Evidence #2 - Ok, but those were healthy young workers (19-59 in the study) and we know (well, most of us) that COVID attacks the elderly. Well this paper from the UK found 80.9% of nursing home residents that tested positive were also asymptomatic. gov.uk/government/pub…
2/15
Evidence #3 – PCR tests are EXTREMELY sensitive, so much so that even the NY Times found that 85-90% of positives are meaningless. nytimes.com/2020/08/29/hea…
3/15
Evidence #4 - many jurisdictions report, as a COVID death, simply ANY death occurring within [X] days of a positive PCR test. For example, see this from New York City (60 days). www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid…
4/15
Evidence #5 – no data/pictures necessary, but we know there was significant excess death in many jurisdictions around the world in 2020, and we know a lot (most?) of that was caused by COVID. However…
5/15
Evidence#6–Lockdowns cause BIG nonCOVID excess death. eg this paper found “In 14 states, >50% of excess deaths were attributed to underlying causes other than COVID” & in NYC there were 398% & 356% increases in heart disease & diabetes, respectively
6/15 jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…
Evidence #7 – we know the CDC expanded its definition of classifying deaths attributable to COVID, altering standard established medical criteria for diagnosis.
7/15 cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss…
Evidence #8 – the median and mean stay prior to death in a nursing home—where ~40% of COVID deaths occurred—are only ~5 months and ~14 months, respectively
8/15 ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
Question#1–Given the liberal definition of a COVID death as simply any death w/in a specified time period of a + test, and given 80-90% asymptomatic, how do we distinguish between dying FROM covid vs. dying with an asymptomatic + test that “overrides” the primary diagnosis?
9/15
If the latter were occurring, I would expect to see COVID death by age mirror that of all other death (similar to results I would get if I were measuring whether there was an epidemic of people dying of green eyes). Well…
h/t @justin_hart
10/15
Question#2 – Surely the above accounts for some of what is occurring, but we still have excess death spikes to explain. So how do we know a greater % of excess death is not from lockdowns like missed critical med. care? Or dependent care home residents abandoned in panic?
11/15
How do we know, for example, the 400% increase in cardiac deaths isn’t just the portion that couldn’t be reclassed/overridden as COVID due to asymptomatic + test? Many hard-hit areas reached 30-50% seroprevalence, so in theory could 30-50% of all deaths be classed “COVID”?
12/15
Question#3–how do we know the lockdowns didnt result in a lot of people dying from preventable causes (or overdoses) b/c they were too scared to go to the hospital b/c of gov’t/media panic? If so, I might see substantially increased non-COVID deaths at home
ht @EWoodhouse7
13/15
Too many people sadly died of COVID. Too many people sadly died (and will continue to die) because of lockdowns. Its important to distinguish the two so that we can learn from our mistakes. I suspect it will take years of forensic analysis if it is allowed to occur at all.
14/15
A bit about the lockdown economy & why it may appear that, despite many businesses being decimated, others (including the economy as a whole) seem in no hurry to exit. With public co’s having reported, we can now look back on 2020 in full.
1/13
For my non-finance followers, 1 thing to understand is the economy—like a stock index—is effectively capitalization-weighted. This means the biggest companies have the most impact & the smallest are mostly irrelevant, both w/r/t econ metrics & co’s influence on gov/policy
2/13
Below is a good visual of what I mean using the S&P500. The 5 biggest companies have a weighting equal to the bottom 350. So you can barely see a company like General Motors worth $75B, let alone a local shop that—pre-lockdown—made $75k/yr & might be worth $1m (if public).
3/13
1 yr ago today, Dr. Ioannidis wrote the below. I read it that day, agreed with nearly every word, and still do. Worth revisiting in full, but I’ve captured a few key quotes below along with my own commentary
“we dont know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health. Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric”
“How long, though, should measures like these be continued if the pandemic churns across the globe unabated”
I’d love to know. We never should have implemented such devastating & unprecedented “temporary” measures without defined exit criteria.
3/8
A revised look at who gets to work from home. Remember this the next time someone says "if only people would just listen"
Total US salaries & wages have surpassed pre-pandemic levels, except there are now 9.5 million fewer people w jobs.
How is that possible? Simple: the rich got richer while the poor got poorer. This is the inverse of what most lockdown supporters profess to desire in society.
Those earning >$85k were never impacted by job losses. Those earning <$30k on the other hand nearly hit 40% unemployment in April and are still ~15%. For comparison, unemployment hit 10% in the financial crisis. Note the rate for this group tanked again during winter lockdowns.
Statements like this from Pfizer remind me of Warren Buffett's quip "Don't ask the barber whether you need a haircut."
(1/6)
Pfizer has said it expects $15 billion in 2021 revenue attributable to its COVID vax. For comparison, its total 2020 revenue was ~$42 billion, with its best-selling product Prevnar 13 (introduced 10 years ago) contributing just under $6 billion.
(2/6)
So the COVID vax will instantly become Pfizer's best selling product by 2.5 times and represent a ~35% increase in total company gross revenue. For a 170-year old stodgy $200B market cap company, that is other-worldly growth.
The 10,000-Foot View: Forever Lockdown Unraveling?
A short (for me) thread on what I perceive as the current macro situation (warning: contains some optimism)
1) I believe many have overestimated the degree to which people “like” lockdown. Sure, there are some.
1/15
But rather, they might simply “support” it as they believe it to be a necessary part of our societal approach to the virus due to that claim having been repeated ad nauseum in MSM.
2/15
Further, they have merely been inconvenienced by lockdown (the Zoom class) rather than decimated (working class), so they lack any incentive to question the prevailing narrative and instead conform to what is perceived as the virtuous course of action.