Who would have thought it? A new landmark meta-study by researchers at Johns Hopkins University and Sweden’s Lund University has concluded that that draconian restrictions imposed on the British population in the spring of 2020 saved fewer than 1,700 lives in England and Wales and were “a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs”. The Telegraph has more.
Scientists from Johns Hopkins University and Lund University examined almost 20,000 studies on measures taken to protect populations against Covid across the world.
Their findings suggest that lockdowns in response to the first wave of the pandemic, when compared with less strict policies adopted by the likes of Sweden, prevented as few as 1,700 deaths in England and Wales. In an average week there are around 11,000 deaths in England and Wales.
The report authors said their findings showed that the draconian measures had a “negligible impact” on Covid mortality and were a “policy failure of gigantic proportions”.
Johns Hopkins is one of the most respected medical schools in the world and became known during the pandemic for its Covid dashboard measuring cases and deaths all over the world.
The study’s authors conclude: “The science of lockdowns is clear; the data are in: the deaths saved were a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs imposed.”
The detrimental impact of lockdown on children’s health and education, on economic growth and its contribution to large increases in public debt has become increasingly clear since the policy was introduced.
However, The Telegraph recently revealed that a secretive government unit worked with social media companies during the pandemic in an attempt to curtail criticism of controversial lockdown policies.
The Covid Disinformation Unit monitored social media and asked tech companies to remove posts it considered to be “potentially harmful content”.
Britain’s first lockdown, in March 2020, was introduced on the basis of modelling exercises from Prof Neil Ferguson which had predicted there could be more than 500,000 deaths in the UK, without action to stop the spread of the virus.
His research had suggested that even with mitigations such as social distancing, and household quarantines for Covid cases, there could be at least 250,000 deaths, unless further measures were taken.
The new study on the impact of lockdowns is published in a report by the Institute of Economic Affairs out on Monday.
Across Europe, countries which embarked on lockdowns saw 6,000 fewer deaths than if they had embarked on a less draconian approach, while the US could have seen 4,000 fewer deaths, they conclude.
By contrast, modelling by Prof Ferguson and his colleagues from Imperial College London in March 2020 had predicted that, without action, the UK could see 510,000 deaths from Covid, with 2.2 million in the United States.
After lockdown was imposed, the scientist suggested that “intense social distancing and other interventions now in place” could reduce that figure to 20,000 in the UK.
The Covid Inquiry is set to examine the Government’s decision making during the pandemic but it has already been the subject of significant criticism relating to its speed, scope and transparency.
Researchers for the Johns Hopkins study said the findings showed that lockdowns had been “a global policy failure of gigantic proportions”.
Co-author Dr. Lars Jonung, professor emeritus at the Knut Wicksell Centre for Financial Studies at Sweden’s Lund University, said the study was the first to fully evaluate the impact of mandatory restrictions.
He said: “It demonstrates that lockdowns were a failed promise. They had negligible health effects but disastrous economic, social and political costs to society. Most likely lockdowns represent the biggest policy mistake in modern times.”
Prof. Steve H. Hanke, co-author and professor of applied economics and co-director of the Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise at Johns Hopkins University: said: “When it comes to Covid, epidemiological models have many things in common: dubious assumptions, hair-raising predictions of disaster that miss the mark, and few lessons learned.”
The researchers examined 19,646 potentially relevant studies, selecting 22 with standardised measures for meta analysis.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: The conclusions of Dr. Lars Jonung and Prof. Steve Hanke et al are remarkably similar to those of Kevin Bardosh, which we reported on last week. Having reviewed 600 papers looking at the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions during the pandemic, Bardosh concluded that the collateral damage was “substantial, wide-ranging and will leave behind a legacy of harm for hundreds of millions of people”.
Stop Press 2: The Telegraph has another story, providing more detail on the researchers’ findings, here. In addition, two of the researchers have written a comment piece arguing that “lockdowns were a colossal global policy failure that should never be imposed again”.
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.
Does the author know something I don’t. I’m aware the animal that slaughtered three girls was a child of Rwandan parents who were supposedly Christian, but that doesn’t necessarily make the animal a Christian. I’ve been waiting for the inevitable ‘fact’ that the animal was actually a Christian member of the EDL (or something as ludicrous). Have I missed anything?
Robinson, Musk, Douglas Murray…they’re targeting more and more outspoken people and they’re going to keep going. They’re comical in their desperation. It’s also interesting to see how Americans perceive what’s happening in the UK. Mainly condemning the government, Leftards and thanking God for their guns, pitying the British for not having the same rights as them, criticizing those who let it get to this point, but I’ve seen support from other countries, people out with their pro-England banners. The UK has gone viral, basically, and the world is watching;
”Holy moly, what has happened to the home of the Magna Carta? Did MI5 rip that document to smithereens? Years ago, the wayward nitwit Prince Harry got into some hot water by dressing up as a Nazi for a costume ball. The public was aghast that a member of the Royal Family could be so daft as to minimize the atrocities of the fascist thugs who nearly conquered Europe. Little did they know that Harebrained Harry was way ahead of the game. The threat of fascism isn’t buried in Britain’s past; it’s choking Britain’s future. Maybe Meghan Markle’s leashed poodle should find his old German uniform now that Keir Starmer’s stormtroopers have taken Westminster.
