From the BBC article
View attachment 1196772
Does anyone else think figures like this are bullshit? We haven't seen that anywhere in the world yet. If you look
here you see
View attachment 1196776
Compare to South Korea
View attachment 1196778
Now, of course, we don't know where in the curve the UK is or, admittedly, if it'll follow the same curve. However, I'd say the fact that the UK is in complete lockdown down seems like it should have an effect on how the virus can spread. It's too early to say if UK infections will plateau and start to fall off now, but I'm sure that will happen. South Korea has had 100 deaths. Admittedly people are still dying but the total death toll looks like it will be way under 20K, let alone 250K or 500K. No country has reported a death toll like that. We might suspect that China is lying about their death toll but we have no hard evidence that is the case. Suspicion about the CCP being lying cunts is rational, assuming that they've covered up millions of deaths is not because millions of deaths are hard to hide, even in China.
It reminds me of climate change or Brexit or fucking anything which has happened in the last ten years since the media went full-on apocalypse porn. In each case, they hype up some survey with 'best case', 'medium case' and 'worst case' figures in it and it turns out in a couple of months that every single one of those vastly overestimated how bad things were. And in each case, the media always seems to have some sort of desired option like not leaving the EU or shutting down the whole economy (climate change/coronavirus) and they quote studies that support that option and claim to have the backing of 'The Science'. Despite the fact that almost no journalists understand the first thing about science. All they do is find the most dramatic bad news they can find and scare everyone shitless into backing whatever destructive policy they want. Even the BBC article hints that the study may well be complete bullshit
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51979654
I dunno about you but saying '
UP TO 500K PEOPLE WILL DIE UNLESS WE SHUT DOWN THE WHOLE ECONOMY' is a lot less convincing if the caveat to that is '
admittedly most of those 500K would have died even with no virus because they were old and sick'.
The innumerates in the media use modeling rather as a drunk uses a lamppost, more for support than for illumination. And usually, the thing they're trying to support is disastrous for the majority of the population.