First the ‘experts’ asked Americans to give them two weeks to flatten the COVID curve so we didn’t overwhelm our hospitals.
Now, nearly four months later, many states are still in some form of lockdown and the idea of opening or staying closed has become politicized … which we all knew it would, eventually. Many people question if we would even be where we are now if this weren’t an election year and the Left didn’t see an opportunity to destroy Trump by destroying the country, but we digress.
Brit Hume shared yet another thread from Alex Berenson, this one taking apart the new talking point ‘Team Apocalypse’ is using to fight against ending lockdowns.
This one’s a doozy:
To understand the fibs and elisions Team Apocalypse is now using in its rearguard action to keep lockdowns alive, I want to run through this much retweeted thread from a (very liberal) physician who has aggressively fought against ending lockdowns… https://t.co/tY1M61D5d2
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) May 25, 2020
Data and science aren’t going their way anymore so now they’re claiming we need to stay locked down because ‘there’s still so much we don’t know.’
Convenient, right?
For example, on April 15, she tweeted that ending them would cause #SarsCov2 to spread “to an extent that will make our current infection & death rate laughable.” Obviously, what’s happened in Georgia and much of Europe make that statement ridiculous. So what’s her argument now?
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) May 25, 2020
They’ve been soooooo wrong about sooooo much.
While the hysterics on Team Apocalypse still scream "WAIT TWO WEEKS," the more sophisticated now have a different argument: "There's so much we don't know" (and thus, implicitly, we can't take any chances).
Except: four months into this epidemic, there's so much we do know…
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) May 25, 2020
What he said.
Dr. Ranney writes we don't know the infection fatality rate, but @CDCgov pegged it this week at about 0.25% – about 1 in 400 people. (A reasonable range is 0.15% to 0.4%.)
Arguably even more importantly, we know exactly WHO dies from #sarscov2, a fact Dr. Ranney never mentions.
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) May 25, 2020
Even the CDC has adjusted mortality to a far lower and ‘reasonable’ range.
Deaths are stratified by age in a way the media and health authorities STILL won't make clear; people over 80 account for more than half the deaths worldwide and have a risk of death that is 100x or more as high as those under 50. People under 40 have almost no risk from #COVID.
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) May 25, 2020
But if they admit this is really only very dangerous to certain groups they lose control and stuff.
To fail to discuss this reality is to elide the most basic truth about #SARSCoV2 – it is less dangerous than the flu for young people and probably no more dangerous for the middle-aged…
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) May 25, 2020
Winner winner chicken dinner.
Her logic is stunning.
But not in a good way.
— Bill Moody (@WRogersM) May 25, 2020
Its funny seeing people like @meganranney dismiss the CDC when it doesn't fit their beliefs and narrative. Their latest stats show that this virus is no deadlier than the flu, once you take out the fatalities in nursing homes, 0.1%. https://t.co/3lzB89EGFT
— brian scoville (@bscovy1) May 25, 2020
She’s a nightmare.
— JHPrince (@JHPrince4) May 25, 2020
So much we still don't know, yet incredibly the origin story was established in late December.
— P.T. (@PeterTainui) May 25, 2020
Lockdowns have got to GO.
***
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member