Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
As Jay points out at the beginning of the show, Mark Helprin has been thinking about pandemics longer than most of us have. Here is a piece he published in 2006. “We face a danger that approaches steadily from the far distance like a tsunami in slow motion. It will almost certainly strike in one form or another, it could strike tomorrow . . .” Helprin, as you know, is the novelist, short-story writer, essayist, and national-security analyst. In this episode of “Q&A,” he talks exclusively about the plague now upon us, including the politics of it. A blunt, informed, bracing presentation.
Subscribe to Q & A, Hosted by Jay Nordlinger in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
ExpressVPN
Every day you use the internet without ExpressVPN, you’re putting sensitive information at risk. Don’t put this off. Protect your online data with ExpressVPN today!
I twould have been nice if Halpern had mentioned that the 57,000 dead of COVID are around the same numbers we see from normal old influenza outbreaks – yet we certainly are not required to shut down everything for the sake of those deaths.
And also Trump never ever said to inject lysol. The speaker should have taken the time to watch the live streaming service of Trump saying what he said, rather than the CNN Talking Heads telling us what he said, while the video of Trump is playing in the background.
But at least for me, now the “mask” if off Jay Nordinger. This one podcast lets me see who he is and who he allows to feed us propaganda. (As if we are not getting enough propaganda from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN etc.)
Helprin goes on to state that the low numbers of COVID cases experienced were related to our big sacrifice in sheltering at home. He fails to have any understanding that the analysis that has been done by more than one group of people reveals the Big Lie as to COVID: Sweden remained an open society while Norway closed down. Results: there was only an almost unnoticeable extra few deaths in Sweden, which is more than balanced out by the fact that domestic abuse cases, and suicides in Norway, plus deaths of people who became too afraid to seek medical attention were much higher in Norway.
Your contention that “only an almost unnoticeable extra few deaths in Sweden” is demonstrably false. Here is a side by side comparison of Sweden and Norway. As of today, Sweden has 2,274 deaths or 225 per capita. Norway has 205 or 38 per capita. Finland has recorded 193 deaths or 35 per capita. In other words, very noticeable. Note: Sweden does have a little less than twice the population of Finland and Denmark, which is why I gave the per capita (cases per million) figures.
One more chart for you: total number of reported cases of the Nordic countries: Notice the difference? Does that look like a “big lie”? Doesn’t to me…
I disagree that COVID deaths “are around the same numbers we see from normal old influenza outbreaks.” Flu season is basically over in the U.S. now and as of today we have 54,000 deaths with just under a million reported cases. This is not the flu.
Thanks for listening!
And the effects on the Swedish economy are really unknown at this time.
I have read or read very smart people, conservatives, who do the flu comparison. And it is simply wrong. COVID-19 is significantly more contagious. And when it expresses symptoms, vastly more uncomfortable and even its effects remain to be fully realized (e.g. the incidence of blot clots and strokes in young people who have recovered, possible permanent lung damage).
First of all, until I know the source of the above graphs and statistics, it is meaningless to me. And I will be happy to look into the meaning of the graphs once I know who supplied them. But I am not willing to examine data that is not from are a reliable impeachable source.
Secondly, your credibility is shattered in total when you state that the flu over 2019- 2020 had 54,000 deaths inside a million reported cases. The statistic of 54,000 regular flu deaths is questionable as so many reports exist stating that once deaths were reported as being “due to COVID” all other mortality cases disappeared. Apparently although COVID is a serious illness, it’s a cure for heart disease, and a cure for pneumonia, and a cure for cancer, as deaths from those causes no longer exist. So I question the 54,000 deaths and suspect it is a higher number.
That is one way to demolish the argument that the flu was “54,000 deaths over one million cases.” Let’s leave aside for a moment if that number should or should not be higher. Instead let us look at the second way to demolish that argument. That would be an examination of how the numbers of deaths as a ratio of overall cases that you apparently are relying on with regards to COVID cannot be computed due to the fact that the COV tests weren’t available to the gen public. So for a good 2 to 4 weeks, the general public was not allowed to be tested until they admitted to hospital personnel that they were sick with a hi fever for over a week. Obviously the end result is that people who ended up being tested were folks much sicker than normal rather mild cases of COV experienced by majority of the infected general public. Most people w/ mild cases have not been tested. So a death rate as a ratio compared to overall cases of COV, and the numbers counted of those COVID cases is an undercount, all bets go out the window.
End of Part One
Part Two: So the important fact about Dr Erikson and the other Bakersfield doctor is that with their doing some serious antibody tests across a random survey of Californians, they made the discovery that the totals relating to numbers of infected people is orders of magnitude higher than what is being reported. Orders of magnitude.
So then it is very similar in terms of seriousness to a very bad flu. Once the survey is correctly assigned a truer number in terms of numbers of those infected even though the infections are mild, the mortality rate is nowhere near the 3.4% mortality rate that the doomsayers and Gates’ affiliatiates tried to convince us of. We had such bad influenza outbreaks back in 1957 and 1968, as well as twice since the year 2000. (Although the years of those outbreaks escape my brain right now.)
Quite a big difference: 3 deaths per ten thousand cases (Bakersfield doctors) versus 7 deaths out of 200 cases (Neill Ferguson of Imperial College.)
You do not even have to leave ricochet to view the 54 minute video of the COVID presentation of the Bakersfield doctors – it is at this link (Although the original youtube has been striken and it is now on vimeo)
http://ricochet.com/751945/the-dr-erickson-video-that-challenges-the-who-and-cdc-covid-19-models/
@caroljoy
The top charts come from Pantheon Macroeconomics a provider of unbiased, independent macroeconomic research and are used by financial market professionals around the word.. The bottom charts come from Statista which provides data to the U.S. government and many research facilities including John Hopkins and Stanford. Their charts are updated daily.
