Adam Creighton turns raving loony

For months I’ve not addressed Adam Creighton’s virus tirade demanding more people die to save business. It’s obvious that this is a false binary. The virus crushes economies whether governments step in to address it or not.

Instead, I’ll just leave this here to let you take the measure of the man:

A little collective sacrifice so we can all get back to enjoying life unencumbered by restrictions is hardly the gulag.

Or, we can kill people, lots of ’em:

And the economy will shut anyway as the body count rises.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


    • The WHO recommends against lockdowns

      Not quite. One of their investigators recommends against NATIONAL lockdowns but does not say the same about regional lockdowns, such as what we have here on Oz. In fact she recommends them:

      Top WHO disease detective warns against return to national lockdowns…. Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, who helps lead the WHO’s pandemic response, said that ‘localised’ measures should instead be used to stem Covid-19

      Zero reading comprehension….

      • I think its quite clear who the raving lunatics are here

        Nowhere in your copy pasted text does she recommend local or city-wide lockdowns

        She recommended “local MEASURES”

        Why are you always so dishonest?

        Instead Dr Van Kerkhove urged countries to make use of the tools currently available to adopt a “tailored, specific, localised” approach to contain new clusters of infections.

        “The speed of the science on this has been extraordinary… we have tools right now that can prevent transmission and save lives,” Dr Van Kerkhove said, referencing measures including contacting tracing, widespread testing, equipping health facilities, physical distancing and wearing face masks.

    • And plenty do. As to impact M.I.T. Economists stated getting rid of the virus best solution as 2nd would cause greater economic damage. Where’s Sweden deaths and gdp wise.

    • Coming, Creighton is a raving loony because of his absurd and insulting comparison of a lockdown with tyranny.

      But you go ahead and misinterpret me all you like for your own ends.

      • The state of disaster declaration will empower the police minister, Lisa Neville, to appoint police as authorised officers. This means when doing spot checks on people’s homes, if the residents did not give permission for them to enter, police will be authorised to enter without a warrant.

        Melbourne University epidemiologist Professor Tony Blakely told he didn’t think there was a stage five, at least not that he knew of, but he did think authorities could further tweak current restrictions.
        Among them, he said, authorities could make mask-wearing compulsory in the home.

  1. MB readerMEMBER

    What Adam doesn’t appreciate is that if governments don’t close the place down when things get bad then people will. And while it won’t be all people it will be enough so that the economy will continue to be sclerotic but it won’t be enough to get rid of the virus. I think shutdown is the way to go, sadly. Hopefully we can eliminate it within Australia. As to immigration, we can go back to quarantine for longterm stayers. For people coming and going on short visits, it will not be so easy. And I am definitely in the mood for getting on a plane and getting out of here but don’t see it happening anytime soon.

    • alwaysanonMEMBER

      You should see the comments out of Newcastle after a Sydney person went on a pub crawl and spread it all over the region recently. “Close the M1 NOW!” “People from Sydney are not welcome!” etc. I think you’re right that people will put up their own barricades if it comes to it and the government is not seen to be doing anything…

      • It’s actually quite interesting but this crisis is causing the country to split along regional and local boundaries — we’re becoming tribal all of a sudden.

  2. Maybe he can volunteer for the virus as a gonzo journalism experiment and report back on how it all goes.

  3. Creighton is correct, total BS going on. Roughly 90% of deaths are ppl over 70 …..lock up the oldies and disaster is over

    • No hes a loon distorting stats and unknowingly extending the very problem we face. Twisting Sweden to fit his agenda when its impossible to differentiate people being locked down and people reducing needless contact with others off their own back. The answer to this issue has always been go early go hard, and dont let your guard down.

    • You can’t reason with people in the grip of a national mania. The average age of victims is probably older than average life expectancy. Yet we are willing to throw the future of everyone under 70 under a bus.

