A new literature review and meta-analysis of the effects of lockdowns on COVID-19 mortality out of Johns Hopkins found that lockdowns must never be used as a pandemic policy.
We are only including the key summary. Dr. Fauci was wrong again, and all of you conspiracy theorists were RIGHT. It was clearly wrong and it makes one wonder if there wasn’t a deliberate effort to destroy people, small business, capitalism.
The authors write:
In the early stages of a pandemic, before the arrival of vaccines and new treatments, a society can respond in two ways: mandated behavioral changes or voluntary behavioral changes. Our study fails to demonstrate significant positive effects of mandated behavioral changes (lockdowns).
[…]
-
The Importance of Prayer: How a Christian Gold Company Stands Out by Defending Americans’ Retirement
Finally, allow us to broaden our perspective after presenting our meta-analysis that focuses on the following question: “What does the evidence tell us about the effects of lockdowns on mortality?” We provide a firm answer to this question: The evidence fails to confirm that lockdowns have a significant effect in reducing COVID-19 mortality. The effect is little to none.
Lockdowns have not been used to such a large extent during any of the pandemics of the past century. However, lockdowns during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic have had devastating effects. They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence, and undermining liberal democracy. These costs to society must be compared to the benefits of lockdowns, which our meta-analysis has shown are marginal at best. Such a standard benefit-cost calculation leads to a strong conclusion: lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument.
Finally!
Read the study below.
A Literature Review and Meta Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID 19 Mortality on Scribd
wpDiscuz
