We hate to be the bearer of bad news, Ben Shapiro, but feelings trump facts when it comes to covid-19.
This is thanks entirely to the love triangle forged between the corporate press, government officials, and tech giants whose sinister plus divisive campaign of dread and censorship spawned a chemical reaction so virulent that modern society was upended in a matter of weeks for a virus with a 99 percent in addition survival rate.
In no time whatsoever sacrificing for and preserving “ public health” — costs be damned— became the chief end of humanity. Relegating oneself to a lifetime of unquestioned submission to lockdowns and mask mandates became the greatest calling one could fulfill— at least until the shot arrived.
As our most fundamental individual rights were stripped aside, did any president, excellent minister, governor, or mayor suggest that maybe “ the particular people” have a vote to find out whether or not every aspect of their life should be subject to manipulation on a regular basis? Of course not. As it turns out, your “ sacred directly to vote” may only end up being exercised so long as the judgment class permits. It appears that our only job in times of emergency is to wait for marching purchases from those with political strength.
What a lot of should have come to realize more than this past year and a half are 2 lamentable impulses of the average person: (1) the trained behavioral instinct, learned primarily in federal government schools, to revere plus please those in positions of perceived authority plus (2) the desire for security over liberty. Fused with modernity’s cushy standards of living, these two traits enabled a series of effortless goalpost changes, starting from “ We’re all in this together! ” to “ Three jabs or weekly testing, else you and your family may starve. ” Mind you, anybody who predicted far less draconian policies in the early stages of the pandemic was promptly tagged a conspiracy theorist.
At their core, these pandemic schemes— lockdowns, curfews, capacity restrictions, vaccine mandates, and more— counted heavily on a blind trust in the ruling elite’s open public health pronouncements and our own desire to behave in a socially approved, conflict-free manner. But as it turns out, all of the big-picture covid data from the past eighteen months regarding lockdowns, and vaccine subscriber base thoroughly implicate the ruling elite.
The Covid-19 Data We Need to Acknowledge
There is zero meaningful correlation between lockdown strength and covid-19 outcomes .
Prior to 2020 lockdowns had never ever been recommended as a public health reaction, even for severe respiratory outbreaks. However , with a little little bit of media-induced panic, social pressure, and a theistic reverence for computer modeling , it was quickly accepted these historically and scientifically unprecedented public health measures stored lives. In turn, it was simply agreed that more stringent lockdowns would be more effective than weaker lockdowns.
All costs and meaningful arguments aside, heavy skepticism toward lockdowns was justified as early as April 2020, in order to was shown that a region’s time to lock down made simply no impact on its death cost.
Fast-forward eleven months and we find that data from March one, 2020, to March 1, 2021, show that lockdowns were always a nonfactor in mitigating the distribute of covid-19. The following information was split into four three-month periods to better account for adjustments in each nation’s stringency index. The period of measurement was cut off on Mar 1, 2021, to leave out any significant vaccine subscriber base. Because Israel was the just nation in the following graph that had significant full vaccination rates going into March 2021, it has been excluded through the last period of measurement.
Source: Our World in Data COVID-19 dataset (stringency_index, total_cases_per_million, total_deaths_per_million).
Quite plainly, more strict lockdowns, regardless of population density— illustrated by the size of the dots— had no higher effect on covid-19 outcomes compared to less stringent lockdowns. In fact , the minimal correlation that will does exist slopes in the opposite direction of what we’ve been trained to believe regarding lockdowns.
Similar conclusions can be drawn about lockdowns in the United States. Due to data constraints on lockdown stringency, the following state data is broken down into two periods: one much larger period extending from March 1, 2020, to January 1, 2021, and a second period extending through January 1, 2021, by means of March 1, 2021.