      Even the WHO said the death rate is about 0. 25%. That is about 2.5x worse than a severe flu. A nasty virus sure but destroying our future over this? In a normal year there are about 440 deaths PER DAY on average in Australia. After 6 months we have just over 200 deaths and have spent over $200 billion. A billion dollars per death. It is completely insane.

      And the fear! People are terrified. I can understand in March why people were so frightened but millions of people have had this virus. The statistics are in. Unless you are over 70 or have serious preexisting conditions you have a 99.99% chance of surviving.

      Then we get the straw man arguments about putting money over health. In poor countries people die from everything all the time. Poor countries can’t afford quality healthcare. After this ‘pandemic’ we will be a lot poorer for a very long time. Many people will have already died from preventable diseases and illnesses that weren’t caught in time because of the hysteria. Many more will die because we can no longer afford the best and latest medical care.

      • +1. The media narrative is the KPI of “number of cases.” This is what the governments are going to get elected on. So there you have it.

      • Jumping jack flash

        “…we have just over 200 deaths and have spent over $200 billion.”


        closer to 300, but what’s a 100 billion between friends? But 100 billion isn’t all that much these days. We spend 100 billion every year just on the banks. Remember when 100 billion dollars used to be a lot of money, or even a trillion dollars, for that matter?

        They’ll need to spend more than twice that current figure if they want to save the economy. The problem is the debt growth hasn’t been adequate for the last decade to maintain the debt and the nonproductive debt has eaten into our stock of productive dollars. Fortunately the virus has exposed their crooked system for what it is, and shown everyone that it is completely unsustainable.

        But now the virus is a very convenient excuse to magick up a ton of money and hand it around. And lo and behold here comes a second wave right on cue, so they can spend another 300 billion…

        • ‘“…we have just over 200 deaths and have spent over $200 billion.”

          Well, you’re both fools, as you’ve entered the realm of the circular argument: Look, we didn’t need to spend all that money because we’ve only had 200 deaths.

    • TightwadMEMBER

      Absolutely agree. These knee jerk oppressive lockdowns are completely useless. This is a virus, like the flu. It can’t be eliminated so just protect the people it affects (80 year olds in care homes).

      • Not like the flu. It leaves massive numbers of people with scarring on the lungs, heart problems and neurological problems. Young people. I even know someone who was supposedly “asymptomatic” who has scarring on her lungs. How asymptomatic is that? And she’s well under 70.

        • TightwadMEMBER

          We’d better make cars, drinking, extreme sports etc. illegal as well then. Best if we all sit at home and stay safe-wait a minute that’s not what life is for though is it!

          • Unfortunately years of experience with the flu – generally you get better or sometimes you die – is not leaving us prepared to think about a contagious illness that is likely to cause widespread long-term illness and disability.

          • 1. The corona virus isn’t exactly something ‘illegal’
            2. Whether legal or illegal, those dangerous-to-health or lethal pastimes are undertaken by choice
            Perhaps don’t try false analogies to persuade; they don’t work, not even as humour.

        • Is that actually different to flu though? I have scarring in my lungs despite testing negative for covid, I assume due to regular flu I had a few years ago.

      • I am GrootMEMBER

        I agree bolstrood. I am some way off your age, but I find this attitude to be quite disgusting and pathetic. I have little doubt if it was their age group most at risk they wouldn’t be making the same argument.

        We all intuitively recognise there is a limit to what can be asked of people, but if and when that time comes, there are more dignified ways to approach it.

  4. There’s definitely a western media bubble of group think that can’t cope with Sweden’s success under the Anders Tegnell approach.
    (skip to 25min mark to hear Tegnell explain why masks are not necessary)

    • Let’s talk about Sweden’s “success” when they go into winter again. At the moment they are outdoors, away from work, not using public transport, all the windows open in buildings ……

    • Theres no either or on this Aaron, adopt a range of measures, they aren’t mutually exclusive. Heaps of studies going back a decade show how much of a difference they can make, at virtually zero cost to your economy. Out of all the measures its should have been the first used. If you really want to learn how to fight COVID read about Taiwans response. Textbook case study, easily implemented and sustainable.

