Nobel Prize winner believes UK Lockdown saved no lives and may have actually cost them

Stanford University Professor Michael Levitt predicts that the UK will be rid of Covid-19 within weeks.

THE lockdown measures by the UK government caused more deaths than it saved, a Nobel laureate scientist said on Saturday, and also predicted the UK would emerge from Covid-19 within weeks.

Michael Levitt, a Stanford University professor who correctly predicted the initial trajectory of the pandemic, sent messages to Professor Neil Ferguson in March telling the influential government advisor he had over-estimated the potential death toll by at least “10 or 12 times.”

The Imperial College professor’s modelling, a major factor in the government’s apparent abandoning of a so-called herd-immunity policy, was part of an unnecessary “panic virus” which spread among global political leaders, Prof Levitt said.

The professor went on to explain:

“I think it may have cost lives. It will have saved a few road accident lives – things like that – but social damage – domestic abuse, divorces, alcoholism – has been extreme. And then you have those who were not treated for other conditions.”


https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2020/05/24/nobel-prize-winner-believes-uk-lockdown-saved-no-lives-and-may-have-actually-cost-them/

Listen to the scientists.

Wait, not that scientist.

Horrible, horrible road accidents and social damage. Thank god for occasional wars.  Saves a lot of pain.  

Not for the Soldiers and their Families mate !

nicko wrote:Not for the Soldiers and their Families mate !

The point is, redefinition can solve a lot of problems.

Maddog wrote:Listen to the scientists.  

Wait, not that scientist.  

Exactly!

“Listen to this guy, no wait, that guy, no wait this one...hang on, which one serves my purpose again?”

I’ve abided by the rules mostly, but a part of me has always been sceptical...

The truth is only the truth according to what we know or believe in that moment. So I guess I’m always flaky about what i consider to be true. It’s complicated.

eddie wrote:

Maddog wrote:Listen to the scientists.  

Wait, not that scientist.  

Exactly!

“Listen to this guy, no wait, that guy, no wait this one...hang on, which one serves my purpose again?”

I’ve abided by the rules mostly, but a part of me has always been sceptical...

The truth is only the truth according to what we know or believe in that moment. So I guess I’m always flaky about what i consider to be true. It’s complicated.

Let's not forget that scientists change their minds, which is a good thing as sometimes they are wrong.

Skepticism is the most intelligent way to deal with changing science being conflated with politics.

At least scientists change their minds according to objective empirical data. There might be a question of how much evidence can change a mind, but it's not done on a whim.

When non-scientists get involved, it becomes pure opportunism. How does it fit with what you want to be? That's how we get into wishing it away.