Source: Data on cases and deaths from Our World in Data COVID-19 dataset (total_cases_per_million, total_deaths_per_million); data on hospitalizations from HealthData. gov ( COVID-19 Reported Patient Impact plus Hospital Capacity by Condition Timeseries ); information on stringency for The month of january 2021– March 2021 from Adam McCann “ States with the Fewest Coronavirus Restrictions , ” Wallethub, Apr. 6, 2021; and through Dec. thirty-one, 2020, from Laura Hallas, Ariq Hatibie, Saptarshi Pyarali, and Thomas Hale, “ Variations in US States’ Responses to COVID-19 ” (BSG Working Paper Series BSG-WP-2020/034, edition 2 . 0, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, Dec 2020). Data on population density from World Human population Review ( US States – Ranked simply by Population 2021 ).
Again, we find no statistically significant correlations between lockdown stringency plus cases, deaths, or hospitalizations. Population density, again noted by the size of the dots, was also a nonfactor.
Quite plainly, regardless of the intensity, duration, or location of the lockdown mandated by government authorities, no respiratory system virus can be legislated aside. The claims that lockdowns are some sort of life-saving general public health measure and that the strength of a region’s lockdown is inversely related to covid-19 occurrence is simply not borne out there in the data.
Briefly I would like to note a single glaring cost of lockdowns centered on recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates , namely the abnormally high level of drug overdoses which have persisted since the first 1 / 2 of 2020.
Source: Data. CDC. org ( Early Model-Based Provisional Estimates of Medication Overdose, Suicide, and Transportation-Related Deaths ).
While there are many more costs associated with lockdowns than could be discussed in one article, it is very important realize that even if the lockdowns had been costless, their inefficacy is sufficient to render them useless as a public health measure.
Hospitals, on the whole, were never overrun.
While it is tempting to generalize based on a few extreme cases that exist at the tail ends of a distribution, these cases are not representative of the whole. This temptation is succumbed to most frequently when manufacturing panic about overrun and overcrowded hospitals. While these stories are seemingly endless, they are nevertheless statistical outliers. A brief review of United States hospitalization data confirms as much.
Source: HealthData. gov ( COVID-19 Reported Patient Influence and Hospital Capacity simply by State Timeseries ).
From consuming corporate press headlines you can have the impression that almost every hospital is operating over or near 100 percent capacity. As it turns out, inpatient mattress utilization— these are staffed inpatient beds that include all overflow and surge/expansion beds employed for inpatients, including all ICU beds— across the United States offers stayed below 76 % over the course of the pandemic whilst inpatient bed utilization designed for covid-19 patients has never overtaken 15 percent. However , judging by the fact that the 2021 periodic summer surge— which has currently peaked— has surpassed the particular 2020 seasonal summer rise, these rates will likely be exceeded when the deadlier seasonal wintertime surge arrives in the arriving months. Nevertheless, it would be simple speculation to suggest that private hospitals are going to exceed or achieve nearly 100 percent capacity since winter rolls around.
While 76 % utilization may seem high, previous medical director James Allen points out that an 85 percent guests rate is commonly considered to be ideal operating capacity. Allen comments that having too little of an occupancy rate implies that workers and resources are sitting idle, which can result in layoffs. On the other hand, a near– 100 percent occupancy rate would be too much of a strain on assets, leaving patients without care.
While there are certainly extreme cases of hospitals being pushed beyond capacity, the idea that United States private hospitals, on average, have been operating at or beyond 100 percent capability is absolutely ludicrous.
Vaccine uptake is not preventing case development.
The covid-19 vaccine simply may be the most hyped pharmaceutical product in medical history. Marketed to the world as nothing short of global salvation, the particular vaccine was supposed to start our return to normalcy. Regardless of this belief, the data suggest that increased vaccination rates are not being able to slow the spread of covid-19.
First, let’s assess the following claim made by Anthony Fauci during a June 3 CNN interview : “ When you’re below 50 percent of the people being vaccinated, that is certainly when you’re going to have a problem… Along with 50 percent vaccinated I feel fairly certain you’re not going to view the kind of surges we’ve seen in the past. ” Mind you, when Fauci believed that fifty percent vaccination rates were going to halt surges, you can bet a majority of the nation felt the same way.
