Sunday, December 20, 2020

Insufficient data, and the science of pandemics

". . . The CDC declares that “there are insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of vitamin D [to control the pandemic].”

Somehow, though, the “insufficient data” problem disappeared when it came to lockdowns and mask mandates. Before the pandemic, the official expert consensus was against those measures, but the consensus was promptly discarded in the hope that these sacrifices might help. The evidence since then could easily be called insufficient, given the lack of randomized studies and the inconvenient data showing that places with lockdowns didn’t fare any better than the places without strict measures. And given what has emerged about the minuscule rate of transmission in outdoor settings, you could certainly say there’s insufficient evidence to order people to stay inside their homes or to mandate masks outdoors. . .  

It’s not surprising that groups with disproportionately high rates of Covid mortality are also prone to vitamin D deficiency: African-Americans and other minorities, the obese, residents of nursing homes and other elderly people. Levels of vitamin D tend to decline with age, and because the vitamin is synthesized in the body by exposure to sunlight, people tend to have lower levels if they spend less time outdoors or have darker skin that absorbs less ultraviolet radiation from the sun."

 Pandemic Penitents | City Journal (

And now we're in a second wave, and possibly a mutation that will be moving much faster so we'll just do more of what hasn't been working. So, the more we stay inside, the less sun and less Vitamin D, and the more depression from lack of sun and lack of socializing.  So, the experts tell us to do more of what's killing us.

There are no peer review articles supporting wearing a mask for Covid19, but there are many for using Vitamin D.

No comments: