As we tot up the unintended consequences of lockdowns across the world, it’s worth bearing in mind that the quarantining of entire countries for extended periods of time is a new and untried strategy for managing a pandemic. Historically, there are very few examples of lockdowns being used before. The earliest historical example I can find is Florence in 1631, when an outbreak of the plague killed 12% of the population. More recently, Mexico in 2009, during the first days of an H1N1 influenza outbreak, isolated those suspected of being infected, closed schools, banned public gatherings and cancelled a regional soccer tournament. But those measures weren’t replicated in other countries and Mexico abandoned them after 18 days, partly due to the mounting social and economic costs.
We’re often told by lockdown enthusiasts that those US cities that introduced extreme social distancing measures during the Spanish flu pandemic experienced fewer deaths than those that didn’t. But those measures stopped well short of a full lockdown. For instance, in St Louis, which is often held up as a model of how to manage the current pandemic, churches and schools were closed, business hours were restricted and people were ordered to wear mask in public, but the city never issued a stay-at-home order and only cancelled business activity entirely for about forty-eight hours.
Also worth noting that lockdowns weren’t even suggested during America’s deadliest bouts of seasonal flu since 1919. In 1967-68, flu killed about 100,000 Americans and in 1957-58 it killed about 116,000. As of yesterday, the COVID-19 death toll in the US was just over 100,000. As a side note, it now looks almost certain that the outbreak in Germany, which Angela Merkel described as the worst crisis to afflict the country since the Second World War, will kill fewer people than the seasonal influenza outbreak in 2018 – and no thanks to the lockdown Chancellor Merkel ordered. Der Spiegel has published the daily mortality figures for Germany, which show infections beginning to fall before the more extreme measures were introduced. And there’s been no sustained uptick in infections in Germany since the the lockdown was lifted, something that’s also true of every other country – and every US state – that’s eased extreme social distancing measures.
So why the rush to lock down citizens across the world in response to coronavirus? It’s all the more surprising when you bear in mind that the World Health Organisation (WHO) specifically recommended against quarantining as a strategy for managing the outbreak of a flu-like pandemic in a report it published in 2019. This was drawn to my attention by a reader with a background in epidemiology and public health who says she’s been horrified by the unquestioning acceptance of the Covid response measures by her colleagues whom she expected to be more capable of critical thought. The WHO report even stopped short of recommending the quarantining of exposed individuals. No doubt some people will point out that COVID-19 isn’t a flu-like illness, so more drastic measures are called for. But the WHO report says that quarantining wouldn’t have done any good as a way to mitigate the impact of Spanish flu, a much more deadly virus than SARS-CoV-2.
What changed the WHO’s mind and prompted it to praise the response of the Chinese authorities in Hubei province, which included the virtual incarceration of 60 million people? It was this, more than anything else, that persuaded governments across the world to lockdown their citizens.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“Net Zero Will Require a Command Economy”
Perhaps this gives a clue as to its popularity with the group that fancies doing lots of “commanding”.
Well there are just to many of us nasty human beings. Depopulation is the only answer I wonder how they will address this issue.
Interestingly the elite never suggest killing off the oldies at age 70 as a way to control population. I guess because Soros & the gang are oldies themselves.
None of it will ever apply to them. They are the Prize Pigs.
De-population?????? How do you propose we go about that? In reality it is the poorest countries who have the highest birthrates. Once a country becomes prosperous its birthrates fall to that seen in the wealthy west. So the answer to your alleged problem of too many people is wealth. ———-Ironically there is only one way that poor countries can become prosperous and that is by using the same fuels as we did ——Coal gas and oil. Fobbing poor people off with wind turbines is condemning them to misery and poverty for decades to come.
Great article, even if CO2 is the problem net zero is totally unachievable without a huge drop in our standard of living. That won’t go down to well with the electorate, that’s if you believe we are still living in a democracy.
