Posted in CDC, Disease Prevention, Education, Free Society, Government Regulations, outcomes, outcomes measurement, Patient Safety, Policy Issues, Poverty, Prevention, Protocols, Uncategorized, Unsettled Science

Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions, Says Leading Epidemiologist—and the World Is Paying the Price | Jon Miltimore

Three months ago, Dr. John Ioannidis of Stanford University predicted dire social consequences if states enforced social distancing measures to curb a virus scientists didn’t yet understand.

“I feel extremely sad that my predictions were verified,” Ioannidis said in a recent interview with Greek media.

“There are already more than 50 studies that have presented results on how many people in different countries and locations have developed antibodies to the virus,” Ioannidis, a Greek-American physician, told Greek Reporter. “Of course none of these studies are perfect, but cumulatively they provide useful composite evidence. A very crude estimate might suggest that about 150-300 million or more people have already been infected around the world, far more than the 10 million documented cases.”

Ioannidis said medical data suggest the fatality risk is far lower than earlier estimates had led policymakers to believe and “is almost 0%” for individuals under 45 years old. The median fatality rate is roughly 0.25 percent, however, because the risk “escalates substantially” for individuals over 85 and can be as high as 25 percent for debilitated people in nursing homes.

“The death rate in a given country depends a lot on the age-structure, who are the people infected, and how they are managed,” Ioannidis said. “For people younger than 45, the infection fatality rate is almost 0%. For 45 to 70, it is probably about 0.05-0.3%. For those above 70, it escalates substantially…”

“Major consequences on the economy, society and mental health” have already occurred. I hope they are reversible, and this depends to a large extent on whether we can avoid prolonging the draconian lockdowns and manage to deal with COVID-19 in a smart, precision-risk targeted approach, rather than blindly shutting down everything…”

There’s little question that the lock-downs have caused widespread economic, social, and emotional carnage. Evidence that US states that locked down fared better than states that did not is hard to find.

Though not yet certain, the COVID-19 pandemic may well turn out to be another example of central planning gone wrong.

As I previously noted, it’s a sad irony that many of the greatest disasters in modern history—from Stalin’s “kolkhoz” collective farming system to Mao’s Great Leap Forward and beyond—are the result of central planners trying to improve the lot of humanity through coercive action.

“This is not a dispute about whether planning is to be done or not,” Hayek wrote in The Use of Knowledge in Society. “It is a dispute as to whether planning is to be done centrally, by one authority for the whole economic system, or is to be divided among many individuals.”

Source: Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions, Says Leading Epidemiologist—and the World Is Paying the Price | Jon Miltimore

Posted in Disease Prevention, Economic Issues, Education, emotional intelligence, Evidence-based Medicine, government incompetence, Government Regulations, Job loss, Liberty, outcomes, outcomes measurement, Patient Safety, Policy Issues, Poverty, Prevention, Uncategorized

Watch “Why the Lockdown Should Last Longer” on YouTube

Another instant classic! JP nails it again. Watch and share before our overseers remove the video (for our own good).

😉

Posted in Dependency, Disease Prevention, Economic Issues, Education, Free Society, government incompetence, Government Regulations, Influence peddling, Job loss, Liberty, NIH, Organizational structure, Patient Safety, Policy Issues, Poverty, Prevention, Rule of Law, Stress, Uncategorized, Unemployment, Wealth

Coronavirus and the Two Americas | International Liberty

“…the coronavirus has exposed the fault line between those who are subsidized by government and those who pay for government.

In her Wall Street Journal column, Peggy Noonan opines about how the “protected” don’t have to worry about the consequences of economic shutdowns.

…Since the pandemic began, the overclass has been in charge—scientists, doctors, political figures, consultants—calling the shots for the average people. But personally they have less skin in the game. The National Institutes of Health scientist won’t lose his livelihood over what’s happened. Neither will the midday anchor. I’ve called this divide the protected versus the unprotected. …

https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2020/05/25/coronavirus-and-the-two-americas/

Posted in American Presidents, Bailouts, big government, Dependency, Disease Prevention, Economic Issues, Government Regulations, Government Spending, Government Stimulus, Leadership, Organizational structure, outcomes measurement, Patient Safety, Policy Issues, Poverty, Prevention, Representative Republic vs. Democracy, Rule of Law, U.S. Constitution, Uncategorized, Unemployment

Coronavirus and Federalism | International Liberty

John Daniel Davidson of the Federalist echoes the benefits of having choices made at the state and local level.