The 54,000 figure is known cases confirmed by testing. Yes, you are correct that recent studies have shown that actual cases may be much, much higher. I have produced two interviews with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya at Stanford Medicine, who led the Santa Clara County and LA County studies, so I am very familiar with those conclusions. But Jay will tell you (as he does in those interviews) that COVID is not the flu. It’s far more contagious and far more dangerous to certain at risk populations (pretty much what Halpern says in this interview). I urge you to watch them if you have not already seen them.
You stated that “there was only an almost unnoticeable extra few deaths in Sweden.” That’s what I took issue with and provided evidence to the contrary.
I have to get out of the house right now as there is no more bread or Bailey’s plus we both have cabin fever. But I will examine the charts now that I know they are from Pantheon.
Proposal: How about we all agree to end the “COVID-19 is/is not the Flu” debate, as if by uttering that phrase one can settle any argument. It can’t. Apples may not be Oranges, but as adults we can compare and contrast them, legitimately. They have a lot in common, after all…
Can I point out that I find it extremely disingenuous for “experts” to come forward with any numbers reflecting any mortality rate if the testing numbers themselves are inadequate.
Once the “experts” act comfortable with that slant on things, I no longer trust the experts. And Bill Gates has definitely acted comfortable with the inflated mortality numbers resulting from the fact that testing numbers are inadequate. So I have no belief in him, his proxies Fauci and Birx and little belief in almost any Talking Heads in the media.
@blueyeti
I am bowing out of examining the charts from Pantheon as they’ re behind a paywall, or free trial situation, which will most likely end up being an ongoing subscription which I have no interest in.
So since I cannot go that site freely and then once there perhaps determine what the methods were used by which the graphs and charts came about, it is rather a waste of time to deal with them.
You can point out anything you want, but that’s not the topic we were debating.
Which is why I posted the relevant chart and provided the source.
Mark Helprin is probably a terrific writer (I haven’t read any of his stuff) and without a doubt he is a smarter and more accomplished person than I am. But good lord, what a humor-less and personality-less guy. “Agenda is plural. Obviously.” Please. Get over yourself, dude.
One chart has differing numbers on both the left and the right hand side. or isntance, Sweden has 600 on the left and 160 on the right? What does that even mean? If you can explain those numbers I could perhaps make sense of it.
I also have no idea of what the 600 and 300 mean. Is that actual 300 (Norway) and actual 600 (Sweden) or is it in thousands. After all, the chart’s legends are missing. Any info appreciated.
100 deaths per million would be considered a ‘typical’ flu season in USA.
I find Yitzak Ben Israel’s 60 day hypothesis most compelling.
Regardless of policy or country, the virus peaks during week 6 (day 42) and declines rapidly after week 8 (day 56).
You should probably ask the President if you can see his charts:
The majority of deaths in Sweden have been over age 70. More than half in nursing homes.
Sweden policy was imperfect just like everyone else
No reason to lockdown after May 1. We are past the peak of the curve. CDC data confirms this. Total deaths peaked on April 11 in USA. Total as in all not just COVID-19
Sure, but the discussion was Sweden’s COVID mortality rate vs. the other Nordic countries. Sweden’s rate is much higher, regardless of demographics.
You’re right. The demographics of Sweden, Norway and Denmark are very similar.
I suspect there is another factor besides shelter in place. I just can’t prove it… right now
I forgot to mention: Sweden did not close its borders
GDP per capita (nominal)
Norway: $82773 (oil and natural exporter)
Denmark: $62041
Sweden: $54135
Population density (per km^2):
Norway: 17.0
Denmark: 133.9
Sweden: 22.5
Immigration (%):
Norway: 14.10
Denmark: 7.90
Sweden: 14.98
Norway is not a member of EU — that can only be a good thing
Sweden is not a member of NATO — random trivia
I don’t know the unemployment and consumer spending figures in Sweden, Denmark, Norway but I can only guess the economic damage in Sweden is lower than in Denmark and Norway.
If we only look at deaths per million, yes, Sweden is a ‘failure’ vs Denmark and Norway.
But we have to look at the ‘net’ benefit or cost of not locking down to get a clearer more complete picture.
Hospitals in Sweden have not been ‘overwhelmed’ despite no restrictive lockdown. Why flatten the curve if you don’t have to?
Again, this is not what we were were discussing. We were discussing Sweden’s “success” vs. the other Nordic countries. In a purely apples to apples discussion, Sweden’s decision resulted in exponentially more infections and more deaths. It’s not close.
Are they benefiting more economically? I think it’s probably too early to know that. Certainly, keeping their economy open had some short term benefits, but in the big picture, I don’t think we know that yet.
Why would I ask him that? If there are no adjustments made for the fact that Sweden has roughly twice the population of Norway, then the mention of Sweden having the most deaths becomes less and less relevant, right? GIGO
The amount of testing in all the Scandinavian nations was absurdly low, and for that reason alone I would question the mortality rates. As every day now, we are getting more data. This means those of us in the public who are curious about the COVID illness now can take into consideration the knowledge to which the researchers handling the random surveys are adding to. Then from that additional knowledge and rising data base, it is easy to see that with more testing and larger databases, most people who have been infected by COVID are asymptomatic, not dead or dying.
But we don’t know for sure that the cause is lockdown/no lockdown.
I’m sure there is a confounding variable that we haven’t yet discovered.
I was just thinking about that same idea. There are pockets of various regions where COVID is more worrisome than other places. Why? Detroit was quite problematic; as was NYC. People point to the great numbers of people who utilized the NYC subway and public transportation systems. Yet people in the greater San Francisco Bay area also do that. Despite that, the COVID infection did not take as many lives in the SF area. Why?