mhaze,

I haven't lied once, nor have you caught me lying. You, on the other hand, are caught on a regular basis - with yesterday being the most recent incident. And you've just done it multiple times again.

//It seems you've been beaten down so badly on this that you're now reduced to making the unsupported and unsupportable claim that the lockdowns saved the hospital system.//

Beaten down? Heh, no, all of my points are still standing. Yours, on the other hand, are scattered in pieces.

We’ve already gone through the fact that the lockdowns reduced the burden on healthcare systems in detail; so thoroughly, in fact, that you had to abandon it. Now you’re just going to assert otherwise. “Nuh-uh!”

//Every time you see evidence that the lockdowns failed to save lives you simply revert to the unsupported assertion that it saved the hospital system without offering any evidence for the assertion.//

You haven’t provided any evidence of this. Your last few links failed to do this, too.

//Jurisdictions which didn't lockdown didn't see any collapse in their hospital system but you'll ignore that because.....well just because.//

I never ignored it before, so why would I suddenly start ignoring it now?

Preventing healthcare collapse isn’t just about keeping hospitals from literally shutting down - it’s about ensuring they can continue to function without being overwhelmed by preventable cases. Lockdowns helped spread out the impact, saving more lives in the long run.

Would you like to go through it all again? I doubt it.

You can't convince the closed minds mhaze, but for those who can think logically here's some more from Australian GP Dr Julie Sladden in The Spectator:

"And what of the effects of repeatedly boosting the population? The unexpected association of increased risk of Covid with more prior vaccine doses, as suggested by the Cleveland study, certainly warrants further attention before we funnel the population into a lifelong program of endless boosters. Not to mention what repeated boosting might be doing to our immune systems. ..

"As for ‘safe’, the recently released Australian CDC surveillance report of adverse events following Covid vaccines concludes ‘there was an unprecedentedly large number of AEFI reports observed following the introduction of Covid-19 vaccines in 2021’. Meanwhile, the significance of the alarming number of adverse event reports is summarised succinctly, by scientist Dr Andrew Madry, at the recent Senate Inquiry into Excess Mortality.

"‘Covid medicines account for 23 per cent of all adverse events reported in the whole 53-year history of the DAEN (Database of Adverse Event Notifications) for all medicines. It takes up 38 per cent of all cardiac disorders in the 53-year history.’"

Mikko,

I thought you might like these. I came across them while I was scrolling though my covid archives....

http://dailysceptic.org/2023/03/29/the-narrative-in-retreat/

eg "Based on the original Phase 3 trial data, Bart Classen showed as early as August 2021: “Results prove that none of the vaccines provide a health benefit and all pivotal trials show a statically significant increase in ‘all cause severe morbidity’ in the vaccinated group compared to the placebo group.”

or this

http://victorygirlsblog.com/nyt-opinion-admits-mask-mandates-were-useless/

" "'Do something' is not science, and it shouldn't have been public policy."

JD,

Now you're just playing semantics..."Preventing healthcare collapse isn’t just about keeping hospitals from literally shutting down - it’s about ensuring they can continue to function without being overwhelmed by preventable cases. "

Collapse or overwhelm or whatever you you want to call it, didn't happen.

If lockdowns stopped it form happening then those places without lockdowns would have suffered the collapse/overwhelming/whatever you want to call it.

But they didn't. So an adult with a modicum of logic would realise that the hospitals survived with or without lockdown.

But I get that you've fallen hook, line and sinker for the government claims about the need for lockdowns and mere proof that they were worse than useless isn't going to affect that grovelling to authority.

mhaze,

You’ve been on the backfoot the entire time, and none of your arguments have held up to any scrutiny, and you’ve provided no credible evidence for anything you’ve said. So, why would I suddenly start resorting to semantical games?

//Collapse or overwhelm or whatever you you want to call it, didn't happen.//

Yes, the latter did.

We saw hospitals across Italy, parts of the US, and even the UK get pushed to their limits before lockdowns were properly implemented. Patients were treated in hallways and even parking lots in some places, and non-covid care was delayed or cancelled entirely. That’s what being overwhelmed looks like.

Just because full-on collapse didn’t happen everywhere doesn’t mean lockdowns were unnecessary. The goal was to prevent that kind of overwhelm from becoming widespread. Comparing places like Sweden or other jurisdictions with different conditions ignores the reality that without lockdowns, many other places would’ve seen their healthcare systems buckle under the strain.

Not every region faced the same conditions. Population density, healthcare capacity, timing, and existing infrastructure all played a role. Comparing regions with vastly different variables and claiming it proves lockdowns were "worse than useless" is either naïve or deliberately misleading.

But we’ve already been through all this before. I don’t know why you should expect your arse to be kicked any less hard a second time around.

By the way, I was working in the IT industry as a programmer between 1998-2013, so I know what I'm talking about as far as Y2K goes. What were you doing? Googling (or Yahoo-ing) conspiracy theories, by the sounds of it.

"We saw hospitals across Italy, parts of the US, and even the UK get pushed to their limits before lockdowns were properly implemented."

Oh well, if a few hospitals on the other side of the planet suffered a few days of overload, that certainly justifies closing down the entire economy and society in Australia or something. I think you're running out of straws to clutch.

The hospital system in Australia was never under threat. The politicians here (you know, the ones you habitually defer to) were simply mouthing the platitudes coming from the other side of the world. Two weeks to flatten the curve became 6 months to flatten the economy - from which we still haven't recovered.

I hear-tell that Adelaide's hospitals have a major problem with overload in their emergency departments. I think we urgently need close down the entire society to avoid that happening in NSW.</sarc>

"You’ve been on the backfoot the entire time, and none of your arguments have held up to any scrutiny,"

Scrutiny? Is that what you're calling it? Simply saying 'you're wrong because I say you're wrong and that proves you're wrong' isn't scrutiny. Anyone reading the thread knows that.

____________________________________________________________________

"By the way, I was working in the IT industry as a programmer between 1998-2013, so I know what I'm talking about as far as Y2K goes. "

Well I don't think you know what you're talking about on any subject.

I was a programmer on System 36 mainframes from 1980 - 85. A programmer on 086 style PCs for a few years after that, a software consultant for a decade and IT manager through the late 90s into the early 2000s. Thereafter I freelanced as a programmer for the shipping industry until around 2010 and still have two international clients who I do occasional consulting for. That's what I was doing.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=20173#356631

In all my years in the industry, I've never met a programmer or anyone conversant with the issue who thought it was anything other than an overblown scare. Forgive me if I doubt your credentials.