Everyone with intellectual honesty has been concerned about the health repercussions that prolonged economic restrictions mean. FORTUNE magazine online reports,
The economic effects of COVID-19 could prove deadlier than the disease itself.
They refer to a paper developed by authors from Duke University, Harvard Medical School, and the Johns Hopkins University. They looked at the unemployment rate pertaining to possible life expectancy. Why Employment?
The unemployment rate jumped from nearly the lowest in 50 years to the highest since the current measurement system began in 1948. While it has come down, it’s still at its highest rate since the recovery from the 2008–09 financial crisis.
So I looked at the study. Lots of Math. I do not like Models, but Lockdown and Mandate people like them, why not …
The NBER study is not an anti-lockdown or a warning of mitigation restrictions as a person of a particular political view may hope for. It makes the same mistakes we have seen since March of 2020 in allowing a perspective without looking for other scientific points of view.
SARS-CoV-2 is shed by asymptomatic individuals and persists in the environment for days, implying that public health measures to halt virus spreading could be effective at reducing transmission and mortality, see Li et al. (2020) and Pan et al. (2020).
The asymptomatic spread debate is ongoing. I say it does not matter or have a considerable proven effect on the numbers of people being admitted to the hospital, ICU, or deaths. PROTECT THE VULNERABLE! So wear a mask around Grampa and Grandma during a visit. Do not take the Grandparents out to indoor dining or public places if they have co-morbidities. Read the Great Barrington Declaration. A recent study shows that asymptomatic spread was minimal as discussed at RationalGround.com and the study here,
Estimated mean household secondary attack rate from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) was significantly higher than from asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%; P < .001), although there were few studies in the latter group. These findings are consistent with other household studies reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited role in household transmission.
Dr. Fauci agreed on January 28, 2020,
To continue…
Universal masking, social distancing, contact tracing, and quarantine were later identified as effective tools to contain SARS-CoV-2 spreading, see Leung et al. (2020) and Moghadas et al. (2020).
I have a number of videos now showing that compared to no mandated, heavily mandated mitigation strategies do not stop the cases or hospitalizations. The virus will go in waves in different parts of the country and times. PROTECT THE VULNERABLE! More at Rational Ground.
To continue…
Mathematical modeling predicted a catastrophic exhaustion of health care personnel and resources, particularly ventilators, unless strict containment measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 spreading were established, see Anderson et al. (2020) and Davies et al. (2020).
Anderson et al. from this section used the Imperial College modeling for the information. This has now come to be known as the source of the lockdowns and disaster and false as supported by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Here and the Heritage Foundation, Here. In fact, this is what started the commentary by Anderson et al. March 6, 2020,
Governments will not be able to minimise both deaths from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) and the economic impact of viral spread. Keeping mortality as low as possible will be the highest priority for individuals; hence governments must put in place measures to ameliorate the inevitable economic downturn.
Anderson et al. had a sense of the devastation about to be unleashed. But as of July, 2020, The Lancet allowed publication of a study saying otherwise to lockdowns. My underlines…
These findings suggest that more restrictive public health practices may indeed be associated with less transmission and better outcomes. However, in our analysis, full lockdowns and wide-spread COVID-19 testing were not associated with reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.
Even though this NBER study I am discussing today continues to circulate information and the poor science to support it. (AS COMPARED TO ABOVE STUDY)
…lockdowns have also contributed to further reduce economic activity. These measures have arguably saved lives, reducing the contagion rate and mitigating the risk of exhaustion of health care personnel and resources.
Its findings are important to clear some of the fog because of today’s relentless Covid narrative.
Between late March-early April, most U.S. states imposed stay-at-home orders and lockdowns, resulting in widespread shut down of business. Unemployment rate rose from 3.8% in February 2020 to 14.7% in April 2020 with 23.1 million unemployed Americans. Despite a decline to 6.7% in December 2020, the average unemployment rate over the year is comparable with the 10% unemployment rate at the peak of the 2007-2009 Great Recession and it is near the post-World War II histori- cal maximum reached in the early 1980s (10.8%). Importantly, COVID-19 related job losses disproportionately affect women, particularly of Hispanic heritage; African Americans; foreign born individuals; less educated adults and individuals age 16-24. In fact, the unemployment rate underestimates the extent of the economic contraction as many potential workers have abandoned the workforce (especially women).
That will result in,
The implied increases in age-adjusted deaths every 100,000 citizens are 31.59 for African-Americans, 41.12 for African- American men, 36.77 for African-American women, 21.41 for White, 27.31 for White men, 27.47 for White women.
For the overall population, the increase in the death rate following the COVID-19 pandemic implies staggering 0.84 and 1.22 million excess deaths over the next 15 and 20 years, respectively.
For African- Americans, we estimate 200 thousand and 290 thousand excess deaths over the next 15 and 20 years, respectively.
For Whites, we estimate 0.76 and 1.09 million excess deaths over the next 15 and 20 years, respectively.
I agree, this is “staggering”, and sad that so many physicians have forgotten that every health recommendation one gives can have consequences. Informed Consent is what physicians follow in legalese. I do not believe we ever gave the public, our patients, informed consent on any recommendation during the Coronavirus pandemic. It was always a government mandate.
