|
|
|
|
|
|
by reureu
660 days ago
|
|
|
> to imply that dissenting opinions aren't supported by science to be pretty offensive Unless I missed something, you have yet to share the science that supports your view. I'm not bowing out of discussing this because we have different opinions, I'm bowing out because I shared a study (and could provide more) and you responded by shifting goal posts and standing by your claim, not by responding in kind with similar studies or different interpretations of the data. There's not much discussion to be had if we're not working from a shared understanding of data and facts, and those data and facts aren't driving our opinions and beliefs. Anyway, best of luck out there! |
|
|
There you go:
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9368251/
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026427512...
- https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/sweden-covid-and-excess-... (Sweden being "notorious" for not having mandated lockdowns)
Comparing excess mortality in Sweden and Germany (which had numerous lockdowns): https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/covid?tab=chart&Metric=...