The founders wisely chose a federal republic for our form of government, which means sovereignty is divided between states and the federal government. The powers of the federal government are limited and enumerated, while all powers not granted to the feds are reserved for the states, including emergency police powers of the kind we’re seeing states and localities use now. …Much of the media seems wholly unaware of this basic feature of our system of government. …Trump explained that many governors might have a more direct line on this equipment and if so they should go ahead and acquire it themselves, no need to wait on Washington, D.C. This is of course exactly the way federalism is supposed to work. …We should expect the government power that’s closest to affected communities to be the most active, while Washington, D.C., concern itself with larger problems.

Source: Coronavirus and Federalism | International Liberty

Posted in Bailouts, Disease Prevention, Economic Issues, Education, Free Society, Government Regulations, Leadership, Liberty, outcomes measurement, Patient Safety, Philosophy, Poverty, Prevention, Protocols, Rule of Law, U.S. Constitution, Uncategorized, Unemployment, Uninsured

How Shutting Down The Economy Could Kill Tens Of Thousands | The Federalist

“The economy is the people, and the people are the economy. The ability to continue to function in a market system does matter to individuals within the system, particularly when the ability of business to remain open and continue to employ them is in question.”

Source: How Shutting Down The Economy Could Kill Tens Of Thousands

Posted in Economic Issues, government incompetence, Government Spending, Government Stimulus, Job loss, Keynesian Economics, News From Washington, Policy Issues, Poverty, Uncategorized, Unemployment, Wealth

When You Subsidize Something, You Get More of It

Decisions

April 9, 2020. New unemployment claims surged to 6.6 million today in face of the COVID-19 shut down.

Prediction:

The joblessness rate will remain high until July when subsidies for non-work end.

Timing is key. The study of recessions shows us that employment usually rises (mysteriously) when unemployment benefits end. The connection should be obvious, especially for millions whose unemployment is more than their previous wages. This is the case for a family member of mine who is making $600 more per month now than before he was laid off.

This is why Germany’s approach during the recession of 2008 made sense. They paid employers to keep people on payroll. This had psychological and economic benefits.

Without question, remuneration/compensation to pay bills for those who’s jobs have ended due to mandated shelter at home and mandated closures (gov’t should reimburse those it shuts down) is justified. From the employer’s standpoint, unemployment benefits act like a tax on labor in addition to wages for each employee; they essentially have to pay premium to make it worthwhile for employee to return.

Sure, workers realize the benefits are temporary and many, if they liked their jobs, will return sooner if called back. And the astute workers will save the excess unemployment payments or pay off debt; most will spend it or, worse, incur more debt. History tells us that many will delay returning to work as long as possible if they are making more by not working. And who could blame them. This can force employers to hire possibly less qualified people at a higher wage than the value they produce.

And furthermore, history also tells us that as unemployment remains high, the political response is to extend the unemployment benefits longer, further prolonging recovery; and the cycle is perpetuated.

On the macro-economic level and policy level, this is why we need incentives to become a nation of producers and savers, rather than spender and debtors. From a tax policy perspective, we must stop punishing savings and investment and create incentives to save and proper disincentives for debt. This includes a “debt brake” for the federal government like they have in Switzerland.

Posted in Access to healthcare, Economic Issues, Education, Evidence-based Medicine, Health Insurance, Medicaid, Medical Costs, outcomes, outcomes measurement, Patient Safety, Philosophy, Poverty, Prevention, primary care, Protocols, Uncategorized, Unemployment

Bridging the Gap Between Where the Quality Metric Ends and Real Life Begins—A Trusting Relationship |JAMA NETWORK

Jennifer E. DeVoe, MD, DPhil

JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(2):177-178. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.5132

My teaching session with the medical student at the end of the day included a discussion about patient care decisions and recommendations that go beyond ticking quality boxes and following the latest guidelines. Initially, I felt as if I was rationalizing my delivery of suboptimal care and began to doubt myself. 

However, the quality reports I receive each month do not capture the complexity of many patients’ lives.4 These reports fail to reflect the individualized and shared decisions made between a patient and her physician who have known each other for 15 years; the proprietary quality score calculation formulas do not adjust for the healing power of relationships.5 Amid the mounting evidence that primary care saves lives,6 our health care system does not (yet) have a population health analytics tool that captures and tracks the progress that she and I have made together in more than a decade. When will we create better systems with capabilities to measure the emergency department visits that were prevented, the stable housing that was obtained, the increased resiliency she has built into her life, her feelings of empowerment to be a better parent, the reduction in her self-destructive behaviors, and the trusting relationship we have built over time?

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2757531?guestAccessKey=15c869b5-37d4-42f4-9feb-12bdc314dbe6&utm_source=silverchair&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=article_alert-jamainternalmedicine&utm_content=etoc&utm_term=020320&appId=scweb