Children born over the past year of lockdowns – at a time when the Government has prevented babies from seeing elderly relatives and other extended family members, from socialising at parks or with the children of their parent’s friends, and from studying the expressions on the faces behind the masks of locals in indoor public spaces – have significantly reduced verbal, motor and overall cognitive performance compared to children born before, according to a new U.S. study. Tests on early learning, verbal development and non-verbal development all produced results that were far behind those from the years preceding the lockdowns.
The Guardian has more.
With limited stimulation at home and less interaction with the world outside, pandemic-era children appear to have scored shockingly low on tests designed to assess cognitive development, said lead study author Sean Deoni, Associate Professor of Paediatrics (Research) at Brown University.
In the decade preceding the pandemic, the mean IQ score on standardised tests for children aged between three months and three years of age hovered around 100, but for children born during the pandemic that number tumbled to 78, according to the analysis, which is yet to be peer-reviewed. …
The study included 672 children from the state of Rhode Island. Of these, 188 were born after July 2020 and 308 were born prior to January 2019, while 176 were born between January 2019 and March 2020. The children included in the study were born full-term, had no developmental disabilities and were mostly white.
Those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds fared worse in the tests, the researchers found.
The biggest reason behind the falling scores is likely the lack of stimulation and interaction at home, said Deoni. “Parents are stressed and frazzled… that interaction the child would normally get has decreased substantially.”
Whether these lower cognitive scores will have a long-term impact is unclear. In the first few years of life, the foundations for cognition are laid, much like building a house – it’s easier to add rooms or flourishes when you’re building the foundation, Deoni said. “The ability to course-correct becomes smaller, the older that child gets.”
Given this data comes from a relatively affluent part of the U.S., where social support and unemployment benefits are generous, the fear is that things could be worse in poorer parts of the country and the world, he added.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Lockdown enthusiast Stuart Ritchie is sceptical about these findings.
Sorry, but there's no way the absolutely massive IQ difference in this study is real. An average IQ of 100 for kids born before the pandemic compared to an average of 79 during it? No – sorry, just too huge an effect to be plausible. https://t.co/o1SwlGuIT0
— Stuart Ritchie(@StuartJRitchie) August 13, 2021
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.
The existence/origin of the virus doesn’t matter: it’s the lockdown that has trashed our civilisation.
The lab origin is key to discrediting both “The Science” and the people who did the trashing.
No it really isn’t: lockdown never made sense irrespective of where the virus came from. It was a political decision, not a medical one.
Exactly, and the Wuhan leak blows the political motivations wide open.
As an aside, I don’t believe in lockdowns at all, but a leak probably justifies them more than a natural origin for the simple reason that one might assume a man made virus to be potentially or actually much more dangerous and unprecedented in its effects. That’s assuming you didn’t already know its effects which it seems, given what’s coming out, they may well have done.
All helps to uncover the nine pathetic lies as outlined by Yeadon.
Novelty, lethality, lack of prior immunity, lack of existing treatments, efficacy of testing, asymptomatic transmission, efficacy of masks, efficacy of lockdowns, danger of variants.
They knew the effects of said virus perfectly well by 19th March 2020, 100%, when they downgraded the severity level of Covid19 officially on the gov.uk website, citing low overall mortality rates as the reason for the downgrade. So you might be able to make a case for applying some caution up to that point, in theory, when they might have been able to say they had genuine concern, because an IFR of 3.4% was being bandied around, but as soon as it was established that “the virus” was no more lethal than common flu, which they definitely did know by 19th March 2020, there was no longer any justification fdor any further measures.
19th March 2020 was just before the first lockdown. We’re still living the nightmare, in a more advanced form, 15+ months down the line.
This is a fundamentally important but often overlooked fact which blows the government narrative out of the water. It is something everyone should work to promote to people who believe in the government narrative, because you can show them the gov.uk webpage which still has the announcement of it being downgraded up for all to see. I presume it serves some kind of legal purpose.
Status of COVID-19
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#status-of-covid-19
As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK. There are many diseases which can cause serious illness which are not classified as HCIDs.
The 4 nations public health HCID group made an interim recommendation in January 2020 to classify COVID-19 as an HCID. This was based on consideration of the UK HCID criteria about the virus and the disease with information available during the early stages of the outbreak. Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.
Our last warning if we heed it and if it’s not too late.
No. Mark my words, the Collapse of the Lab Leak Theory will show you that people are sheep and they’ll quickly forget that the mainstream media lied to them for so long and persecuted anyone who told the truth. The mainstream media took hold of the narrative by filing a Freedom of Information Request for Fauci’s emails and they’ll take the story anywhere they like from now on.
2 + 2 = 5 and we’ve always been at war with Eurasia. And men can have babies as long as they don’t participate in women’s sports. Any more. Or something.
If President Trump had been shown evidence of the lab leak by US intelligence then they would have shared this intelligence and all knew there was this possibility. I do feel if it turns out to be true, which it is certainly looking the case, the suppression of this by scientists raises what else have they suppressed and who can actually be trusted. Scientists and experts clearly can’t be trusted.
And did some use this to bring down the president of the USA? And all those people who have tried to say anyone questioning China is racist and all that Chinese money invested in western economies and western research? The implications seem huge. Many have been moving away from google, Facebook etc but now will there be a real movement away from them to more independent platforms.
Back last May people commenting here did raise the possibility that the government thought they were dealing with a bio weapons attack. But none of this means that the pandemic preparedness plan should have been jettisoned for lockdowns.
It came from Chimerica.
Natalie Winters in The National Pulse highlights a NIH hosted conference in 2011 at which CCP scientists (no other sort in China and perhaps even Chimerica) spoke of the lack of regulation in China (as an advantage perhaps).
