Re: Hmmm... previously gave you a source for projected excess cancer deaths... Archived Message
Posted by Ken Waldron on October 9, 2020, 2:43 pm, in reply to "Re: Hmmm... previously gave you a source for projected excess cancer deaths..."
"One: I responded to your email above, which clearly says zilch about collateral damage" -I wasn't talking about collateral damage (on which there are very few reliable sources) but of the faux proposal to save the day above, so that's hardly surprising. "Two: I had stated 20000-50000 deaths, quoting a research article. That was later corroborated by SAGE, with an estimate of 30000 excess cancer deaths." -Which was completely undermined by the Lancet study that you chose to ignore because it didn't say what you wanted, so your rhetorical "Again.." above was both dishonest any hypocritical. It gave: "3291–3621 additional deaths across the scenarios within 5 years." i.e. A tenth of your above lower estimate above over five years for the major cancers. -But as you don't really care about excess deaths from Covid its hard to believe you are bothered by excess cancer deaths. To you its a stick to beat the drum for your "back to normal and the devil take the hindmost." mantra. The "American Institute for Economic Research" doesn't give a damn about the health of the populace: as I point out above its all about normalising your kind of thinking for the longer term: that's what right wing lobby groups social Darwinists and eugenicists would like. With Covid19 we are in stage one of the Martin Niemoller slide: "First they came for the economically unviable pensioners..." And then where does it stop?
|
|