This article considers the effectiveness of lockdowns, face masks and vaccination programmes vis-à-vis mitigating COVID-19, with an epilogue on excess deaths.
In the autumn of 2019 a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, began to circulate widely but at a low level. In March 2020, as the influenza season in the Northern Hemisphere subsided, due to a drop in viral interference SARS-CoV-2 surged and became the dominant respiratory virus. COVID-19 spread from China around the world, suppressing influenza, whilst leaving the other human-infecting coronaviruses undisturbed. The vast majority of countries reacted to COVID-19 by imposing non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as lockdowns and facemask policies and, later, vaccination programmes.
Whilst some epidemiological modelling studies give credence to the effectiveness of lockdowns, most studies based on empirical data concluded that lockdowns had little or no effect on COVID-19 transmission, cases or deaths. The collateral damage caused by lockdowns impacted health, economic, social, political, legal, policing and transport issues. Health issues included delayed and missed healthcare, immunity debt, accidents, deaths, mental health, reduced fertility, an increase in obesity, an increase in smoking and alcohol and drug abuse, higher taxes, higher inflation, more people on benefits, waste (test and trace, personal protective equipment and hotel quarantine) and fraud (Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme payments). Children missed school, which compromised their development, communication skills, education and physical and mental health. Lockdowns also generated a workshy workforce and normalised truancy. Lockdowns exacerbated inequalities, too, with the poor being the worst affected. In the Third World, matters were even worse. The United Nations reported that hunger led to the deaths of 10,000 more children per month over the first year of the pandemic. It also estimated that disruptions in South Asia in 2020 likely contributed to 228,000 deaths among children under five years old. The benefits of lockdowns included reduced air pollution, fewer road traffic collisions and a drop in suicide rates. Overall, lockdowns failed a cost-benefit analysis by orders of magnitude. Lockdowns were implemented by governments due to pressure from the WHO and a well-funded international pandemic preparedness lobby, overly pessimistic modelling, risk aversion and the desire to be seen to take action. Lockdowns were then sustained because the media spread fear, whilst the public became fearful, abandoned the care of public affairs to the government-media-education class, trusted leaders and assumed that because governments implemented lockdowns they must work, making them motivated to virtue-signal and support them. Meanwhile, politicians were motivated to retain or seek power, so keen to appease the median voter, and maintained lockdowns, despite the economic and health damage they caused. A vicious circle developed: fear sustained lockdowns and lockdowns sustained fear.
Face masks were not effective at mitigating COVID-19, but can cause dyspnoea, hypoxia, hypoxemia and hypercapnia, harbour pathogens, compromise communication, vision, exercise capacity, cognition and immunity, cause headaches, skin complaints, bad breath and particulate inhalation, facilitate crime and lead to pollution. The only effective use for surgical masks and N95 respirators is for splash and droplet protection in healthcare. P100 respirators are effective (but only for the wearer) against COVID-19. The sad thing is that we’ve not learnt anything new about masks. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, and with reference to an influenza pandemic, meta-analyses of RCTs on community masking published by the WHO and the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed no benefit. During the pandemic there were various low-quality observational studies that appeared to show benefit. Then after the pandemic, in 2023, an update to the Cochrane review confirmed that there was no significant evidence that wearing masks in the community reduces the spread of colds, influenza or COVID-19. So we’ve gone full circle, and back where we started before the pandemic: masks don’t work.
In December 2020 COVID-19 vaccination programmes were introduced. The vaccinations failed to provide sterilising immunity or stop transmission. The vaccination exhibits negative efficacy for the first two weeks, probably due to immunosuppression, which increases cases, hospitalisations and deaths. The vaccine, in the pre-Omicron era, then may have provided some protection against hospitalisation and death for the not previously infected for several months, before it waned towards and below zero effectiveness. Because those with ‘breakthrough’ infections may exhibit lesser symptoms, but have a similar viral load to the unvaccinated, they may be more likely to inadvertently spread COVID-19 to others and become superspreaders. In May 2021 the Delta variant appeared triggering new waves and from December 2021 the less severe Omicron variant appeared. The variant displaced harmless cold-causing human coronaviruses, and influenza returned. Vaccination programmes led to the immune system, via original antigenic sin, being fixed for earlier strains, leaving it less able to provide effective responses during subsequent infections. This enabled the natural selection of immune escape subvariants that are highly infectious. We ended up with antibody-dependent enhancement of the disease, vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease and the rapid spread of Omicron among the vaccinated leading to more cases, hospitalisations and deaths. The constant reinfection from an evolving cloud of variants leads to immunosuppression, secondary infections and superinfections. SARS-CoV-2 and mRNA vaccines can both induce cells in various parts of the body to produce the spike protein for months, leading to inflammation and adverse events. Repeated mRNA vaccinations increase IgG4 antibodies, induce partial immune tolerance and weaken the immune system. Because the vaccines did not prevent transmission and may have increased infection rates, the unvaccinated did not impose a negative externality on others, meaning there were no medical or ethical grounds for making vaccinations mandatory or for vaccine passports.
The populations of East Asia, Southeast Asia and Australasia may have had greater pre-existing immunity (from other coronaviruses) against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 due to their closer proximity to the origin of COVID-19, leading to low infection rates until Omicron. Global excess mortality, earlier largely involving COVID-19 and iatrogenic (treatment-related) harm, and later often related to cardiovascular issues, has continued to be significantly elevated since COVID-19 appeared, largely due to both COVID-19 and the vaccinations (directly, indirectly, in combination and over the short and longer-term) and the collateral damage caused by lockdowns.
A seasonal influenza-like illness became a pandemic of governmental overreach and collective hysteria. Lockdowns turned out to be the greatest health economics mistake in modern history, face masks served no useful purpose in the community, in schools or in healthcare, whilst vaccinations were likely somewhat effective against severe COVID-19 in the not-previously-infected elderly in 2021, but ultimately probably did more harm than good. It seems likely that we would have been better off doing nothing. Next time, we really should keep calm and carry on.
Dr. Martin Sewell is a quant researcher. This is a summary of his comprehensive new paper on COVID-19 and global policy responses. Follow him on X.
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.