| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| Germany has succumbed to panic |
| 2020-03-19 |
| Sp!ked via Instapundit Germany is in lockdown. The speed with which social life has been restricted as a consequence of Covid-19 is frightening. The first restrictions began on 8 March when the government banned events involving more than 1,000 people. Operas, theatres, trade fairs and sports’ events were closed or cancelled. In football, the term Geisterspiele (ghost matches) was coined to describe games being played in empty stadiums. Six days later, schools and kindergartens were shut. Only emergency childcare for certain families could be maintained, parents were told. Public gatherings of more than 50 people were forbidden. All of this was soon superseded by the announcement on Monday that all pubs, cafés, private clubs, libraries, religious centres (churches, synagogues and mosques), and outdoor children’s playgrounds would have to close until at least 19 April ‐ a month away. Even funeral halls have been shut (only outdoor services with no more than 50 mourners are permitted). ...Now, the lockdown is here. The government’s change of mind came after it faced increasing attacks from sections of the press, claiming it wasn’t doing enough. For weeks, fearmongers in the media have been warning that we are only days behind Italy. Instead of taking a level-headed and rational approach, Germany keeps implementing ever-harsher restrictions. This is as frightening as the virus itself. |
| Posted by:g(r)omgoru |
| #6 ^Nor do we need to - all we need to know is how to twick the parameters of the model to make it behave in a desirable fashion. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2020-03-19 16:40 |
| #5 Can we please get accurate numbers? The people who would otherwise be filling out the forms that get entered into computers to be sent to the various central authorities to be forwarded to WHO are otherwise occupied at the moment. And expanding on g(r)omgoru’s point, even the CDC’s annual flu numbers — except for hospital statistics (severe illness and death numbers) — are estimates spit out by computer models based on previous population samples. Bottom line, we do not yet have the data to make truly data-informed decisions. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2020-03-19 16:31 |
| #4 MM there are no accurate numbers even in professional publications because most people who suffer from light form of cold/flu do not register. Don't blame the press (they've enough sins as it is). |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2020-03-19 12:34 |
| #3 Accurate numbers. From where? From the same media and government grant grabbing "scientist" community that has been pushing gerbil worming? Really? Bwahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa.... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2020-03-19 12:03 |
| #2 Can we please get accurate numbers? Specifically, numbers that reflect the enormous population of those who a) were definitely infected but who recovered, and b) likely to have been infected but who show no symptoms? And also that the timeline us accurate when it comes to for adding and subtracting from the total # of infected for each day? Are we sure that the curve that is being calculated has taken the above into account? If not, then the ACTUAL curve is certain to be far different from what our policy makers are looking at: most likely far "spikier" in earlier/past periods, and far less spiky -- flatter -- today and in recent days. Which means that we are almost certainly doing ourselves more harm by locking down everything and everyone right now than we would if we were to make selective, careful, and above all, DATA-INFORMED closures. |
| Posted by: Lex 2020-03-19 08:21 |
| #1 Panic? For now measures taken are less strict than in Italy, Spain and France. Some things make more sense than others, but we must flatten the curve. Mass meetings should have been banned much earlier. |
| Posted by: European Conservative 2020-03-19 07:00 |