Up to half the excess deaths in American nursing homes were due to the impact of lockdowns and mitigation measures on frail residents rather than the virus. That’s the conclusion of epidemiologist Professor Eyal Shahar in a new analysis of a study on U.S. nursing home deaths.
The study, published in the Journal of Health Economics in 2022, found that the greater the mitigation efforts in U.S. nursing homes, the higher the death toll during the pandemic. “Those efforts not only largely failed to reduce Covid mortality, but they also added non-Covid deaths. The more they tried to mitigate, the worse the outcome was,” notes Prof. Shahar.
“These results are consistent in three consecutive periods: May through September 2020, September through December 2020, and December 2020 through April 2021. Moreover, the relationship between quality ranking and mortality became stronger over time,” he adds.
The reason was the non-Covid death toll: “The higher the ranking, the higher the number of non-Covid deaths”.
While in the first wave the harsh mitigation measures do appear to have reduced Covid deaths somewhat, this effect was “insufficient” to make-up for the non-Covid deaths associated with a higher ranking. It was also not true for later waves.
The study authors propose the most likely causal explanation: that higher ranked nursing homes imposed stricter – and deadlier – mitigation measures. Prof. Shahar writes:
Quality ranking was a surrogate for adherence to mitigation guidelines. The higher the quality of a nursing home, the more strictly official guidelines were followed. And those guidelines had a wide range of adverse consequences, which the authors describe as “unfortunate downsides to these early policies that could have negatively impacted nursing home resident health”.
Citing relevant studies, they specify some of the mechanisms: extreme isolation, which may be deadly in Alzheimer’s; unsupervised meals leading to weight loss; a lack of communal activities, which reduced exercise and increased the time spent in bed; and a large decline in regular medical care of frail, elderly residents. These plausible mechanisms are documented in horrific personal stories.
The study authors claim that vaccination helped protect from Covid from 2021 onwards. Looking at their data, Prof. Shahar disputes this:
The effectiveness of Covid vaccines against Covid death was temporary and mediocre at best. Most likely, it was near zero or negative in the frail elderly. … The case fatality rate (CFR) did not decrease during the vaccination campaign. Nor did Covid vaccines reduce Covid and all-cause mortality in that vulnerable population.
Prof. Shahar estimates the proportion of excess deaths attributable to the mitigation measures. Making the defensible assumption that the lowest-ranking nursing homes show the level of mortality with no mitigation at all, he calculates that mitigation efforts accounted for “one-third to half of the excess mortality in 12 months”.
Notably, the study authors don’t try to claim the non-Covid deaths were missed Covid – a common argument from those wanting to exaggerate the impact of the virus. Prof. Shahar goes further and criticises the authors for failing to recognise that around a quarter of ‘Covid’ deaths were no such thing as they died ‘with Covid’ from other conditions: “Based on CDC data, about 25% of Covid deaths in the U.S. were misattributed in the first five months of 2021.”
With no evidence of net, or even any, benefit, and clear evidence of a devastating death toll, this study’s important findings show that even for those most vulnerable to the virus – those who many argue should receive ‘focused protection’ – mitigation measures do far more harm than good.
It turns out, when a flu-like virus comes along – even a novel(ish) and potentially engineered one – there’s still no better response than to keep calm and carry on. And whatever you do, don’t jettison dignity, compassion and freedom. It can be deadly.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
OK
But Liz we need offshore wind farms like we need a hole in the head.
Speaking of which, I don’t know if they’re already doing something like this in the UK. I’m also wondering why they don’t do this on land instead, given that the bodies of the poor birds can at least be counted, and what arbitrary number of killed birds will they declare ‘acceptable’?
”Energy firm Vattenfall is going to place infrared cameras on one of its wind turbines in the North Sea to gauge how many birds are killed by the blades.
At the moment the decision to stop or slow turbines lies with the economic affairs ministry. It uses models which predict deaths at busy times of year, such as spring and autumn when millions of birds cross the North Sea on their migratory routes.
In 2023, North Sea turbines were halted three times to protect birds and some 50,000 are killed each year, experts have estimated.
The predictions do not give an accurate picture, Vattenfall said, because the dead birds fall into the sea and disappear in the current.
Some 16 infrared cameras will be placed on the turbine, which is part of an offshore wind farm some 18 kilometres from the coast near The Hague.”
https://www.dutchnews.nl/2024/04/vattenfall-to-put-cameras-on-wind-turbine-to-count-dead-birds/
Was that sliver of fantasy included to let it pass the Telegraph censors?