At this moment, government authorities are blocking foreign I.P. addresses from accessing the United Kingdom’s police website. Apparently, the Brits have gotten their knickers in an Oliver Twist over outsiders using words that are now banned in the U.K. One freedom-curious bloke observed, “I see our police is a tad upset with Americans making fun of them.” Over there, the language enforcers are locking up Grandma and Grandpa for saying that foreigners shouldn’t be raping and murdering children, but over here, plenty of First Amendment–loving Americans are sending pictures of General George Washington kicking some serious Redcoat butt.
One transatlantic tweeter jeered, “I’ve never been more grateful that our forefathers crossed the Delaware on Christmas to kill British law enforcers.” If that sentiment doesn’t make you want to shoot off fireworks while grilling a couple ribeye steaks and revving the engine of a monster truck outside a WrestleMania grudge match, you might just be Canadian. Yucky U.K. can’t do squat when Joe America gives his two cents. So the powers that be scream at their I.T. boffins to shut down the internet, and the tech slaves do their best to comply. Surely some North Korean with a secret window to the outside world is shaking his head in disgust. As Amy Curtis over at Twitchy smartly concludes, “From ‘Keep Calm and Carry On’ to ‘your Facebook posts hurt my feels’ in 75 years.” So true. RIP, U.K.”
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/08/yucky_uk.html
Yet the international condemnation will make no more impression on our captured institutions than the astonishment at Trudeau’s overreach in Canada, over the truckers, did.
It has become an ethical priority for the progressives to lie factually about what their opponents have done or said in order to do them harm. That does not appear to count as misinformation requiring to be scoured by the team of police officers seconded from investigating actual crimes.
As regards the riots, though, has anyone arrested the Hope not Hate guy who spread the malicious rumour that a Muslim woman had been attacked with acid, thus sparking Muslim violence? I thought not.
It is very frustrating that those including Starmer who liberally spice their speech with ‘Far Right’ are not called out and held to account.
We are witnessing the usual Left and Far Left fake news misinformation and propaganda.
Specifically, what is the evidence they rely on?
Whom specifically do they identify as ‘Far Right’?
Whom specifically do they allege were the organisers of the fake 100 ‘Far Right’ demonstrations which never happened – because of course if there is anyone who is ‘Far Right’ there are so few it might be difficult for them to be in 100 different places at the same time either at all or in any numbers.
What are the names of the ‘Far Right’ groups they allege were involved – only the EDL has been named and that ceased to exist a decade ago.
What is their evidence for defaming 4 million Reform voters as ‘Far Right’?
Starmer is going to have to tread carefully on revising the Online Safety Act because unless he exempts government from its provisions he personally might find himself the subject of legal proceedings for spreading fake news and disinformation along with a lot of other politicians and government departments.
The Sunday Times was in full regime message mode yesterday, complete with “10 Years in Prison – if we see you on the street trying to make us listen (you dumb, inarticulate pleb)” headline.
Dr. Watson is right: David Clews did not “fan the flames” of the riots. Here is one fact that came to light in the DM public comments:
“Did he also say that immigrants were exposing themselves in the hotel windows, which is what started the rioters throwing things at the hotel? The real story has not been told.”
I suppose he might have done but, I guarantee, based on my own quick survey of 30, if you asked 1000 people in the street you’re unlikely to find anyone who even knows who he is…
Its the first time I’d heard of UNN tbh…..
Contrast the verbal litter of this broadcasting outfit with the state’s blasphemous use of the funeral of a murdered child to make a public service announcement by a uniformed person.
Whether this person was invited or invited themselves, their presence starkly illustrates the fact that the Service they represent only arrives after someone has been injured or killed as a result of violent crime.
The uniformed person making the address at the funeral expressed sorrow at the fact that the grieving family had to suffer the affront of the looting and arson that followed the murder of their child. As a visible representative of the state, this person made no apology for the fact that the institutions of the state have been long absent from effectively dealing with and, indeed, uninterested in, the everyday crime the ‘communities’ must endure.
Like the Roman Empire which had no police force but only a Praetorian Guard, Britain’s police service is deployed to shore up the authority of the state when it is insolently challenged by the tattooed barbarians.
All I can saw is the only people to have died in all of this are the 3 murdered girls. They are now just a footnote in history as far as the media and politicians are concerned.
Bonfire of Teenagers by Morrisey
And the silly people sing: “Don’t Look Back in Anger”
And the morons sing and sway: “Don’t Look Back in Anger”
I can assure you I will look back in anger ’till the day I die:
Government Policy on issues of concern.
If he’s a free speech absolutist, then I already like him.
“...give(s) airtime to some cringeworthy characters such as the arch conspiracy theorist David Ike and the prominent anti-vaxxer Andrew Wakefield.”
A staggering assertion by a clearly ill informed Roger Watson. The jury might be out on David Icke – he hasn’t even spelt his name correctly – although on the globalists One World Government issue he is correct but since when did “prominent anti-vaxxer” Andrew Wakefield equal “cringeworthy?”
Unbelievable.
Yes he has let himself down there and anyway they may be cringeworthy to Dr Watson but that’s just his opinion – if nobody publishes what these people say, how can we assess what we think?
https://words.mattiasdesmet.org/p/the-riots-in-great-britain-a-dream?r=ylgqf&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
I really liked Mattias Desmet’s article, highlighting the role government is playing in creating division.
Just out of interest,and as an aside does anyone know if ‘Prominent Antivaxxer’ Andrew Wakefield has an opinion on the covid jabs and if so what it is?