View Single Post
Old 06-19-2020, 11:14 AM   #104
Major
Senior Member
 
Major's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Laconia
Posts: 1,056
Thanks: 435
Thanked 1,000 Times in 415 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdarby View Post
How many lives have been saved by requiring seatbelt usage in motor vehicles?

How many cases of lung cancer have been prevented due to prohibiting smoking in restaurants and airplanes?

How many lives have been saved due to speed limits on roadways?

Any numbers are educated conjecture. No one can factually answer your questions. However, there are highly trained and educated epidemiologists and statisticians who can forecast morbidity and mortality. On the other side of the spectrum are people who know nothing of epidemiology and statistical forecasts who treat this all like it’s a bunch of bunk. When Galileo proposed that the sun was the center of our solar system he was labeled a heretic by the church! Those were the two sides of that spectrum back then. Heck there are people who believe the world is flat and no amount of “hocus-pocus science” will prove to them otherwise! I wish you luck on your quest for answers.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
The so-called experts for the most part are government hacks whose best interest is to gin-up crises to ensure future funds. The so-called experts in January, February and early March said there was nothing to worry about. Go to Chinatown and order your favorite menu item. I wish we had listened to their early recommendations. Usually, ones first instinct is the right instinct. The same can be said for the so-called climate change experts. Their best interest is to create a crisis to ensure funding and wealth transfer.

To answer your first question, I think it should be easy to determine. Measure the number of deaths per year prior to enacting the law and after enacting the law.

The second question is similarly answered - measure the number of deaths attributable to cancer and heart disease before and after enacting the law.

The third question is tricky. The reason why we lowered the speed limit, initially to 50 and then to 55, had nothing to do with safety. The issue was gas (fuel) conservation. The thought being that going slower used less fuel. It has since become a safety issue. I guess we could look at accident deaths before and after the speed limits to determine an answer.

So there are ways to measure the questions you asked. I'm curious to see the data on face masks.
Major is offline