Truss may not be much good at politics but she is usually right on the substance of policy. Net Zero is economic lunacy. Most members of her rotten party are in thrall to authoritarian collectivism, however, and after fourteen disastrous years in government they deserve to be wiped out in the forthcoming election. Things need to get even worse before they get better.
And erecting a giant hamster wheel to power the UK will make it nirvana. If you didn’t realise it truss is a fool, the ppl in politics are very low quality, even the few who say the odd sensible thing.
If you reject sound advice, just because the source isn’t consistently reliable, we won’t get anything worthwhile from the political bubble, or the Legacy Media: though I usually can’t tell the difference between the two.
And if you reject newcomers, just because they haven’t done anything yet that is worthy of approval, because they haven’t been in office, we will be doomed to failure, and national destruction.
Don’t let Perfection be the enemy of Good.
I’ve posted about this before: the ridiculous lowering of the national speed limit here in the Netherlands, which came into force 4 years back. The speed limit that any normal, sane person ignores, especially if you regularly travel over the border to neighbouring Belgium or Germany, who don’t have such a nonsensical rule. Well lo and behold research has shown that it’s made bugger all meaningful difference. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that the alleged pitiful 0.2% reduction in nitrogen could be explained by the significant increase in electric cars in the last few years, because they’re everywhere over here now;
”The PVV, VVD, NSC, and BBB are discussing whether the speed limits on Dutch highways can be increased back to 130 kilometers per hour, sources told the newspaper AD on Tuesday. The topic has been on the agenda for a few weeks, but the leak to the media now may be an attempt to distract from a looming impasse on the asylum and migration file, political reporters think.
Four years ago, the Rutte III Cabinet lowered the maximum speed limit on highways to 100 kilometers per hour between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. in an attempt to lower nitrogen emissions. But a recent study by Wim de Vries, a professor and nitrogen expert at Wageningen University, showed that the lower speed limit only reduced nitrogen emissions by at most 0.2 percent on paper.”
https://nltimes.nl/2024/04/16/parties-formation-talks-investigating-return-130-kmh-speed-limit
Net Zero is meant to replace existing infrastructure that works, with new infrastructure that is less efficient and using money that will be taken from the economy in taxes, and thus will reduce wealth creating economic activity.
To get less output for greater input, is the inverse of efficiency and economic growth.
While Truss might have been one of the least treacherous and incompetent of Johnson replacements ( others such as Braverman or Badenoch might have been better) , here I have to agree with her to some extent. Technically she is wrong on more offshore wind energy unless her recommendation for more Nuclear and shale gas derived generation is acted on. And even then, the regulatory process for the former seems designed to block implementation for around 2 decades. We have far in excess of the % wind renewable power for a stable grid. Tidal power would be a more revelant source for an island nation.
We are paying on average 2 1/4 times US electricty prices and 3 1/2 times S Korean prices ( Domestic and business average ). Yet the latter has limited and depleted gas field resources and imports most of its energy as Liquid Natural Gas. Which is carried at -159 degC, Liz not -180. Ludicrously we refuse to use our own onshore resources and there are those that believe USA sabotaged the Nordstream pipeline in order to provide a captive export market once most of the Gulf coast LNG import terminals had been converted to re-liquefy and export its own shale gas.
Tidal power has its own problems: peak power moves to different times every day, just look at the high tide times around Britain for the relevant information. And how does the power at 3am, in the Summer, get stored for use at 6pm in the Winter? And then each location has its ecological disaster waiting in the wings, whether it’s the silting up of the created reservoir, that will need power to be removed, to changes in the water table. And this is in addition to the disruption of shipping. And there are very few sites where it’s possible anyway.
The built in snag is the conflation of environmental management and “Climate Change” scaremongering. The established techniques for environment issues, especially in urban areas, are OK, but the ideas of manipulating the weather itself are not. Those that believe in “Net Zero” are skirting around this flawed concept of pretending that they are the same things, but they are not.
I have just read Toby’s article above this about the black, female version of Ranting – that’s Rayner by the way – the one who loves to use the principal weapon so beloved of her colleague Diane Abacus ie the Race Card ( never leave home without it) and there is no option to comment.
Mods???
I read it too and feel very sorry for the way Toby was treated by an MP with ‘previous’ form. The article was to defend Prof Cass who has been threatened and upset by some people who think it is acceptable to experiment on children with life changing consequences.
Look at what a collection of MP’s does to vast swathes of the population or even to individuals such as Mr Assange. Isn’t that why such people are in Parliament (but really shouldn’t be)?