Source: Data on cases from Our World in Data COVID-19 dataset (new_cases_smoothed_per_million); data on vaccination rates from Information. CDC. gov ( COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States Jurisdiction ).
As you can see, simple weeks after 50 percent full vaccination rates had been achieved in twenty states, cases in each one of those declares erupted. It comes as no surprise that authorities are now contacting for 70, 80, or 90 percent vaccination rates to get things under control.
Looking at the whole of the United States since March one, 2021, there is no statistically substantial indication that states which have administered, on average, more shot doses are faring any better than states that have given fewer doses on average.
Source: Data on cases from Our Entire world in Data COVID-19 dataset (total_cases_per_million); data on vaccination rates from Data. CDC. gov ( COVID-19 Vaccines in the United States Legislation ). Date variety is Mar. 1, 2021– Sept. 9, 2021.
Moving along to full vaccination rates, there is again no statistically significant indication that states plus countries with higher proportions of their population fully vaccinated are mitigating case growth any better than states along with lower percentages of their population fully vaccinated. As before, fully vaccinated rates are taken as an average of the past six months.
Source: Data on cases from Our World in Data COVID-19 dataset (total_cases_per_million); data on vaccination rates from Data. CDC. gov ( COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States Jurisdiction ). Date range is Mar. 1, 2021– Sept. 9, 2021.
Source: Data on cases and vaccination from Our World in Data COVID-19 dataset (total_cases_per_million, people_fully_vaccinated). Date range is Mar. 1, 2021– Sept. 9, 2021.
Additionally , a recently available vaccine surveillance report from the UK shows that fully vaccinated individuals between the ages of forty and eighty are receiving infected at higher rates than their unvaccinated alternatives. For those under forty and over eighty, infection rates among the vaccinated are lower than in the unvaccinated, but still substantial.
Supply: Public Health England, COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report – 7 days 36 (London: Public Health Britain, 2021).
Issue isn’t enough to raise a few eyebrows, there are plenty of instances of countries— only a few shown below— having experienced a surge in the event or even their highest case levels of the pandemic amid ever-increasing rates of vaccination.
Source: Information on cases and vaccination from Our World in Data COVID-19 dataset (new_cases, people_fully_vaccinated).
Keep in mind that the particular percentage of people who have received at least one dose is greater than what’s displayed above. So the assumption that simply getting jabs out to people— without having to fully vaccinate them— was going to bring cases to a screeching halt is also incredibly doubtful.
Pertaining specifically to the month of August, we find that a number of extremely vaccinated nations are encountering worse total case numbers amidst the highly vaccinated summer of 2021 rather than the unvaccinated summer of 2020.
Supply: Data on cases and vaccination from Our World in Data COVID-19 dataset (total_cases_per_million, people_vaccinated).
How do it be the case that the 0 percent vaccinated nation had far fewer cases last year than it did once sixty, 70, or 80 % of its population was completely vaccinated with what is proclaimed to be an incredibly effective vaccine? Why, despite these far worse metrics, are we all no longer seeing the rigorous lockdown measures like business closures, curfews, capacity limitations, or stay-at-home orders that defined the summer of 2020? Collegiate and professional sports activities arenas that were empty only one year ago are now loaded to the brim; and small to no effort is being made to check for vaccination status or proof of negative check at the gate. Are we seriously expected to believe that the political leaders have any kind of desire to preserve the “ public health” when they’re allowing their economies to use with practically no minimization measures in place despite climbing metrics? Maybe you are starting to realize that these “ public health” measures and the new vaccine mandates never had anything to do with your health.
Despite all the information we have on lockdowns, hospitalization trends, and newly emerging vaccination data, one can just marvel at how trust in the public health system plus ruling elite can continue in any capacity.