1. Sorry, Rich, my friend. You’ve absolutely no idea whether lockdowns and sheltering of the general population is the primary reason for lesser deaths than originally predicted...
2... or, in the long run, will prove detrimental overall to the population as others with impressive medical and scientific backgrounds have argued.
3. Indeed, there’s concern of additional waves of viral death because of the lack of immunity-building among large segments of the population due to the broad rather than targeted mitigation strategies.
4. Moreover, there’s plenty of information now regarding the resulting neglect of treatment for other serious illnesses, the harmful health effects of closing much of the economy, the layoffs of health professionals who serve patients with other deadly diseases..
5... the widely disparate outcomes among states and cities, etc. I’m afraid aspects of the small and big pictures allude you because you threw in with the most drastic if not draconian state and federal governmental responses early on, without the benefit of accurate models..
6.. and data relied upon by authorities, and which many scholars have said for over a month was lacking if not off-the-charts inaccurate. Indeed, experts from Yale, Stanford, Rockefeller, Oxford, etc., have been critical of the approach you and others have embraced.
7. And in several cases, their estimates and concerns have been quite accurate. So, the thinly argued slap at Bill and Seth (yes, a radio host) by you (a blogger), isn’t your best effort. And I say so with more respect than you showed either of them.
nationalreview.com/2020/04/corona…
nationalreview.com/2020/04/corona…
