A recent video featuring Dr. Erickson and Dr. Massihi going over the statistics and asking the important questions that many of us are asking keeps disappearing from all major social media and video platforms. What is it that they don’t want us to see? What are they trying to “protect us” from? Anthony and I take this one point-by-point, tonight on the Unframe of Mind show. JOIN US ELSEWHERE:
Join the Unframed Minds Facebook group:
Find us anywhere at:
Support/Donate:
Merch:
SHOW NOTES:
The video keeps getting removed by major social media outlets.
In a list of counter arguments by “MD commentary from Andre Leach,” whoever the hell that is, they start off by saying, “OK, since this video by Drs. Erickson and Massihi has been making the rounds on facebook, I feel like I need to respond. Now first of all, I actually agree with the basic premise that this is not as dangerous as we first thought and we should probably move to open. However they make many false and misleading claims so I feel like I need to respond.
This video is I believe making the rounds because it sounds internally logical and has many facts that are either deliberately or inadvertantly misinterpreted and about 95% of the things they are saying are true and then there's the 5% that's the gotcha.”
Now, I know that bad grammar doesn’t make the information incorrect, but if you want to be taken seriously; especially as an “MD,” make sure you edit your statements. A little punctuation certainly wouldn’t hurt. If you want me to accept the accuracy of the information you are providing, make sure your grammar is at least accurate to a sixth-grade level.
That being said, the author suggests that they “actually agree with the basic premise that this is not dangerous as we first thought and we should probably move to open,” and that “about 95% of the things they are saying are true.” If that’s the case, why waste people’s time with “countering” the remaining 5%, and even going a step further to accuse them of “deliberately or inadvertently misinterpreting” the information. That’s like you and I agreeing that we should feed the homeless, but because you think I have a few of my facts incorrect, you go on to write up a 1,500 word point-by-point take down of my deliberate misrepresentation of the facts.
“[Erickson] says that we should quarantine the people that are sick and not the people that are well. ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. However in order to quarantine the sick and not the well, you need to know who is sick and who is well. That's the problem with Covid-19 is that unlike measles or most other infectious diseases, people can spread the disease when they are asymptomatic so how do you know who needs to be quarantined and who doesn't? so what do you do when you don't know who has the virus? yeah, you quarantine everyone.”
Erickson never says “We should quarantine the people who are sick and not the people that are well.” He says, “[Quarantining the way we did] is a good idea when we don’t have any facts. In everything we’ve studied, typically, you quarantine the sick.” Nowhere in there does he say what we should or shouldn’t do.
AUTHOR: “Ideally, you do what South Korea did and have lots of testing available and you test everyone and then you trace all their contacts and test them and now you know who has the virus and who doesn't and you quarantine those who have the virus and let the others go about their business. We did not have testing and we still do not have enough testing to test everyone.”
“[Erickson says] that they had 340 out of 5213 tests positive (6.5%). Then they talk about how 12% of the tests in california were positive. Then they say that Ca has 39 million people and 12% of them being positive means 4.5 million people have covid-19. THIS IS THE SINGLE GREATEST PROBLEM WITH THIS VIDEO.
First of all, the author’s numbers are incorrect. Erickson says 4.7 million people, not 4.5
Erickson: “We’ve seen 1,227 deaths in the state of california with a possible prevalence of 4.7 million. That means you have a 0.03% chance of dying from COVID-19 in the state of California.”
Author: “Either they are being purposely misleading or they completely forgot statistics 101. They are confusing testing within a high pretest probability cohort with a random sample of the population that can be extrapolated to the general population. Let me explain. Until now, the way covid testing worked was that there were so few tests that we only tested people that we were pretty sure had the disease. And even if we were pretty sure they had the disease, if they had mild symptoms, we didn't test them. Therefore the tested samples will have a much higher rate of positivity than the general population.
Rest of notes at
0 Comments