Intelligent Design Medicine

Fake stats debunker Ioannidis on COVID-19 stats: Not reliable

Spread the love

Following up on PaV’s post the other day, “Pass me a Corona,” it’s worth asking, how reliable are the data we are freaking out over anyway? The famed fake stats debunker John Ioannidis gives good reasons for doubt and also adds:

In the absence of data, prepare-for-the-worst reasoning leads to extreme measures of social distancing and lockdowns. Unfortunately, we do not know if these measures work. School closures, for example, may reduce transmission rates. But they may also backfire if children socialize anyhow, if school closure leads children to spend more time with susceptible elderly family members, if children at home disrupt their parents ability to work, and more. School closures may also diminish the chances of developing herd immunity in an age group that is spared serious disease…

One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health. Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric. At a minimum, we need unbiased prevalence and incidence data for the evolving infectious load to guide decision-making.

John P. A. Ioannidis, “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data” at STAT

One might add, every place isn’t like every other place. There may be lot we don’t know about the worst scenarios such that extreme reactions based on hearing about them are all the more unwise, leading to harm from problems created by efforts to avoid the contagion.

8 Replies to “Fake stats debunker Ioannidis on COVID-19 stats: Not reliable

  1. 1
    polistra says:

    Yup. I’ve been thinking the same thing about the “distancing”. Proper public health authorities used to quarantine people who were actually sick, and close a few places where massive close contact could occur, like swimming pools. They never closed down normal activities, because normal activities build up immunity. If we aren’t getting exposed to small doses, we’re perfectly susceptible to the first dose. (Remember “smallpox blankets”?)

    This is the PURPOSE of the distancing, not an accidental consequence. The people who are designing this setup are not dumb, they’re evil.

  2. 2
    Angraecum says:

    You can’t get immunity from an entirely new virus by wondering about and hoping to only get a little bit of it…

  3. 3
    BobRyan says:

    This is not a new virus, but a new mutation of an already existing virus. COVID has been around for a while and it is far from the deadly thing the media and governments are presenting it as.

  4. 4
    Angraecum says:

    For the record, SARS-CoV2 (the virus that causes covid-19) does, of course, have ancestors. But no humans have been exposed to them, so no one has immunity to it.

  5. 5
    PaV says:


    What do the Diamond Princiess cruise ship date tell us about this virus?

  6. 6
    Eugene says:

    Anyone advocating for “herd immunity” should first visualize himself in a hospital bed under a ventilator and only then decide if this is indeed a good trade-off for saving his investment in the already-overpriced-to-begin-with stock market.

  7. 7
    BobRyan says:

    Angraecum & Eugene:

    There are always going to be some people immune to any virus. COVID is not some unknown, but something we’ve been studying in human’s for almost 20 years. This is not some never before strain, but a mutation of the existing one we already have from COVID-2. Just because the media makes something sound scary, doesn’t make it so.
    Eugene seems to think everyone is going to end up on ventilators and die. Maybe Eugene should take a look at the virus and he may find out it’s not the monster he believes it to be. Just because the media uses scary words, like virus, does not make it scary. COVID is highly contagious, but not particularly deadly. There’s a difference between the two that you seem to not understand.
    The only differences between COVID-2 and COVID-19 are how much more we know now and just how ridiculous it is to overreact. Not all viruses are the same.
    Then again, I’m dealing with Darwinists who believe the Scientific Method doesn’t apply to macroevolution. You believe bumper stickers over data. Not all viruses are the same. Look up COVID and pay close attention to the part where it is not particularly deadly. Then look up Marburg virus for a true nightmare scenario if that one ever does what COVID did.

  8. 8
    BobRyan says:

    Considering some people cannot take the time to do a little bit of research for themselves, I’ve taken a little time to do it for you. Unlike you, I don’t need someone to hold my hand and tell me to hide in the closet to keep the nasty virus away. I prefer fact over hype and fear.
    According to New Scientist, this particular strain of COVID that people are panicking over is called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. For anyone who remembers what happened almost 20 years ago, that was an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. That was SARS and this is SARS 2.
    It is related to the virus we have already been exposed to. This is important to take note, since it means we already have the antibodies. South Korea, through mass testing, has found that 99% of people who test positive of COVID-19 do not develop severe symptoms. The WHO claims 80% will not develop severe symptoms. The true average will be somewhere in the neighborhood of 90%, since countries with older populations, like Italy, will have higher mortality rates.
    Influenza is more deadly than COVID-19.

Leave a Reply