You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: [Discussion Post] Should we stay locked down for the COVID-19 pandemic or open up?
I think that locking down or opening up is directly related to Region and not a National or International discussion
Have you seen any data to support the idea that lockdowns actually reduced fatality rates in any location at all (as compared to less extreme and more targeted mitigation efforts)? I haven't scrutinized the math/stats, but I have seen a number of sources claiming that the results are indistinguishable between locations that instituted lockdowns and those that didn't.
For example
I haven't stumbled across anyone who looked at the numbers and then claimed to find an empirical effect, although that could be due to selection bias arising from the sites that I chose to include in my RSS feed. I'm interested to know if anyone's making that claim.
And of course, there are the counterexample countries like Sweden, Japan, Taiwan, etc...
I agree that mitigation decisions should be made regionally or locally, but I'm not totally convinced that lockdowns are actually necessary or useful anywhere as a mitigation tool (with the likely exception of huge international hubs like NYC).
I can not show any data, in fact there is some that seems to counter it.
On the other hand... The dense populations are struggling, so I less contact seems good.
In anycase to treat New York and Montana the same, makes zero sense.