Well, in the same way Florida is a part of the United States and therefore I assume it is justifiable to argue that since a lack of restrictions has seemingly caused hospitals to fill up with COVID-19 there that this is true of the entire US
-
-
the more precise wording is: no evidence the restrictions removed on 19th july (rule of 6 indoors, 30 outdoors, no clubbing) did much that can be debated well because those restrictions were not being obeyed
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, "work" is a very loose term. When there is a bias in the scientific community/peer review process, then you will undoubtedly get a "large body of evidence" that supports one side. Also most of those only look at short-term effects, not long-term.https://twitter.com/youyanggu/status/1423722981671440386 …
-
I've been very clear that it is difficult to assess, but you simply haven't defined effective not even what you mean by restrictions. You can say anything as long as you're vague!
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
You alluded to this exact point earlier. The UK lockdowns are associated with plummeting infections in the winter, so many published papers saying "look! restrictions work!" But those papers all ignore what happened in the spring/summer when those restrictions get relaxed.
-
I mean, if we're defining "work" as "reduce short-term infections" then there is abundant and strong evidence that restrictions work. If your argument is about the long term of a pandemic, a single graph with a misplaced arrow is not a good way to make it imo
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.