Fascinating Study on the Effects of COVID Measures

[NatMorton]

As can be expected, the first serious studies on how the various states fared through the pandemic are starting to emerge. I've only just come across this one, so I can't vouch for it. That said, it certainly makes the argument that the states that had less strict lockdown measures have come through the pandemic better. Their mortality rates were not significantly higher (or even higher at all) and they did not suffer the degree of negative impact to their economies or public education systems.

Here are the study's grades assigned to each state:


Study, source; here.

WSJ op-ed on it that attempts to draw a few more conclusions here (paywall).

 

[americanwoman]

I'm surprised, but pleased, to see Nebraska so high. At the time it seemed our Governor Peter Ricketts wasn't always making the best decisions but the results don't lie and I will give him the props for this. Hopefully there won't be another pandemic like this but we should at least be more prepared if there is.

 

[Cardinal]

Deaths per capita:

 

[Cardinal]

Vaccinations per capita:

 

[post]

I'm surprised, but pleased, to see Nebraska so high. At the time it seemed our Governor Peter Ricketts wasn't always making the best decisions but the results don't lie and I will give him the props for this. Hopefully there won't be another pandemic like this but we should at least be more prepared if there is.

Stephen Moore is one of the "authors". IOW, ignore "the report".

https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/NBERcovidstudy.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Moore_(writer)#Federal_Reserve_Board_candidacy
"...After having his nomination withdrawn, Moore returned to his previous positions with FreedomWorks, The Heritage Foundation, and Committee to Unleash Prosperity. Additionally, Moore became chief economic officer of Frax, a cryptocurrency that has branded itself, "the world’s decentralized central bank.”[81] .."

 

[NatMorton]

Stephen Moore is one of the "authors". IOW, ignore "the report".

https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/NBERcovidstudy.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Moore_(writer)#Federal_Reserve_Board_candidacy
"...After having his nomination withdrawn, Moore returned to his previous positions with FreedomWorks, The Heritage Foundation, and Committee to Unleash Prosperity. Additionally, Moore became chief economic officer of Frax, a cryptocurrency that has branded itself, "the world’s decentralized central bank.”[81] .."

Something about the data you don't like?

 

[Cardinal]

Something about the data you don't like?

That it’s essentially meaningless when stacked against the inverse proportion of vaccinations and hospitalizations/deaths. People can dunk on lockdowns and masks til the cows come home, but at the end of the day it’s vaccinations that rule the roost. And by that metric, red states and red counties in particular get an F.

 

[jnug]

Having looked through the entire "study" let me first say that IMO applying statistical measures and weights and then deriving political rhetoric from the results are a FAIL. They will always be a fail. I can change any result simply be deciding on a weighting that helps me make whatever argument I am trying to make.

We do know that since COVID actually attacked us from Europe the states that were major European POE's were deeply effected. That they also happen to be states with high population density. The combination was a killer. That automatically puts NY, NJ and CT at a disadvantage not at all considered in this so-called "study".

Schools remaining closed or staying open were entirely an issue of Testing. We never ever got testing right and therefore could not use it in any meaningful way to help schools stay open. Again, schools in areas of high population density, overcrowded and with aging inefficient ventilation systems were once again at a disadvantage, again a factor completely ignored in the "study". That school districts that knew their classroom sizes and aging school infrastructure were problematic were more cautious about schools remaining open should be obvious to anybody with a brain.

I would use the entire thing as bathroom tissue or as the last line of a an eye chart.

 

[NatMorton]

Having looked through the entire "study" let me first say that IMO applying statistical measures and weights and then deriving political rhetoric from the results are a FAIL. They will always be a fail. I can change any result simply be deciding on a weighting that helps me make whatever argument I am trying to make.

We do know that since COVID actually attacked us from Europe the states that were major European POE's were deeply effected. That they also happen to be states with high population density. The combination was a killer. That automatically puts NY, NJ and CT at a disadvantage not at all considered in this so-called "study".

Schools remaining closed or staying open were entirely an issue of Testing. We never ever got testing right and therefore could not use it in any meaningful way to help schools stay open. Again, schools in areas of high population density, overcrowded and with aging inefficient ventilation systems were once again at a disadvantage, again a factor completely ignored in the "study". That school districts that knew their classroom sizes and aging school infrastructure were problematic were more cautious about schools remaining open should be obvious to anybody with a brain.

I would use the entire thing as bathroom tissue or as the last line of a an eye chart.

I suspect if the table's sequence were inverted you'd be praising the study.

 

[jnug]

I suspect if the table's sequence were inverted you'd be praising the study.

No I would not. Bullshit is bullshit. Applying weighted statistical measures in order to produce political rhetoric is bullshit no matter who does it. Though it is interesting that Right wing proponents just engage in this nonsense constantly....NOTHING BETTER TO DO BUT ENGAGE IN PROPAGANDA from what I can see.