Though many Western countries eschewed lockdowns during the Omicron wave, a few did reintroduce major restrictions. One of these was the Netherlands.
Beginning on December 18th, ‘non-essential’ shops, bars, restaurants, gyms, museums and other public venues were shuttered. No more than two guests were allowed in people’s homes, rising to four over the Christmas period. Sports matches had to be played without spectators. And all the country’s schools were closed.
Upon announcing the measures, Prime Minister Mark Rutte said, “I stand here tonight in a sombre mood … the Netherlands will go back into lockdown from tomorrow.”
Measures were finally eased on January 26th – approximately five weeks later. What does the Netherlands have to show for these five weeks of restrictions? Absolutely nothing, as the chart below indicates:
The red shaded area shows the period for which restrictions were in place. As you can see, they had precisely zero effect on the case trajectory, which began climbing during lockdown, and then continued climbing once lockdown ended. In fact, infections didn’t peak until February 12th – another two and a half weeks later.
The Netherlands is one of the world’s most advanced countries, boasting the eighth highest score on the Human Development Index. If it can’t get a lockdown to work – after double-vaccinating 70% of the population – what chance is there for the rest of us?
It’s worth comparing what happened in the Netherlands to the course of events here in Britain – where, commendably, Boris refused to lock down (see below).
The overall shape of the curve is exactly the same as in the Netherlands. In fact, reported infections per million people peaked at a much lower level here than they did over there – 2,600 compared to 7,300.
This demonstrates, once again, that seeing infections decline shortly after a lockdown does not prove lockdown is what caused the decline. Infections have repeatedly declined in the absence of major restrictions, and sometimes without any discernible change in aggregate behaviour.
Unfortunately for the pro-lockdown scientists, the virus simply doesn’t behave in the manner their models suggest. This was evident as early as April of 2020, when Sweden’s first wave began to retreat. Yet almost two years later, they still haven’t learned their lesson.
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.
Steve Baker has a phd in “hot air”.
From fake eurosceptic to fake lockdown sceptic, this all round fake Tory backbench rebel makes career opportunism look effortless at times. Mind you, he is in good company.
Mr Crumble.
I ended all lockdown restrictions for myself ages ago.
So did I!
…..but then again, if the Prime Minister would like to take the time to invite me to number 10 and offer me the post of Junior Minister for Lockdown Enforcement I’d be quite prepared to argue for government measures to continue until the back end of 2023, at which point we can perhaps have a cabinet review of where things stand.”
As I posted earlier:
Masks, distancing, track and trace, mandatory tests, travel restrictions, caps on numbers, WFH guidance = lockdown
The 21st June will make no difference to my life. I do more or less exactly the same things now as I have done since lockdown started in March 2020, the only difference being the tennis club is open. Other than that, I don’t go anywhere or do anything that involves coronabollocks – which is more or less everything other than outdoor activity. I have continued to socialise privately, sometimes legally, sometimes illegally. But for the rest, life is over and will continue to be so, probably for decades.
Covid is great for jobswurfs. They love itvas an excuse for poor service.
Excellent !!!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd4GFaCXAKc&t=160s&ab_channel=IvorCummins
Apart from those over 80 who had two or more chronic diseases, SARS-CoV-2 has been LESS of a risk than ‘flu for the vast majority of people.
There is NO valid reason for anyone who is at minimal risk of harm from SARS-CoV-2 to have a “vaccine” for which there IS a risk of harm that is far from trivial.
The greatest danger to our long-term freedom is the “Covid Status Passport” or “Vaccine Passport”. The likes of Steve Baker, if they are not faux libetarians, must fight vigorously for the rights of everyone to refuse any medical intervention, especially any experimental drugs or treatments. It’s a fundamental right which a vaccine passport would remove whether or not that is the intention.
We MUST return to the pre-2020 way of assessing risk and the right of the individual to make their own risk assessment and not to be coerced into having a jab that carries a greater risk of harm than the disease must be protected at all costs.
After all, this is a respiratory virus that has resulted in the death rate for the UK in 2020 rising from slightly less than 1% to slightly more than 1%. This is not the “Doomsday Virus” that will, if it ever shows up, wipe out the greater part of humanity. For a virus that is essentially harmless to the vast majority of people under 65, an international vaccine passport that can be used to totally remove our rights in an instant is not needed, not warranted and must never happen.
We must not allow the medical business to gain total power over us all. Not now, not ever. It is a fundamental right that we’re allowed to refuse any forced procedure or treatment.
“Covid Status” documents ARE the end-point for this “emergency” and they have always been the plan. Resist this move to totalitarianism now while you still can.