There really is not enough reliable data to truly know just where we are in this thing. Then there are those that downplay the risk and there are those that inflate the risk depending on their agenda.
I want to again be clear here, my question is; does the science and data justify the response? And the truth of the matter is that we just don't know. There is not enough information nor is much of that information reliable.
Pretty much hits the nail square on the head IMO
A little back pedaling is what in my opinion, I see of past claims.
But then nobody should forget, a broken clock that still has two hands, is still correct twice a day, meaning if you hear enough different "opinions", chances are good that at least one of them will be proven correct.
Frankly, I am starting to wonder if you have a problem with comprehension. First, you don't share the information with us that gets you to your conclusions. And then when you do finally share one link, it is on the wrong subject and didn't support your assertion. And now this. My position all along has been that it is looking like more damage is being done with the response than was being done by the virus. That is for certain in more areas than not.
It's possible that there are a few specific places where shutting down the economy, locking people in their homes, and devastating individuals and businesses finances may be prudent. But in most of the United State of America that stuff is NOT SUPPORTED by direct, unassailable data. PERIOD! No matter what some politicians and the evening news (or even you) say.
