I blew it when I predicted in 2020 that the Covid scare would be like the many scares before it, much hyped but not nearly as deadly as the fear mongers suggested it would be. But I was spot on when I pushed back against the lockdown being pushed by the Imperial College London crowd (which recommendations were ultimately adopted by most nations). So concludes a new paper out of Johns Hopkins University, “A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality,”
As summarized in National Review, the “paper starts by noting that “an often cited model simulation study by researchers at the Imperial College London (Ferguson et al. (2020)) predicted that a suppression strategy based on a lockdown would reduce COVID-19 mortality by up to 98%.” The Imperial College simulation was among the sources used by public-health authorities to justify the earliest lockdowns. It turned out to be more than 98 percent wrong. According to the authors, the most-precise studies found no statistically significant effect of lockdowns on mortality.”
Countless trillions of dollars were wasted, millions of lives were impoverished, and the education of an entire generation was undercut. All for nothing. Will we keep that in mind the next time the government screams “follow the science”? Here’s another prediction. Probably not. I fear we have become a nation of hyper risk adverse (and therefore deeply compliant) sheep-le.