This is quite a flawed and obviously biased analysis.
To use just one example. If the UK hadn't had locked down when it did, it's likely the entire health service would have collapsed, leading to more excess AND Covid deaths.
Unlike the author, I don't pretend to have the answer, but anyone with a functioning brain can see this "analysis" is without merit.
This seems to be a common theme among substack articles, at least those that make it into the top 60 on HN (pages 1 and 2). Poor reasoning, politically motivated bias, etc. I could be wrong, though; I certainly have my own biases.
I don't know if the UK system has unique characteristics that would have made it likely to collapse (whatever that means) but I equally sure it wouldn't have happened in the US. I waited in vain for stories of people dying because no more beds or ventilators were available and never found one. I ready plenty about how we were close. The way probability works if we were really close, there would have been many examples of it actually happening.
Either way, that doesn't really answer his analysis unless you can account for the collapse not happening in Sweden
Seems like a lot of sloppiness supported more by attitude than evidence.
> ... there is very little resistance now to the assertion that COVID was manufactured in a biolab. Those responsible for making it are responsible for the millions of deaths it has caused.
This is still very much debated. Based on the two related strains that were cultured from the wet market and the locations of the earliest infections there is good reason to believe the virus came from there. Notably this is what many virologists experienced with identifying outbreak sources are asserting.
> ...forced wearing of masks, etc. show very little evidence of benefit ...
Admit to forgetting the details, but there was one large US State, I think it was Nebraska, which dropped masking for political reasons and had an immediate and sharp increase in COVID cases. There is lots of data with masks and diseases spread through the air. This is why surgeons are required to wear them.
If masking was ineffective, why was the 2020 influenza season virtually non-existent in both northern and South hemispheres where masking was required?
Clearly masks helped reduce flu, but also simply being more socially distanced in general.
Of course, many people have a hard time thinking deeply about things like this. Many actually have cited the lack of flu cases as proof of misclassification of everything to covid. But since we know flu is much less contagious than covid, it makes sense that mitigation measure like masks and social distancing were simply more effective on less contagious viruses.
Given that medical tests for influenza have existed for a long time, and are and have been routinely given for hospital admissions, I think we can discard the misclassification of everything to covid theory.
Fascinating analysis and I cannot immediately see the flaws. I don't see any specific good counter-arguments in this thread.
One thing I would contradict is his idea that it is suspicious that excess deaths taper just as vaccinations do. Wouldn't we expect that if the vaccines worked well? Presumably vaccines taper as the vulnerable population is saturated with vaccine. Some time after that you would expect deaths to slow
I'd start with the childlike superlatives like pointing out "the best epidemiologist in the world". As if there is some world Olympics of epidemiologists to decide such a thing. Being full of memes isn't usually a good sign either.
But that they would claim this data suggests that the vaccine doesn't reduce covid deaths is completely ridiculous. At this point, there is countless data indicating reduced mortality due to the vaccine.
What is the point of hand wavy overlaying two time series, as if the interpretation was obvious (cumulative excess deaths vs. Covid deaths).
Have you realized how the scales do match up between the plots?
Same for excess deaths against vaccination.
I still wonder what I should „see“ there, and why there are no statistical calculations to back up the „obvious“…
To use just one example. If the UK hadn't had locked down when it did, it's likely the entire health service would have collapsed, leading to more excess AND Covid deaths.
Unlike the author, I don't pretend to have the answer, but anyone with a functioning brain can see this "analysis" is without merit.