      • I don’t inherently disagree. The problem is that the system and approach Australia chose is designed around fallible human behaviour. What genius decided to concentrate returning travellers (with known and potential highly virulent contagion) smack bang in the middle of a major metropolis? I put on my OHS hat and apply ICAM and that there is the root cause. (As opposed to “A root” being the cause).

      • The most obese nation on the planet – doesn’t help the situation. Not sure it’s the best comparator ..

        Maybe that’s a key difference between the US and Sweden? I don’t know … just thinking out loud.


          Sweden deaths are actually higher than the US, per million of population. Trumpo should be banging on about how good he’s doing compared to those loser Swedes

    • Ronin8317MEMBER

      What’s the definition of success ? Sweden is a ‘success’ with over 5500 death, but New Zealand is a failure with only 22? Is the aim to see how many people will die?

      • Mining BoganMEMBER

        Death is less draining on the economy than chronic long term health problems. Death is winning.

        • A lot of the “bring it on” squad are closet “ok boomers” who would love to see oldies die just so they can buy the houses cheaper

          • All the elderly and younger I know are against severe local lockdowns.
            Almost everyone elderly and younger I know are for lockdowns of state/international borders.
            Most prepared to face/death/illness if it comes rather than have their day to day lives mandated and restricted, by the government.
            Note: the border lockdowns more about excluding those without a genuine right to a place (our place). Those who are citizens here having a right to go about their business.
            It isn’t as inconsistent as it seems, and being against lockdowns from people on the ground (as opposed to lobbyists) has nothing to do with house-prices. It can have something to do with appreciation of the cost to a broad swathe of Australians of economic destruction. But mostly it is about personal freedom and choice.

    • TightwadMEMBER

      Amazing how the lockdown cheerleaders twist the facts about Sweden, it must be really painful to see how well they’ve done without imposing martial law on their population.

      • Even more amazing is how right wing Anglophone ‘libertarians’ are now suddenly praising the social democratic Swedes for their commitment to ‘freedoms’ that their own governments have revoked.

        They could attempt this in a largely high trust, left leaning, homogeneous, societal, Scandinavian country, but not in a rootless, low trust, neoliberal, Ponzi economy such as Australia.

        • Yes, the mind boggles at how rightards will appropriate anything that fits the amoral cause of the day. In this instance they are using ‘socialists’ as bastions of freedumb.

          My head is full of fµck

  5. The “with no lockdowns, everything will be fine” song.

    Sunshine, lollipops and freezer trucks
    with dead Australians but as long as the national borders open
    I can sell my sky kennels…

    Yeah needs work.

  6. PaperRooDogMEMBER

    I support the locrkdown. Though personally I wouldn’t be upset if the government just said the economic cost (ie a depression lasting several years) is too high for the lives saved (assuming hospitals are not overrun) but then I don’t have any elderly or high risk family members in Australia.

  7. His tone is often improper but the message is still worth regarding.

    Why is the comparison with Sweden just who has done better in August 2020? Their experts even admit it is a long-term strategy that has been front ended. If they have no further large waves (and nothing in recent weeks suggest another is coming) and get to have a normal Christmas in a recovering economy while Melbourne is still in Stage 4 and NSW & QLD in New stage 3 lockdowns with a death count mounting and catching theirs anyway…Will we still be so smug?

    • Most insightful comment here.
      This virus will be around for quite some time.
      Whether Sweden has done better or worse will become apparent over time.

  8. TightwadMEMBER

    Probably not as much as is being caused by these lockdowns on the younger generation who’s futures are being destroyed

  9. reusachtigeMEMBER

    This place makes itself clear that it is just another propaganda arm of the main stream media when it labels anyone against Lock. Us. Down! as “looney”. LOLOLOL

  10. The whole argument rests on what was mentioned briefly above, namely that the virus does not just kill 0.05% of the population, but can create severe organ issues for those younger ones who get it for the rest of their lives.

