Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
Avik,
How long before the lockdown produces a worldwide depression. I’m not being dramatic. I seriously think you and other experts need to face this. A worldwide depression would make the COVID pandemic look like a party favor.
Regards,
Jim
@blueyeti
I think Sweden has herd immunity or very close to it
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/07/27/why-herd-immunity-to-covid-19-is-reached-much-earlier-than-thought-update/
https://unherd.com/podcasts/sunetra-gupta-covid-19-is-on-the-way-out/
https://unherd.com/podcasts/karl-friston-up-to-80-not-even-susceptible-to-covid-19/
Mister Bitcoin,
This is especially interesting. Considering how wrong the original Imperial College estimates for the spread of the virus were, why should we take their estimates of when herd immunity will be in force seriously. I think it could easily be possible that it could happen much earlier. Why believe the same idiots that misdirected us on the spread of the disease.
As I just mentioned on Avik Roy’s post. If you lock down until you produce a worldwide depression, it will make the Pandemic look like a party favor. One way or the other we must consider facing this with the weapons that we have that we know work and get on with it.
Regards,
Jim
Jim,
These are different models.
In fact the article writes:
The Imperial College COVID-19 model (Ferguson et al.[5]) is a prime example of one that does not adequately account for variation in individual susceptibility and connectivity.
I agree the Imperial College model should be ignored completely.
Nicholas Lewis, the author of this article, is not affiliated with Neal Ferguson.
https://www.nicholaslewis.org/covid-19-updated-data-implies-that-uk-modelling-hugely-overestimates-the-expected-death-rates-from-infection/
Dr. Gupta and Dr. Friston have also reached similar conclusions with Mr. Lewis, none are affiliated with Neal Ferguson the architect of the erroneous Imperial College model.
Average age of covid death > average life expectancy
Mister Bitcoin,
Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear in my comment. I wasn’t criticizing the experts Avik Roy is presenting but rather the common acceptance, unquestioning, of very weak old discredited models specifically when it comes to herd immunity. Given the propensity for misinformation coming from leftwing media and statist health agencies, we must fight these fear peddling parasites and vindicate herd immunity as they try their best to smear it.
Regards,
Jim
https://www.statista.com/statistics/526013/sweden-number-of-households-by-type/