“Ill-Founded” Lockdowns Had “Little To No Public Health Effect”; Analysis Of 24 Studies Concludes

By Tyler Durden,  ZEROHEDGE      FEB 01, 2022 – 09:00 PM

Authored by Ivan Pentchoukov via The Epoch Times,

Lockdown measures used by governments worldwide to reduce the death toll from the pandemic had little or no impact on COVID-19 mortality, according to three researchers who analyzed 24 studies.

The researchers, led by Steve Hanke, the co-founder of The Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise, screened 18,590 studies to select the 24 papers used for the final analysis.

They concluded that lockdowns in Europe and the United States reduced the mortality from COVID-19 by 0.2 percent on average. Shelter-in-place orders reduced mortality by 2.9 percent on average, they found.

“While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted,” the researchers wrote.

“In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.”

The study specifically looked at mandated government measures, including mask mandates and travel bans, rather than voluntary measures.

Of all the lockdown measures analyzed, the closure of non-essential business appeared to have the largest impact, reducing COVID-19 mortality by 10.6 percent on average, the study found. The researchers speculate that this is largely due to the closure of bars.

“Only business closure consistently shows evidence of a negative relationship with COVID-19 mortality, but the variation in the estimated effect is large. Three studies find little to no effect, and three find large effects. Two of the larger effects are related to closing bars and restaurants,” the study states.

The study found that lockdowns and limiting gatherings slightly increased COVID-19 mortality by 0.6 percent and 1.6 percent respectively.

“Overall, we conclude that lockdowns are not an effective way of reducing mortality rates during a pandemic, at least not during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic,” the researchers wrote.

The finding of the meta-analysis is in line with an analysis of 100 COVID-19 studies published in September last year, which concluded “that lockdowns have had, at best, a marginal effect on the number of Covid-19 deaths.”

Meanwhile, the conclusion contrasts with a late 2020 meta-analysis that found that lockdowns successfully reduced COVID-19 mortality. The researchers in the Johns Hopkins study point out that the 2020 analysis used several modeling studies “which we have explicitly excluded.”

While having little to no impact on COVID-19 mortality, lockdowns had a significant effect on people suffering from other ailments.

Lockdowns led to some 40 percent of American adults delaying or avoiding getting urgent medical care in June 2020. In the U.K., lockdown-related delays to lung cancer diagnoses could lead to 2,500 extra deaths, according to an analysis by the UK Lung Cancer Coalition.

February 2, 2022 | 7 Comments »

Leave a Reply

7 Comments / 7 Comments

  1. Thank you, Peloni.

    This is true even when the bad behavior in question includes creating genocidal viruses. In truth, their is no incentive for them to stop their bad behavior, quite the opposite, in fact.

    We seem to have raised a whole generation who believe the answer to all this is to “go with the flow”.

    We are only following orders! You understand.

    https://youtu.be/XfbiStS1kG4

  2. @Adam
    NeoCov is a virus that was first isolated in ~2013. Its importance is due to its related similarities to MERS.

    The origin of MERS has never actually been determined. It is conjectured that MERS underwent a species hop after mutating in a camel or some other intermediate host. This theory, however, is likely just to cover for the very real possibility that MERS was more credibly presumed to be the product of a viral escape/release from some lab.

    They went looking for some evolutionary link to MERS in the wild and the nearest virus they found was NeoCov, which has an 85% similarity to MERS. This 85% value is meant to confuse people into thinking that it is very similar, but 85% is actually not very similar at all. It is claimed, however, that the functional aspects of the two viruses are very similar, and perhaps that much is true. In any case, the recent news story that was cited in JPOST and elsewhere, relates the fact that NeoCov virus has been discovered to be within a single mutation of being capable of infecting humans. They know this is true because the Bat Lady, Shi Zhengli, proved this by actually introducing the mutation to this virus and demonstrating that it could, in fact, cause human infections after the single mutation. She then took the human infecting form of NeoCov (hNeoCov) and demonstrated that the antibodies from SARS-Cov2 and those from MERS both failed to provide any neutralizing protection to hNeoCov. It is claimed that hNeoCov could kill 30% of the people infected with it. This is pretty much what is known of NeoCov. I may be alone, but my spidey senses are flying off the scale at the very real potential in which this supposed finding may be used to manipulate either a new experimental vaccine or a new pandemic. And the Bat Lady already has the hNeoCov ready to go.