While speaking at the event via telephone, Yuan Zhiming repeatedly emphasized that his lab and China lacked any meaningful regulation of dual-use research.
“There’s no regulation in China, there’s no regulation on the identification of some dual-use research, and there’s no regulation on the classification of research or the classification of information,” he explained.
https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/nih-hosted-wuhan-lab-director-asserting-no-regulation/
“no other sort in China”. And what are communists famous for? I suspect it’s not truth. We desperately need more truth in science and medicine.
(And nothing anti-Chinese people btw. We have nothing against the real Chinese government in Taiwan, or the brave democracy activists in Hong Kong).
Not as if we weren’t warned.
by the lights of perverted science …
Yet in holding scientific discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
“Engineered mice with humanised lungs”? v What the hell?
Tolkien had it right with his opprobrium towards crossing man with orcs. Biological experimentation is going to be an absolute nightmare this century, I fear.
I’m sceptical
They can squash trends and news if they want to (Biden Jnr)
This is being allowed
Why??
I’m sceptical too. Not much of a bioweapon! Most people who die ‘from covid’ are elderly with comorbidities. And the virus still hasn’t been isolated and purified. But if they are saying that the virus is an escaped bioweapon then they can keep ramping up the fear element, and it is this ramped-up fear that is really the weapon.
Just because it escaped from a lab doesn’t mean it’s a bioweapon – as I understand it, they were doing research into viruses in the Wuhan lab – research which may be of questionable wisdom due to leaks, but nevertheless research, not weapons manufacturing.
Anyway, releasing a virus as a weapon that kills billions isn’t a very smart idea, as it will kill your own citizens and your export markets.
No, you need a bioweapon that causes just enough disturbance to be seen as a novel threat, but not one that takes out police and government.
You want to reorganise society not destroy all the profitable bits.
Indeed. I don’t think that’s what they did, but it has worked out like that. I do think that once it leaked they cottoned on pretty quickly to how well the theatre worked.
Tell the average person in the street that the virus was made in a lab and that this was known and covered up
They will be more scared, not less
And they will blame the Chinese, or the Americans, depending on their political persuasion
I don’t see how this helps us. The subtlety that it shows a pattern of deception will be lost on most people. The basic lies that need to be exposed – that covid was an exceptional public health emergency and that the lunatic measures taken and the dodgy vaccines were needed – will remain unaffected.
I always thought that Sars-cov2 was lab created because I had done a fair bit of research into virology prior to this and was horrified to see how gain of function experiments were being done. Relatively benign animal viruses (that only transmitted between animals in restricted ways, like when sheep rub their eyes together) were being aerosolised.
Most of the funding for this research was coming from Homeland Security and the Department of Defence.
The virologists themselves, though they purport to be doing medical; research must all have security clearance to work in these labs.
https://thebulletin.org/2019/08/is-there-a-role-for-the-biological-weapons-convention-in-oversight-of-lab-created-potential-pandemic-pathogens/
Research by Ron Fouchier in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka in Madison, Wisconsin marked the beginning of a “research enterprise” aimed at creating mammalian-airborne-transmissible, highly-pathogenic, avian-influenza live viruses. Such viruses could be transmitted through the air, similar to seasonal human influenza. Through November 2018, 14 laboratories have been identified in this enterprise.
These viruses are examples of lab-created potentially pandemic pathogens that bring up questions reflecting real concerns: Should details of this dual-use research be published? Could lab-created potentially pandemic pathogens be accidentally released from a laboratory into the community and seed a human pandemic? Could they be employed as biological weapons?
The probability of accidental release into the community from one of the laboratories in this research enterprise is uncomfortably high. For these and other lab-created potentially pandemic pathogens, just one laboratory-infected researcher could seed a pandemic. Concern over a pandemic from a research enterprise laboratory release should rival our grave concern over a natural pandemic; the likelihood of both is similar. Furthermore, a laboratory worker with hostile intent could introduce a potentially pandemic pathogen into the community.
Chimeric mice are routinely used in laboratories to test the effect of these new viruses or toxins. So the mice are used in the experiment, but they contain tissues that have been humanised so the researchers can see exactly how the toxin would work in a human.
I do not think there can be much doubt that the Sars-Cov 2 virus was well understood before it was released.
Whoever did it knew it would be sufficiently different to create an emergency, but not so pathogenic it would cause massive deaths – and they would not want the army and all essential workers dropping dead en masse.
Another point is, that Sars-cov-2 has an exact tropism for human cells and cannot infect bat cells. Quite apart from the signs that the spike has been artificially modified, the exact tropism for human cells and its inability to infect its purported animal host, with the absence of an intermediate host – these make the claims that it is our intrusion into natural habitats that is causing animal viruses to jump utter rubbish.
A fascinating article, thanks. Such essays are one of the best things about this site.
If the virus did indeed come from a lab, especially if it was engineered, then the consequences for public faith in science and experts will indeed be incalculable.
But isn’t there an even bigger scandal on the horizon, ready to dwarf the lab-leak theory? What if the Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin based treatments are indeed highly effective against covid-19, as is increasingly be plausibly claimed? How are ‘The Science’ and the Medical Establishment, as well as the media censors, going to explain why they supressed this?
An accidental lab leak is one thing. But the deliberate suppression of cheap and almost risk-free treatments for the resulting disease is on a whole larger scale. How many deaths could that have caused? And who pays the penalty?
And looking beyond that, I can’t help spying a cloud – as yet no bigger than a man’s hand – which may pass quietly, or may not. What if the vaccines do indeed entail serious medium- and long-term side effects? And hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of people have been injected with the stuff? Including a very large proportion of the adult populations of Western societies, and – if ‘The Science’ gets its way – the children as well?
Heaven only knows what we’ve done.