 |  |  |
| 0:00 | -1:01:23 |
Through the magic of the internet, AEI's Lyman Stone joins The Remnant all the way from Hong Kong to talk all things coronavirus: how we got here, the numbers, China's role in the outbreak, and where we go from here.
Show Notes:
-Hong Kong’s relative laxity during the pandemic
-Problems with getting an accurate coronavirus death count
-Siddhartha Sanghi retracts his claim about reduced deaths from social distancing
-Jim Geraghty’s reporting on the Wuhan virology lab
-NY churches being “converted,” if you will, to field hospitals
-Taiwan’s coronavirus travel ban policy
-John Barry’s book on the 1918 flu
-DrinkHydrant.com, promo code “dingo” at checkout
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
| 13 | 14 |
Late to the conversation here. Sorry. A new subscriber getting caught up on all this fantastic content. ... The case for China’s misinformation was well put. I found it interesting though that nothing was said about misinformation in the US itself from the administration and the conservative media. Not trying to turn this into an anti-Trump thread, but it does seem to me that behavior of US citizens would be far more affected by the messages coming out of the US rather than China. Do you feel otherwise? (It is possible I missed it; listening in our more crowded house does present some challenges)
One point of clarification that I wish had been asked: Mr. Stone stated that he thinks it will later be shown that full lock downs are not necessary, that closing schools and preventing large gatherings would have been enough. My assumption is that he meant that once you do that you scare enough people to take it seriously and the lock down effect takes hold because behaviors change without edict. The alternative interpretation would be that he doesn't feel those behaviors will prove to have been necessary to slow this down, but all of his previous statements wouldn't seem to support that.
Did I miss some point of clarification here?