To what extent is CO2 “the problem”? Remember that there is no evidence that CO2 is causing or will cause dangerous changes to climate. ——-But CO2 is something else. It is the one gas that can be directly tied to Industrial Capitalism , and that is what all of this is really about. Notice is always the progressive left and Communists who harp on about the climate. because it is a tool to redistribute and control the worlds wealth and resources. CO2 is the Globalist bureaucrats dream gas. It allows them to put in place policies they have long demanded, and they have the plausible excuse of climate to help them achieve that.
Of course Net Zero requires a central planning, command and control economy – it’s a Socialist wealth redistribution project.
Anyone not having seen that with the whole 30 year long global warming/climate change hoax has not been paying attention.
It is why it is so popular with the German Greens and the EU – nothing says central economic planning and control like the EU.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/israel-palestine-conflict-connecting-dots-more/5835802?doing_wp_cron=1697106680.1301569938659667968750
The best explanation of the Israel “war.”
Exellent, accurate, historically factual and spot on account.
Remember, it’s not just about the control of finance, land and resources, it’s far more sinister than that.
Thanking you for this link.
Oh well, you can’t even talk to normal people about this anymore!
Fat Pig News Investigates!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIO3fJpnXLE
People will not be permitted to vote against the policies of the political class. The nationalist parties were only permitted to flourish in the interests of splitting up the UK. Now that is achieved they will not get such an easy ride.
The Greens were allowed to kick start the policies the political class had already adopted. Now they are just a nuisance.
The chances of a new party are insignificant. Worth trying but with a minimal chance of having any impact. CBDC will not permit donations to them.
What a cheery article.
So Britain will become a North Korea type hermit state. A glowing example of a stale miserable, soul crushing, anti-human ideology.
It will probably need North Korean levels of indoctrination and repression to achieve too.
We’re still in time to vote against it in the next election… oh, yeah, no we can’t because both Team A and Team B are pushing it. Oh well….
Perhaps if enough commentators raise the alarm and plead with the powers that be to be reasonable,.like kowtowing supplicant before an emperor, maybe they’ll relax the goals and crush us into submission a little bit more slowly and gently.
That’s democracy folks.
throwing all that labour into Net Zero
I suggest a slightly different spelling: Throwing all that Labour into Net Zero. Makes much more sense in this way.
This conclusion is indeed what is happening already . We are being commanded to buy electric cars , heat pumps and expensive , unreliable wind and solar energy . The only way it will actually happen is in a Dictatorship like China and I fear our young are stupid enough to vote in a Dictator . It will be too late by the time they realise that their fate is sealed .
It’s been obvious all along. Net Zero is just communism rebranded.
CO2 will not kill us all, in fact it won’t kill anyone due to emissions. But getting to utterly worthless Net Zero will kill quite a few of us and it’ll bring the country to its knees. Net Zero must be stopped and the grifters getting rich off of it need to be jailed.
Net Zero comes from the Maurice Strong School of thought that that thinks that Industrial society should be destroyed and he said “Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about”? ——-Our own globalist parasite politicians are fully onboard with this impoverishment of their own citizens and they are a diabolical disgrace. Not one of them questioned the Net Zero amendment to the Climate Change act in 2019. No questions about cost or benefit were ever asked, and the cost to people in terms of their wallets, their standard of living, welfare and health will be enormous. The political class are squirming UN lackey parasites.
Personally I think NetZero is cloud cuckoo land.
not enough electricity
unsustainable energy sources: wind,solar, battery
a massive rethink is necessary.
“Net Zero Will Require a Command Economy and Massive Drop in Living Standards” – but surely that’s the point? Do people seriously think that Net Zero is about protecting the environment? Or that lockdowns, social distancing and jabs are about preventing the spread of infectious disease? Or that Wokeism is about combatting racism? Or that ESG scores are about creating a fairer society? Or that the Transgender movement is concerned about homosexual and transgender people? Or that Militant Veganism is about animal welfare? Or that the Communist and Socialist ideologies of the last century were about helping ordinary, working people?
It won’t be an issue that the climate hasn’t stopped “changing” by 2050, just like it wasn’t an issue that covid hadn’t disappeared after weeks of lockdown. It will just be our fault for not doing it all soon enough, hard enough, and long enough, so the answer will be to do it all even sooner and harder and longer.