18/n I thoroughly respect the JSM authors, and I don't disagree, but I think whether the benefits outweighed the costs is perhaps more of a social decision than a scientific one
-
Show this thread
-
19/n Even if we could demonstrate that lockdowns saved millions of lives, there are some who would argue for political and other reasons that they were bad So I'm not entirely sure that saying these interventions were "essential" is strictly factual
1 reply 1 retweet 21 likesShow this thread -
20/n They may have been essential from the public health perspective, but ours is not the only perspective out there
2 replies 0 retweets 22 likesShow this thread -
21/n Moving on, we have these statements about herd immunity. This is not referenced, but is decidedly true as I myself have written https://gidmk.medium.com/the-facts-about-herd-immunity-and-covid-19-3230616b70a3 … https://gidmk.medium.com/herd-immunity-for-covid-19-is-still-a-terrible-idea-a7ce15354c43 …pic.twitter.com/JuhDErGFfv
1 reply 0 retweets 20 likesShow this thread -
22/n Moving on, we have similar arguments to those I made in the above blogs, but more succinct, along with a few restatements of the above already referenced points (i.e. LongCOVID)pic.twitter.com/7hmBdLMf8D
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
23/n We also have this statement. It is not referenced, but is very easily documented in every serology study on COVID-19. Have a look at the references for our IFR by age paper if you're interestedpic.twitter.com/VunzBprLPI
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
24/n Lastly, we have the call to action, citing Vietnam, Japan, and NZ as examples of what to do to AVOID lockdown in the future Yes, you read that rightpic.twitter.com/Wjnu90ZPa4
2 replies 1 retweet 22 likesShow this thread -
25/n Indeed, the JSM authors argue specifically that lockdowns may have been justifiable in the face of a massive, out-of-control epidemic, but that (in Oct) the best way forward was decisive action to prevent another lockdownpic.twitter.com/EjM3q3Bt2v
1 reply 1 retweet 25 likesShow this thread -
26/n So, we're at the end. There are no factual inaccuracies per se in the JSM that I could find, and the references all support the statements
1 reply 1 retweet 19 likesShow this thread -
27/n There are definitely two statements that are arguable, although I personally think that they are reasonable to say. Realistically, the difference between "essential" and "useful/necessary" is more semantic than scientific
1 reply 1 retweet 21 likesShow this thread
28/n I would say that the JSM is basically a scientific document with a call to action in it In contrast, as I've explained before, the GBD is simply an unscientific piece of political propaganda
-
-
29/n Comparing the two is an interesting exercise, because even at face value they are amazingly different. GBD does not cite any evidence, and the only specific statement it makes about science (re: herd immunity) is wrong
1 reply 4 retweets 65 likesShow this thread -
30/n In contrast, JSM is filled with factual, scientific statements that are referenced so you can check for yourself
6 replies 1 retweet 59 likesShow this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.