To be clear: I don't think my explanation is necessarily true, but it's just as likely as the idea that no lockdowns reduce deaths 


-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Lockdowns that succeed in preventing outbreaks save lives. Those that don't compound the damage. And in Europe+the Americas the lockdowns rarely prevented outbreaks. Perhaps due to cross immunities...
-
The lockdowns prevented outbreaks from spreading faster, but if you stop locking down it will spread again. And lockdowns were done differently everywhere.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Switzerland and Netherlands had no excess mortality for under-65s. Belgium had no excess mortality under the age of 44.pic.twitter.com/PQ8hb4f8sl
-
We can also see no excess under 44 in Spain. https://www.ine.es/experimental/defunciones/experimental_defunciones.htm …pic.twitter.com/PZ4QkEaJ2G
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Isn't he repeating the same sort of mistake you and
@zorinaq corrected before? https://twitter.com/feheva/status/1362794488272412674 … https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1361852540929728518 … https://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/1361558089049243648 … https://twitter.com/zorinaq/status/1362880054120747008 …pic.twitter.com/j9zYVs6BjZ
-
Probably, but I don't have the time today to unpick more mathematical mistakes
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.