden! also S. Korea, Taiwan,Hong Kong. Little economic/social destruction and problem effectively solved. Effective herd immunity occurred much sooner than most thought possible…see nic lewis here:
    https://judithcurry.com/2020/07/27/why-herd-immunity-to-covid-19-is-reached-much-earlier-than-thought-update/

    In most countries of the world non-accidental deaths per year are no higher this year than last (for the same time period). But the economic/social damage from inane “lock downs” has been devastating in most countries.

  • Cotour

    Two Covid tid bits from the real world:

    A friend just came by and in conversation told me two stories.

    1. Her 80 + year old friend in Florida registered along with other people in his building to have a Covid test done. So they all went down to the center where the test was to be done and waited, and waited. In the end it became too long a wait and they all just left and went home.

    The next week several of them got the reports from their tests, they were positive. The only problem? They registered to have the test, but never took the test, they all left and went home.

    2. Her friends mother who was in her 90’s who lived in Westchester died of natural causes and that was understood by her at the time. When she received the death certificate it listed cause of death, Covid. She is furious.

    Apparently as her friend came to understand that if the death was listed as Covid it was worth $30K to the hospital. Natural death is worth $0.

    The lesson? Just follow the money.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *