/cont

Those who opposed the lockdowns pointed out that it would result in other issues to the detriment of the population and the economy. And this has come to pass.... http://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-20/mortality-rates-australia-covid-excess/103241640

As we struggle with inflation, we need to remember that it was primarily caused by the profligate spending by governments in the lockdown period. We'll be paying a penalty for that error for at least a generation to come.

Covid was a disease that primarily affected the elderly and already infirm. Had that been acted upon in the early stages of the panic, then the economic and societal effects of the lockdown errors would have been avoided. But governments were entranced by the lockdowns and those that differ to authority went along with it.

Your claims about long Covid, even if it exists (and there's severe doubt about that) are beside the point. The lockdowns didn't stop the transmission of the virus. They weren't even designed to do that. Remember that they, the lockdowns, were sold as a means to flatten the curve ie spread the contagion over a longer period to take the pressure of the hospital system. Equally, the so-called vaccines didn't stop the spread and weren't designed to do that. The mask mandate didn't stop the spread.

The vast majority of the population got infected. Many (most?) didn't even know it. Some of the elderly and already infirm died from it. the lockdowns didn't stop that.

But the authorities will be pleased to know that some continue to fall for the propaganda around their policies.

No the elements of the so called "pandemic" weren't unprecedented, it's just those that were responsible didn't look at the precedents.

Woke Marxists aren't productive people because they don't understand and aren't interested in production.

The call to "focus on learning from these mistakes rather than seeking to blame and punish"- is the plea of the irresponsible that don't recognize the principle of cause and effect. Standard seagull management.

Sounds like John Daysh wants to avoid being punished.

mhaze,

There’s a lot out-of-date data in your attempts to cherry-pick there. Seems that “truth twitch” is in full swing.

Firstly, you draw a false equivalence between Covid and the flu by deliberately manipulating the numbers. Averaging the death tolls out of several years is misleading, because Covid deaths occurred in a much shorter timeframe. In Australia:

http://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/provisional-mortality-statistics

The "dying OF" versus "dying WITH" argument has been thoroughly debunked. The vast majority of Covid deaths were directly attributable to the virus. Multiple studies confirmed this:

http://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2859

To make it appear as though the lockdowns were ineffective, you’ve cited old data out of context and ignored the wealth of research that has emerged since. Sweden actually had higher excess mortality compared to its Scandinavian neighbours who implemented stricter measures:

http://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/34/4/737/7675929?login=false

In Victoria, the situation was more complicated than your simple narrative. Victoria might have had thousands more deaths without the interventions, despite big challenges brought along with aged-care outbreaks.:

http://grattan.edu.au/report/lessons-from-victorias-covid-19-failures

A meta-analysis published in The Lancet Public Health further confirmed that countries with stringent lockdowns had significantly lower Covid death rates than those that did not implement such measures:

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(22)00089-6/fulltext.

Your attempts to dismiss long Covid as insignificant are baseless. The Brookings Institution's report found that lost wages, medical expenses, and reduced economic output as a result of long Covid cost the US $3.7 trillion:

http://www.brookings.edu/research/new-data-shows-long-covid-is-keeping-as-many-as-4-million-people-out-of-work

Ten percent of those infected with Covid develop long Covid:

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22)00941-X/fulltext

Gateway Pundit is infamous for its spreading of misinformation and referring to it only damages credibility. The CDC and other credible health organisations and journals have consistently found/reported that Covid is far more dangerous than the flu.

Lastly, your simplistic take on inflation and the economic impact of government spending is either naive or dishonest. Without the interventions, the global economy could have fared far worse. Inflation was driven by multiple factors (e.g. supply chain disruptions, increased post-lockdown demand) not just government spending.

http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/global-economic-prospects
http://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO

JD,

"There’s a lot out-of-date data in your attempts to cherry-pick there. Seems that “truth twitch” is in full swing."

Well you're the one who was using data from the very early part of the lockdown that purported to show it worked even though it hadn't even finished. My links OTOH were from 2023-24. I think we can all see who's picking the cherries.
But I've noted that you try to use the 'cherry-pick' assertion when the data doesn't fit your prejudices but can't be disputed. I guess that works in some circles.

As to "truth twitch" - never heard the term and I don't know what it's supposed to mean. I suspect that makes two of us.

" you draw a false equivalence between Covid and the flu by deliberately manipulating the numbers. "

That's laughable. I pointed out that your numbers were wrong but used them anyway to make my point. And then you complain that the numbers are wrong. Pretty funny.

"The "dying OF" versus "dying WITH" argument has been thoroughly debunked. "

Well if you say so. But your link is again from the very early part of the panic and from one country. I can see it doesn't take much to convince you!! But there are plenty of examples where the data is differentiated between with and of. Our own ABS does it. Studies in Italy showed that 80% of the reported covid deaths there were people who died with not of.
It probably eludes your understanding but that is why most researchers now use excess data figures because it avoids the of/with problem

"you’ve cited old data out of context and ignored the wealth of research that has emerged since"

Again this is fall about funny. You say my data is old and out of date and then support your claim with oldER and more out-of-date data. Again the data I used was for the whole of Europe but you chose a report covering just four countries. Explain cherry-picking again!

Your Lancet link doesn't work so I can't explain to you how that is irrelevant.

As to long Covid, the point seems too complex for you. Whether it exists is immaterial. People were going to get the WuFlu irrespective of lockdowns. Thus they were going to get long covid if it exists. This simplistic assertion that long covid exists therefore lockdowns work is baffling in its idiocy.

As to the economy, your links have zero relevance. The facts are that governments around the world went into enormous debt to pay for the lockdowns and the world is currently paying the price for that.

mhaze,

In your attempts to make it look like I had made an embarrassing blunder - by focusing only on the dates - you failed to realise that the data your links relied on have now been superseded. Whereas, everything I had linked to is still valid - regardless of the dates.

Now THAT is funny!

See what happens when you cherry-pick and sift through your opponent’s comments with the sole intent of supporting a narrative rather than actually engaging with the data and arguments?

Textbook intellectually dishonesty.

Again, your arguments rely on outdated and misleading claims. You criticise early studies I cited while leaning on sources that have been debunked. Sweden’s approach, which you praise, resulted in higher excess mortality compared to its Scandinavian neighbours with stricter lockdowns:

The false equivalence between Covid and the flu continues to be a fundamental flaw in your argument. Even averaging deaths across years, Covid caused healthcare crises globally - something the flu has never done. Calling this a “bad flu season” is dumb.

Dismissing long Covid because “everyone would have caught Covid anyway” ignores how public health measures reduced overall infections and, by extension, long Covid cases. Long Covid has severe public health and economic impacts, affecting millions worldwide and costing trillions.

Your claim of government overreach is conspiratorial paranoia and downright unhinged (hence that presumed “truth twitch” of yours), yet these measures were implemented to save lives, based on the best available evidence at the time. The idea that this was about seizing power is unfounded and distracts from the real issues.

Here are some alternative links in place of the lancet articles:

http://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2405-7
http://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.abd9338
http://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2404-8