Quacks still running Ontario COVID response

Vincent J. Curtis

2 Feb 22

RE: Easing restriction will increase cases, advisors say.  A CP story written by Allison Jones.  Published in the Hamilton Spectator 2 Feb 22.

What is this story except another turn of panic-porn to justify lockdowns?  The alleged experts who said this don’t know the science, and don’t even understand Ontario’s own data.  Lockdowns don’t work on a mass scale.  They don’t prevent the spread and, as we’ve seen with Justin Trudeau, locking the uninfected up with the infected actually promotes the spread - duh!  That’s why case numbers continued rising weeks after lockdowns 1, 2, and 3 were imposed.

Omicron was so wildly contagious that no measures were going to stop its spread, and nobody’s claimed that restrictions did anything to change the Ontario cases curve since December.  Omicron peaked high and fast, and is dropping fast.  We also learned that vaccines are useless in preventing spread.  Even the vaxxed and boosted get COVID and transmit COVID, and the only benefit now claimed for vaccination is reduced morbidity.  Yet, Omicron is noted for its low severity even in the unvaxxed.

The quacks demonstrate their incompetence when they say, “Relaxation of these measures will increase the spread of COVID-19.”  They’re assuming against the science and data that their measures actually did something to slow the spread, like closing strip clubs at 11:00 pm instead of 1:00 am.  They don’t tell you that it’s the area under the curve, not the shape of the curve, that matters.  Those cases are coming willy-nilly sooner or later, measures or not.

They’re quacks pulling the wool over the eyes of the stenographers in the media.  The story goes to note that ‘expert modelling’ (is there any other kind?) shows a wide range of scenarios with hospital admissions rising to 6,000 from its current 3,000 in six weeks.  There’s no explanation as to how that happens, since it's nothing but fiddling with variables and watching how the outcome changes.  You can’t model the effectiveness of lockdowns because they don’t have measurable effectiveness.  It’s all a complicated business unmoored from reality, and the modellers are complaining about lack of good input data.  Garbage in, garbage out is screaming out of the story, and so is the adage, “if you torture the numbers enough, they’ll confess to anything.”  But admitting that might impugn the authority of the ‘expert modellers’ and vitiate the purpose of the story, which is to keep the scare in people.

This story had no business being printed because the ‘expert modellers’ can’t show a case based on the data they have.  Scaring people was all this story was about, but neither the writer nor the editor was ready to call b.s. on the quacks, er, their sources running Ontario’s COVID response.

-30-