    Personally, I am more interested in finding a antibody that will neutralize the researchers who are pursuing these Gain-of-Function projects, than the potential gains against an imagined virus that these researchers are hypothetically trying to protect us from. The simple reality is that they used Gain-of-Function research to develop a virus, SARS-Cov2, that escaped or was released in 2019 and which murdered millions of people while significantly harming the health of hundreds of millions of others, not to mention the social upset and financial redistribution that has taken place as a consequence of their irresponsible actions. The penalty for this was that those who were involved in developing this bioweapon became much more wealthy and much more powerful. Such positive reinforcement has never resulted in halting such reinforced bad behaviors. This is true even when the bad behavior in question includes creating genocidal viruses. In truth, their is no incentive for them to stop their bad behavior, quite the opposite, in fact.

  3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z8XsTtUHwE

    WION also has an excellent report about the “new” coronavirus, dubbed “NeoCoV” by the Wuhan lab. They claim it originated in South African bats. But it somehow made its way to the Wuhan lab, where the “scientists” there warn it is only “one small step away” from a mutation that will enable it to be transmitted from human to human. Would kill one out of every people infected they claim.

  4. @Peloni–is there anything additional that you can find out about this new, allegedly very lethal coronavirus , “NeoCoV?” Any thought you may be able to share with us about it will be appreciated. Thanks.

  5. From today’s Jerusalem Post:

    The very same people who gave us SARS2-Covid19, the very same viral “research” lab in Wuhan, is in the process of developing a far, more deadly coronavirus–presumably because CV2 has not been effective enough in destroying the Western world. This new coronavirus, like CV2, is being developed from bats. They are trying to make it transmissible from human to human, and say they are only “one step away” from achieving this. Undoubtedly “”bat woman is in her element.

    A new lethal virus known as NeoCoV has been discovered, and it may be more transmissible – with one mutation – according to a new study by Chinese scientists from Wuhan, though some experts are cautioning that further study is needed. It has not yet made the leap to humans.
    According to the study, which is in preprint and is therefore not yet peer-reviewed, the NeoCoV variant is a type of coronavirus originally discovered in South Africa. However, it isn’t entirely new. According to the researchers, the NeoCoV variant is linked to the MERS-CoV virus, also known as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), which had outbreaks in several countries in the Middle East before.
    Top Articles By JPost

    Read More
    COVID-19 and the rise of home births – opinion

    Like other coronaviruses, which refers to a type of virus and not specifically to COVID-19, it is not unprecedented for it to exist in animals as well as humans. Right now, NeoCoV is only known to spread among bats, but can it transmit to humans?
    According to the Wuhan researchers, the answer is yes, and it is only one mutation away from becoming dangerous for human life.
    Further, according to the study, antibodies targeting both SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19, and MERS-CoV were not able to stop NeoCoV.
    A logo is pictured on the World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. (credit: REUTERS/ DENIS BALIBOUSE)
    A logo is pictured on the World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. (credit: REUTERS/ DENIS BALIBOUSE)
    However, the World Health Organization (WHO) cautioned against making such conclusions before further study can be done.
    “Whether the virus detected in the study will pose a risk for humans will require further study,” the organization told Russian news agency TASS, adding that it “works closely” with the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the UN Environment Program (UNEP) in order to “monitor and respond to the threat of emerging zoonotic viruses.”

    Tags Coronavirus Wuhan COVID-19 Coronavirus Mutation Assuta Health
    Sign up for The Jerusalem Post Premium Plus for just $5
    Upgrade your reading experience with an ad-free environment and exclusive content