Mathematical model finds no evidence of reduction of Covid-19 deaths under stay-at-home rules.

[Roger]

I doubt most people will bother to read the whole article, including checking out the cited papers and assessing the maths involved.

However, this is a single paper in a sea of evidence that stay at home measures did prevent deaths, though sadly it will probably become the life jacket for the lockdown sceptics amongst us.

I look forward to hearing them give their assessment of this paper

They do seem to selectively ignore datasets which don't match their theory.

Interesting to note they are all Brazilians too and are backing up the Brazilian political line (although they do declare they have no conflicting interests).

Remind me how well Brazil is doing.

 

[Billericay Dichio]

They do seem to selectively ignore datasets which don't match their theory.

Interesting to note they are all Brazilians too and are backing up the Brazilian political line (although they do declare they have no conflicting interests).

Remind me how well Brazil is doing.

According to further links on the OP's original link they have previously published one paper between them (or a meringue?). Only one of them has a medical background and that is tenuous.

My money is on them wanting to get a paper published and being topical is is a good way to do it.

 

[Roger]

According to further links on the OP's original link they have previously published one paper between them (or a meringue?). Only one of them has a medical background and that is tenuous.

My money is on them wanting to get a paper published and being topical is is a good way to do it.

I am not sure they would need a medical background. It is purely statistical analysis and maths.

 

[Baloo]

They do seem to selectively ignore datasets which don't match their theory.

Interesting to note they are all Brazilians too and are backing up the Brazilian political line (although they do declare they have no conflicting interests).

Remind me how well Brazil is doing.

People in Brazil need to get over it.

Jair Bolsonaro tells Brazilians to stop 'whining' about Covid – video

'Stop all this fussing and whining. How long are you going to keep on crying?' Bolsonaro asked supporters

www.theguardian.com

 

[Billericay Dichio]

I am not sure they would need a medical background. It is purely statistical analysis and maths.

Absolutely. It's a paper by maths bods who know nothing about the virus. They're just using the virus to make their paper topical and increase the chances of it getting noticed.

I am not sure they would need a medical background. It is purely statistical analysis and maths.

Absolutely. It's a paper by maths bods who know nothing about the virus. They're just using the virus to make their paper topical and increase the chances of it getting noticed.

 

[Hammer]

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Stay-at-home policy is a case of exception fallacy: an internet-based ecological study - Scientific Reports

A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between...

www.nature.com

A fairly lengthy but interesting read, obviously not a perfect study (nothing possibly can be) and it only focuses on deaths and not than cases and hospital admissions, but it does use a large sample size of similar countries and regions rather than the usual practice of cherry-picking certain countries to suit an agenda (comparing the UK to New Zealand for example lol).

I doubt most people will bother to read the whole article, including checking out the cited papers and assessing the maths involved.

However, this is a single paper in a sea of evidence that stay at home measures did prevent deaths, though sadly it will probably become the life jacket for the lockdown sceptics amongst us.

I look forward to hearing them give their assessment of this paper

Corresponding author is a gynaecologist.

 

[offmenut]

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Stay-at-home policy is a case of exception fallacy: an internet-based ecological study - Scientific Reports

A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between...

www.nature.com

A fairly lengthy but interesting read, obviously not a perfect study (nothing possibly can be) and it only focuses on deaths and not than cases and hospital admissions, but it does use a large sample size of similar countries and regions rather than the usual practice of cherry-picking certain countries to suit an agenda (comparing the UK to New Zealand for example lol).

Its blatantly obvious that lockdowns reduce transmissions and therefore death.

 

[Frijj]

Corresponding author is a gynaecologist.

Appropriate since most people claiming this as evidence, are absolute fannies

 

[hefty em]

Have you tried turning it off and then back on again?

 

[look out piano]

Wibble.

 

[Ashley In!!]

I doubt most people will bother to read the whole article, including checking out the cited papers and assessing the maths involved.

However, this is a single paper in a sea of evidence that stay at home measures did prevent deaths, though sadly it will probably become the life jacket for the lockdown sceptics amongst us.

I look forward to hearing them give their assessment of this paper

"Can't argue with the facts"

 

[ontap]

nature.com absolute nonsense. Food for nutcase conspiracy theory sites.

 

[Dogbark]

Common sense

 

[Gelan]

Where did those going into the home or care home contract covid?

From carers I should imagine?

 

[DoctorMick]

From carers I should imagine?

And where are they getting it from?

 

[Gelan]

And where are they getting it from?

Other people? That's only a guess mind, I could be wrong.

 

[DoctorMick]

Other people? That's only a guess mind, I could be wrong.

Indeed. The point I was replying to suggested community transmission wasn't important, only spread into care homes but those who take it into care homes get it from the community so it's clearly important.

 

[Gelan]

Indeed. The point I was replying to suggested community transmission wasn't important, only spread into care homes but those who take it into care homes get it from the community so it's clearly important.

If you cannot care for yourself, how is it possible to isolate? Carers have partners and children. My initial thought when this Pandemic started was "If it's going to take a few million, then without a vaccine we are just delaying the inevitable.

 

[DoctorMick]

If you cannot care for yourself, how is it possible to isolate? Carers have partners and children. My initial thought when this Pandemic started was "If it's going to take a few million, then without a vaccine we are just delaying the inevitable.

I'm not sure where we crossed wires but we seem to have...

Someone said lockdown didn't prevent any deaths as carers still took it into homes etc. I disagreed.

 

[Gelan]

I'm not sure where we crossed wires but we seem to have...

Someone said lockdown didn't prevent any deaths as carers still took it into homes etc. I disagreed.

I'm on the fence regarding lockdowns...the protection of care homes is, or should, be general to all flu viruses.