Or, how does a biased world rid itself of the best example of a non-lockdown control for its horrible lockdown experiment?
Simple! CHANGE THE DATA.
Of course we all know Sweden has been a battleground regarding its mild voluntary lockdown strategy versus the heavy lockdowns of most of the EU. Inconvenient graphs like this one are quite a thorn in Team Lockdown’s side. Sweden fewer deaths/M, much better quality of life.
When I did some analysis in the Spring and Fall, I looked at Oxford’s stringency index as a proxy for lockdown severity. And sure enough Sweden was significantly lower stringency than all other EU countries.
Here is a plot tracking stringency for the UK, Finland Norway and Sweden. I added Norway and Finland because Team Lockdown loves to reply to Sweden threads with “but Norway but Finland”! When I plotted this in October we see Sweden’s Spring stringency was comparatively low.
But then I just happened to plot this again yesterday. What the heck? Sweden is no longer a mild-response country! It is only slightly less stringent than the UK! And the “but Norway Finland” argument is now moot! Look how much less stringent they’ve been!
So apparently the whole “Sweden didn’t lockdown” thing is just a myth? Here is the comparison between Oxford’s assessment of Sweden’s lockdown in October vs Now. Almost a 50% increase in stringency?! I am certain Swedes would be baffled by this.
So then I thought I should look at other countries. Was their data revised significantly between Fall and Feb? Nope. Small revisions yes. Not huge revisions that change the entire thesis. 🤔
What about the cumulative stringency compare- how does it change? Well now Sweden is above a few countries and on par with several more.
So I of course had to contact Oxford OxCGRT Data Team and ask if this was all just a big mistake. Nope.
They had “several lengthy discussions” and decided to “update”the data. How do recent unenforceable decrees by the PM affect data from last Spring I replied?
So there you have it. Down the memory hole goes Sweden’s non-lockdown control experiment. Now it was much like all other EU countries.
Makes their similar results much easier to explain for Team Lockdown! “See, Sweden really did lockdown! Oxford says so! Ignore the Swedes!”
Inconveniently however, Team Lockdown’s favorite compares “but Norway and but Finland” now show similar/milder lockdowns than Sweden with far better results. Which would point out that lockdowns had little influence over deaths/M. Hence why lock down?
So yes folks the fix is in. Don’t like what the control is telling you about your terrible experiment? Fudge the control data. If there is no control it’s much easier to make unverifiable assertions. This is all most convenient for the UK. Where is Oxford located again?
JPM released some good news today: hospitalization growth rate graphs that clearly show the seasonal winter wave has been declining for some time and hosp growth is declining now in all regions.
But what did the “experts” predict?
“OMG OMG” who could forget this tour de force of Public Health “devastation” by RI’s own Megan Ranney? Whoooooops...
Or Saint Fauci’s “surge upon a surge” that he “didn’t want to frighten us” with? Oooof...
The real deal on Sweden🇸🇪 from an actual Swede @TLennhamn . Please read the paper but I’ll hit the highlights here. “The world’s cautionary tale” it definitely is, but not in the way the writer of that headline intended... key facts in this thread -> …edevelopmentperestroika.wordpress.com/2021/01/15/fin…
Sweden did have about 6000 more deaths than “expected” -98k vs 92k. And the “highest number of deaths since 1918”, a “fact” gleefully reported by the media. But perhaps that’s a bit misleading...
Simple question for the Sweden-haters:
if a population doubles, wouldn’t you expect deaths to double all things being equal?
A tough concept for biased folk I know, but look at Sweden’s population growth and the population-adjusted curve. Can you spot the pandemic now?
Former Obama official Andy Slavitt was recently appointed to Biden’s team as “senior advisor for Covid response.” Known for his frequent “Twitterhea” length fear-mongering threads preaching subservience, we’ve saved some of his greatest hits so that no one doubt his character.
First we should mention that Slavitt has worked for arguably the two most notorious vampire squids of capitalism: Goldman and McKinsey. He’s no social worker. He is also (shockingly) not a scientist or Dr (of any kind). He’s an English/Econ major with an mba.
But in any case let’s focus on a thread from July where Slavitt tells us all how to stop c19. It’s easy you dolts! We can stop it “any time we decide to.”
Due to the proven immense human costs of lockdowns, there must be overwhelming evidence that they have a significant public health benefit. There is none. Just one recent example of the terrible costs:
More important findings from the newly uncovered RI PCR test Ct data!
Recall I previously showed the Ct values of more than 5000 C19 PCR tests from the RI state health lab. Here they are again color coded for estimated infectivity. While all these folks were “positive”...
The green folks were likely not infective and the yellows may not have been. The higher the Ct score, the lower the viral load - the person is “less sick” or has remnant viral rna which can be detected for months while infectivity lasts maybe a week.
Yet it is nearly impossible to obtain Ct score data! Go ahead and ask for it- you will likely get a blank stare or a weak excuse about authorization or data storage. But you won’t get your Ct score. Ridiculous.
PCR Ct data revealed! For the first time we get a look at the Ct values from a state health lab - these cover March-June 2020. First the scatter of all 5036 positive tests:
Next we look at the distribution of Ct values for all tests:
Finally, the temporal shift in percentage of tests with Ct > 32 (arguably a fair cutoff for infectious viral loads).