Well I thought it disgusting that this woman gets away with resorting to smears and slander, not just once but on multiple counts, like she has some sort of vindictive agenda against Toby. All because she has nothing factual in her arsenal with which to attack him, she resorts to scraping the barrel using a pack of lies. To pot with all this ”disinformation”, it’s just blatant lies. Shame on this nasty, spiteful piece of work. And she should be shamed far and wide for her vile behaviour because it says a great deal about somebody’s character, let alone their professionalism, or lack thereof.
“there is no option to comment”
Thanks, I noticed that and wasn’t sure if I’d missed something.
It wasn’t like it was an article that required a comment on censorship.
Yeah, not sure if that’s a boob or deliberate. One can’t always be sure these days….
What you betting the Miserable Git Association now descend on me for commenting off-topic?
You’ll be safe as houses, as ever though.
“Diane Abacus”
Love it.
Like your vote she doesn’t count. Or in her case not particularly well.
Thanks
Off-T
https://off-guardian.org/2024/04/19/bird-flu-censorship-100-day-vaccines-7-predictions-for-the-next-pandemic/
Kit Knightly at Off-G discussing the why’s and wherefores of the next Scamdemic which he predicts for January 2025 and will probably be linked to bird ‘flu which will of course allow them to shut down farming.
“ is the rise of authoritarian regimes and the decline of democracy”
Does she include the West?
Yesterday on the radio I tuned in to BBC 4 ( sorry not got DAB ) there was an episode called Antisocial. They were discussing Highway Code, cyclists and car users. They had a real based guy on there ‘James’. not sure the surname. He was criticising the climate cult, their war on cars and Jeremy Vine. Enough to cause an Aneurysm in the BBC studios.
Blimey.
A hidden 5th columnist then? Brilliant!
I liked her from the first. Quirky? Yes. Naive? Yes.
Stitched up by the Bank of England and globalist cabal? Absolutely.
She’s got guts and is correct about a lot of issues. I disagree on Ukraine, but think she would have been the most conservative PM since Thatcher.
More power to her.
I was neither for nor against Liz Truss until the Davos Deviants got involved and clearly told the tory hierarchy to get her out at which point I was firmly a supporter. This was probably the most shameful act of political backstabbing that I have seen in my lifetime. Truss’s views on the economy were correct and an about turn on the fiscal madness was desperately necessary. However, according to the rules the tory hierarchy have been given this country must be driven to bankruptcy which was why The Hunt was forced on Truss. When this manoeuvre failed to get rid she was chased out. I suspect Liz Truss has no skeletons with which she can be blackmailed. I also expect she has some very dark secrets tucked away and which will be let loose if she is harmed.
At least she is giving some return fire. As the saying goes…Every little helps.
Truss was born into a Left Wing family and has traveled across the political spectrum to end up with a good smattering of Conservative Ideas, with most of the travelling being done while within a ‘Conservative Party’ government. It’s quite a feat, really!
It’s why she doesn’t have a History of solid conservative thinking behind her, but it is also how she managed to get into the Parliamentary ‘Conservative Party’ while Cameron was around, when being a LibDem minded Conservative (in name only) was a ticket to success.
I hope she continues to speak out (and we can support her better suggestions) as, at the moment, there is very little worth coming from the party. And there is much to be said.
According to Nadine Dorries in her book, that was the plan. To destroy the Tory party. Maybe something to do with Brexit, that as we know, never really happened.
I have been reading books on Crypto currencies and FTX, what struck me was the amount of energy that the data centres that support this and in future A.I. use in terms of cooling etc,. These things which lets face it are owned by and used by the”Elite” billionaire boys to make more money to buy more private jets useso much emergy in the form of electricity that it dwarfs what the average city would normally use, and there is simply insufficient energy based on current restrictions to power A.I., crypto and the normal needs of citizens and yet the Eco zealots and protesters do not talk or shout for the shutting down of these data centres, neither does Government do anything, in fact the opposite, Sunak et al actively encourages A.I. Why do you think that is?
Conclusion the little people don;t matter, we are dispensible, disposable, what matters is that the tech nerds get to get richer and the Politicians continue to suck up to them.
“the rise of authoritarian regimes and the decline of democracy” is certainly a problem. Britain is a great example.
But which party does Truss support? Ah yes, the Fake Conservatives, under whose watch British democracy has significantly declined, and the State has become a good deal more authoritarian.
She needs to resign from the Conservatives, or get back in her box.
But Miss Truus did you raise those questions in 2019 when Net Zero was being waved through Parliament? ——-I do not think you did. You were part of the group think of all the main party MP’s who asked no questions of cost or viability of Net Zero. There was no DEBATE, and no VOTE. ——You all just waved it on through.