The science deniers at Johns Hopkins University are at it again. Whereas we all know, having been told so multiple times per day for two years, that lockdowns save lives, here comes some wise-guys from JHU saying not so much.
Here’s a taste from the abstract:
This meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects. They have imposed enormous social and economic costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.
Huh?
That’s what I’ve been saying for at least a year, when it was becoming obvious according to emerging data there was little correlation between lockdowns and mortality rates.
We’ve got a dozen “Premier’s Science Tables” in this country, plus the feds, plus big cities like Toronto with their own “Chief Medical Officers” and their own advisory tables. How could all those experts and doctors and scientists warming the chairs around all those tables get it so wrong?
So the benefits are negligible to non-existent, but the social and economic costs are incalculable, and we’ll be paying them for generations.
Good job, experts!
No comments:
Post a Comment