    I know you guys don’t seem to care as your sssumption is clearly ‘I’ll be OK, coz I’m not a booomer’ (smug smirk on face), but this does not seeem to be the reality.

    Great to have life back the way it was, but only if you still have your health with which to enjoy it no matter what your age!!!

    • TightwadMEMBER

      Quire the opposite. I might not be alright but I want the younger generation who’s futures we are selfishly destroying to be alright.

      • Steady on, Tightwad. I had a chat to some youngsters today and they seemed quite chipper, no mention of bleak futures.

        If you’re serious about how we’re destroying their futures, we should discuss climate.

        • TightwadMEMBER

          Don’t you mean global warming? Oh that’s right, none of those predictions came true so it was rebadged climate change.

          • Okey dokey then! The young are doomed because of a temporary lockdown, and global warming is “not coming true”.

            Thanks for the update.

  11. Locking healthy people in their homes without consent, and requiring face covering submission for them to go about their business is immoral. And note it has been enacted without consent.
    We have a severe deprivation of liberties, of people that have committed no crime, without consent.
    There are two ways of dealing with death.
    Running screaming, scared and panicking away from it, or embracing it as part of life, and only running screaming scared and panicked away from it when there is a mortal threat to the whole, not the individual.
    I’m 40 and in the prime of my life, but if I was taken tomorrow I’d go willingly and happily.. I’ve had a good life, and have nothing to complain about (note I am not suicidal, just not spooked by death, it is a natural part of life). My 60 year old mother, and 86 year old Victorian grandmother similarly go about their days determined to live free and go when they are taken, not shirk fearful away from death trying to grab onto a few more months/years at the pain of ending the pleasures of their lives.

    Think of all the elderly dying alone and lonely unable to join their families for the special occasions that are about all they have to live for at this stage of their lives. The herd is strengthened by individuals facing reasonable risks, it is weakened by running away from them. God help this country if people ever have to fight for it again.
    All that would cower from a virus must surely hide under their beds when called to face a more serious enemy.
    Now before piling on against my view, bear this in mind, I express it only to illustrate there is a valid INTELLECTUAL counter case to the lockdowns, aside from “maths about infection rates”. “maths about infection & death rates” ASSUMES the path to reducing such rates should be the ultimate aim of society. That is just that, an assumption, and a value judgement. It isn’t any more based in reason than the alternate approach.

    Sh*t is going to hit the fan if a vaccine ends up mandated…

    • Jumping jack flash

      “Sh*t is going to hit the fan if a vaccine ends up mandated…”

      For sure.
      I don’t even get a regular flu shot because it is mostly ineffective, probably harmless, but mostly ineffective. Decades of research has gone into that vaccine and it is still mostly ineffective.

      I certainly wont be putting up my hand to get this one that’s been rushed out.

      Who’s going to go first?
      My guess is they will “test” it on the oldies. Oh, the irony.

      • I think it’s fantastic that the same people advocating for letting it rip are often the same people who will run like hysterical nonces the moment a vaccine appears.


      The whole aim is to not have hospitals/health systems completely overwhelmed. Lockdowns wont last forever, they just need to get the spread down. Otherwise yer society and economy is completely cooked anyway.

      “requiring face covering submission”. Masks will be necessary going forward in a lot of settings if we don’t eliminate the virus. Get used to them and social distancing. The more of both those things we do, the more “normal” society will look.

  12. Banana ManMEMBER

    Groupthink. If you’re not for the majority you are a pariah. Black or white, there is no grey. Why do we get to vote for dum shi like homo marriages, but not immigration, or house arrest, or changing out international borders to give away our oil fields? Awesome democracy. Did we vote in Gillard, turnbull? hmm