Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The absolutely devastating economic and social effects were known, the possible effects of the disease both short and long-term were unknown. So we decided to go for the known devastating effects in case the disease was also devastating? That makes zero sense. And there were alternatives proposed to lockdowns like the Great Barrington Declaration that were not simply not considered, but were actively suppressed and smeared by government officials and their media lackeys.

“This proposal from the three fringe epidemiologists . . . seems to be getting a lot of attention – and even a co-signature from Nobel Prize winner Mike Leavitt at Stanford. There needs to be a quick and devastating published take down of its premises, is it underway?”

-NIH director Francis Collins in an email to Anthony Fauci about the Great Barrington Declaration




Great Barrington -> 4th of October. Are you even reading my comments? I am referring to the first lockdowns which took place in April 2020.

"So we decided to go for the known devastating effects in case the disease was also devastating?" Of course we do in case of a pandemic, since we are dealing with a completely different underlying distribution of effects.


Fine, from the WHO in 2019 (and before Wuhan) about what the response to future pandemics ought to be:

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789...

Contact tracing, quarantine of exposed individuals, entry and exit screening and border closures are "Not recommended in any circumstances."




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: