The propoganda campaign of the experts and government is still going full steam ahead. But what is the reality?
Check out the graphs, or go build your own at the CDC web site.
... The CDC has a very helpful tool that allows anyone to compare open vs closed states. The results are devastating for those who believe that lockdowns are the way to control a virus. In this chart we compare closed states Massachusetts and California with open states Georgia, Florida, Texas, and South Carolina.
What can we conclude from such a visualization? It suggests that the lockdowns have had no statistically observable effect on the virus trajectory and resulting severe outcomes. The open states have generally performed better, perhaps not because they are open but simply for reasons of demographics and seasonality. The closed states seem not to have achieved anything in terms of mitigation.
What’s striking about all the above predictions of infections and deaths is not just that they were all wrong. It’s the arrogance and confidence behind each of them. After a full year and directly observing the inability of “nonpharmaceutical interventions” to manage the pathogen, the experts are still wedded to their beloved lockdowns, unable or unwilling to look at the data and learn anything from them.
WIND: lockdowns destroy lives and economies and result in huge numbers of deaths of younger people. That’s all that ever did and all they ever will do, a fact has been obvious for more than half a year now. But repeat a lie often enough and people will believe it forever.
BTW, the CDC data is GIGO, since it was corrupted by arbitrary changes to decades-long practices in reporting standards.
Fearmongering and mental illness at the CDC
Meanwhile, we have CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walenksy who thinks fearmongering is the way to process the fantastically good news on COVID. Particularly her own personal irrational mental state.
"I'm going to pause here, I'm going to lose the script and I'm going to reflect on the recurring feeling I have of impending doom," Walensky said, appearing to grow emotional. "We have so much to look forward to. So much promise and potential of where we are and so much reason for hope. But right now I'm scared."
"I'm speaking today not necessarily as your CDC director, and not only as your CDC director, but as a wife, as a mother, as a daughter, to ask you to just please hold on a little while longer," she said. "I so badly want to be done, I know you all so badly want to be done, we're just almost there, but not quite yet. And so, I'm asking you to just hold on a little longer, to get vaccinated when you can, so that all of those people that we all love will still be here when this pandemic ends."
It is a rigorous fact that emotions impair rational faculties. And Dr Walensky herself admits to severe anxiety as in “recurring feeling I have of impending doom” and being “scared”. But why should we want to hear neurotic personal feelings?
She is thus by her own admission psychologically unfit to serve. Does she not have friends or peers that see she needs pyschiatritric help more than anything else? A “top expert” who who has to go “off script” to detail her personal emotional problems is prima facie evidence of severely impaired professional judgment. If I had any trace of confidence left in the CDC, it’s now vaporized. What an embarrassment to the medical profession.
Never mind that there is no credible scientific evidence for lockdowns, and there is no credible scientific evidence for masks, as per the CDC data!
And since Dr Walensky plays the “wife and mother and dauther” card, I also feel a personal revulsion to her comments. That is, as the proud father of 3 very capable daughters, I am thoroughly disgusted with Dr Walensky doing all professional women a huge disservice by looking weak, biased, and emotion-driven, and thus pandering to all the worst stereotypes about women. Leaders cannot lead by looking unstable and weak and it’s (like it not) worse for a woman.