Covidalism©®: COVID Restrictions in USA have no Health Benefits at all.

Journal of community medicine & health education Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-08
Jan Charles Biro
{"title":"Covidalism<sup>©®</sup>: COVID Restrictions in USA have no Health Benefits at all.","authors":"Jan Charles Biro","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Shortly after the detection of the COVID virus in January 2020 the US Government introduced and enforced a series of restrictions to protect the elderly from a \"deadly virus\" and the \"pandemic of the century\". Persons who disagreed were silenced and punished.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In the 15th month of COVID epidemic (April 2021), we have access to sufficient statistical data and methods to better understand the nature, origin of the COVID pandemic. It is now possible to reliably evaluate the effectiveness of the restrictions and the human factors/driving forces behind this drastic limitation of our natural freedom in this country.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Publicly available epidemiological and population parameters were collected and analyzed using the 'political score' and 'restriction ranking' of 50 states and evaluated by simple and usual statistical methods, mainly correlation analyses. The Political Score of the States (D/R) is the ratio of the number of citizens who self-identified as democrats (D) or republicans (R). The political scores of the 50 states altogether defined a wide, continuous scale, the political scale, that could be used to measure (and statistically evaluate) the effect of politics of a state on the numerical parameters of that state, including population and epidemiologic parameters.The COVID Restriction Score of the States were created to rank the states from 1-50, there 1 is the lowest number of restrictions and 50 is the highest number of restrictions applied by the States. It was based on 13 different key metrics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study revealed, that 1) restrictions reduced the number of viral infections, but 2) they totally failed to reduce the number of supposedly COVID related deaths, expressed as mortality, 3) they increased (SIC!) the lethality of coronavirus. The grade of restrictions were/are strongly associated to the 4) left/right political ratio of the States, there States with more democrat citizens practiced more restrictions. It was found that race, religion and Medicare/healthcare spending have significant influence on politic as well as on the grade of restriction orders. Factors moving States toward the political left and harder COVID restrictions have 5) larger 'non-white' population, 6) larger number of 'non-protestant' believers, 7) larger Jewish population, and 8) more generous Medicare/healthcare spending. It was not possible to see any influence of the size of the 9) senior (65+) population [i.e. those who are allegedly the most vulnerable and are mostly in need of protective restrictions] neither on the States politic nor on the restrictions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The degree of restrictions enforced by different states ware not primarily determined by biological or epidemiological factors (like number of elderly, say 65+ in the state) but by social, political influences instead. Political (a), religious (b) ethnic (c) and economic (d) forces represented the decisive forces on the state's restrictive orders and not the convincing evidence of the potentially harmful effects of the COVID infection and the well-founded adequacy of the defense against it.</p>","PeriodicalId":73681,"journal":{"name":"Journal of community medicine & health education","volume":"14 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11563037/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of community medicine & health education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Shortly after the detection of the COVID virus in January 2020 the US Government introduced and enforced a series of restrictions to protect the elderly from a "deadly virus" and the "pandemic of the century". Persons who disagreed were silenced and punished.

Objective: In the 15th month of COVID epidemic (April 2021), we have access to sufficient statistical data and methods to better understand the nature, origin of the COVID pandemic. It is now possible to reliably evaluate the effectiveness of the restrictions and the human factors/driving forces behind this drastic limitation of our natural freedom in this country.

Methods: Publicly available epidemiological and population parameters were collected and analyzed using the 'political score' and 'restriction ranking' of 50 states and evaluated by simple and usual statistical methods, mainly correlation analyses. The Political Score of the States (D/R) is the ratio of the number of citizens who self-identified as democrats (D) or republicans (R). The political scores of the 50 states altogether defined a wide, continuous scale, the political scale, that could be used to measure (and statistically evaluate) the effect of politics of a state on the numerical parameters of that state, including population and epidemiologic parameters.The COVID Restriction Score of the States were created to rank the states from 1-50, there 1 is the lowest number of restrictions and 50 is the highest number of restrictions applied by the States. It was based on 13 different key metrics.

Results: This study revealed, that 1) restrictions reduced the number of viral infections, but 2) they totally failed to reduce the number of supposedly COVID related deaths, expressed as mortality, 3) they increased (SIC!) the lethality of coronavirus. The grade of restrictions were/are strongly associated to the 4) left/right political ratio of the States, there States with more democrat citizens practiced more restrictions. It was found that race, religion and Medicare/healthcare spending have significant influence on politic as well as on the grade of restriction orders. Factors moving States toward the political left and harder COVID restrictions have 5) larger 'non-white' population, 6) larger number of 'non-protestant' believers, 7) larger Jewish population, and 8) more generous Medicare/healthcare spending. It was not possible to see any influence of the size of the 9) senior (65+) population [i.e. those who are allegedly the most vulnerable and are mostly in need of protective restrictions] neither on the States politic nor on the restrictions.

Conclusions: The degree of restrictions enforced by different states ware not primarily determined by biological or epidemiological factors (like number of elderly, say 65+ in the state) but by social, political influences instead. Political (a), religious (b) ethnic (c) and economic (d) forces represented the decisive forces on the state's restrictive orders and not the convincing evidence of the potentially harmful effects of the COVID infection and the well-founded adequacy of the defense against it.

Covidalism©®:美国的 COVID 限制对健康毫无益处。
背景:2020 年 1 月发现 COVID 病毒后不久,美国政府就出台并实施了一系列限制措施,以保护老年人免受 "致命病毒 "和 "世纪大流行病 "的侵袭。持不同意见的人受到了压制和惩罚:在 COVID 流行的第 15 个月(2021 年 4 月),我们有足够的统计数据和方法来更好地了解 COVID 流行的性质和起源。现在,我们有可能可靠地评估限制措施的有效性,以及对我们国家自然自由的这一严重限制背后的人为因素/驱动力:收集并分析了可公开获得的流行病学和人口参数,使用 50 个州的 "政治得分 "和 "限制排名",并通过简单常用的统计方法(主要是相关分析)进行评估。各州的政治得分(D/R)是自我认同为民主党(D)或共和党(R)的公民人数之比。50 个州的政治得分共同定义了一个宽泛、连续的尺度,即政治尺度,可用于衡量(和统计评估)一个州的政治对该州的数字参数(包括人口和流行病学参数)的影响。COVID 各州限制得分从 1 到 50 分排列,其中 1 代表各州实施的限制最少,50 代表各州实施的限制最多。它基于 13 个不同的关键指标:研究结果表明:1)限制措施减少了病毒感染的数量,但 2)限制措施完全未能减少与冠状病毒相关的死亡人数(以死亡率表示),3)限制措施增加了冠状病毒的致死率(SIC!)。限制的等级与 4) 州的左右政治比例密切相关,民主派公民较多的州实行的限制较多。研究发现,种族、宗教和医疗保险/保健支出对政治以及限制令的等级有重大影响。使国家在政治上向左转并更严格地实施 COVID 限制的因素包括:5)"非白人 "人口较多;6)"非原教旨主义者 "信徒较多;7)犹太人口较多以及 8)医疗保险/医疗支出较慷慨。9) 老年人(65 岁以上)[即那些据称最脆弱、最需要保护性限制的人群]的规模对各州政治和限制措施都没有任何影响:各州实施限制的程度主要不是由生物或流行病学因素(如本州 65 岁以上老年人的数量)决定的,而是由社会和政治影响决定的。政治(a)、宗教(b)、种族(c)和经济(d)力量是各州限制性命令的决定性因素,而不是 COVID 感染的潜在有害影响的令人信服的证据和对其进行充分防御的充分依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信