Systemic Review of Covid Lockdowns Reveals No Benefit, Many Drawbacks

[SweetSue92]

I mean, no kidding. We knew this. But for the crowd who loves the peer-reviewed, feast your eyes below. The entire article is well worth a read.

(And the ridiculous extent of the lockdowns is like a comedy show. Grocery store arrows? Masks walking to the bathroom, but not at the table? Closing beaches and parks? Can anyone defend this now?)

Horrifying New Research into Damage from Covid Lockdowns​

A massive new systematic review of over 130 studies of Covid policies was published recently in Health Affairs Scholar by writers from the Department of Health Policy, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health in Indianapolis, synthesizing the research into ancillary outcomes from lockdowns, school closures, and other mandates. The goal of this systematic review was to find the “unintended health effects” resulting from those policies. Essentially, putting Covid aside, what were the results when it came to various important measures of health?

They write that while policymakers and public health authorities have produced years of reports and lectures on the importance of mandates and lockdowns in reducing viral transmission, there’s a large “gap in the literature” regarding what other impacts may have resulted from “shelter-in-place/stay-at-home orders, workplace closures, and school closures.”

While peer-review isn’t a guarantee of accuracy, all 132 studies included in the analysis were peer-reviewed. Those 132 studies resulted in finding over 450 unique outcomes. And spoiler alert, the overwhelming majority of those outcomes were negative.

What makes their results even more infuriating is that there was, as they explain, “very low quality” evidence that lockdowns would be effective, as well as a “lack of information on potential unintended downstream consequences.” Yet decision-makers plowed forward anyway, despite the “serious ethical, economic, health equity, and human rights concerns” resulting from such policies.

The Shocking Damage Caused by Covid Policies

The Covid lockdowns may not have been effective, but at least they harmed people and created negative impacts that we’re still dealing with.

brownstone.org

 

[odanny]

It's easy to be a Monday morning QB.

 

[Manonthestreet]

It's easy to be a Monday morning QB.

If there is no after action review we will keep making the same mistake

 

[Darkwind]

I mean, no kidding. We knew this. But for the crowd who loves the peer-reviewed, feast your eyes below. The entire article is well worth a read.

(And the ridiculous extent of the lockdowns is like a comedy show. Grocery store arrows? Masks walking to the bathroom, but not at the table? Closing beaches and parks? Can anyone defend this now?)

Horrifying New Research into Damage from Covid Lockdowns​

A massive new systematic review of over 130 studies of Covid policies was published recently in Health Affairs Scholar by writers from the Department of Health Policy, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health in Indianapolis, synthesizing the research into ancillary outcomes from lockdowns, school closures, and other mandates. The goal of this systematic review was to find the “unintended health effects” resulting from those policies. Essentially, putting Covid aside, what were the results when it came to various important measures of health?

They write that while policymakers and public health authorities have produced years of reports and lectures on the importance of mandates and lockdowns in reducing viral transmission, there’s a large “gap in the literature” regarding what other impacts may have resulted from “shelter-in-place/stay-at-home orders, workplace closures, and school closures.”

While peer-review isn’t a guarantee of accuracy, all 132 studies included in the analysis were peer-reviewed. Those 132 studies resulted in finding over 450 unique outcomes. And spoiler alert, the overwhelming majority of those outcomes were negative.

What makes their results even more infuriating is that there was, as they explain, “very low quality” evidence that lockdowns would be effective, as well as a “lack of information on potential unintended downstream consequences.” Yet decision-makers plowed forward anyway, despite the “serious ethical, economic, health equity, and human rights concerns” resulting from such policies.

The Shocking Damage Caused by Covid Policies

The Covid lockdowns may not have been effective, but at least they harmed people and created negative impacts that we’re still dealing with.

brownstone.org

In other news, water is still wet according to leading scientists! LOL

 

[odanny]

If there is no after action review we will keep making the same mistake

I agree, but of course mistakes were made. An abundance of caution to a type of health emergency that no one had dealt with before, a world wide pandemic.

 

[SweetSue92]

It's easy to be a Monday morning QB.

It wasn't hard to QB back then. Arrows on grocery store floors? Like someone is two feet ahead of me that's fine, but if we PASS, the virus will getcha?

Surgical masks for viral protection? Not to mention the masks sewn from Grandma Barb's old curtain material.

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

Covid was a very depressing time for me.
Masks, locked in the house, everything closed up. Following rules like compliant little slaves.

MEANWHILE...all those bums (sorry, unhoused losers) downtown drinkin' their vodka, panhandling, having bum sex behind dumpsters, shooting smack, smoking crack, throwing shit at each other.

No one died.

I wanted them stacked like cordwood along the sidewalks.

"The virus will hunt you down! Get your boosters, can't travel without your tests, get your boosters, you get your boosters?"

 

[SeaMajor7]

First time in recorded Human history that HEALTHY PEOPLE were quarantined in a "pandemic".
The whole idea of quarantining SICK PEOPLE is so that HEALTHY PEOPLE can maintain SOCIETY.
The Marxist Supremacists WANTED a breakdown of society, so they introduced their LOCKDOWNS as intended. These people are EVIL.

 

[martybegan]

It's easy to be a Monday morning QB.

It's easier to stick your head in the sand.

The initial reaction was for a disease people thought had a 1%-3% general mortality rate amongst the entire population. Once that was found to be not the case after the first 2-3 months, things should have adjusted, but they didn't.

I went to my college reunion in 2022 and the college kids were still demanding masks, vaccines, and spacing in a panic, and their age group was probably the least at risk. I had 2 shots and was almost denied staying at the dorms.

2022.

 

[Independent thinker]

It's easy to be a Monday morning QB.

Ummmmmmm, you were told this during Covid. This isn't Monday morning quarterbacking. In fact, you took the professional licenses away of those in the medical profession for telling you this because it went against the democrat's narrative.

 

[Independent thinker]

I mean, no kidding. We knew this. But for the crowd who loves the peer-reviewed, feast your eyes below. The entire article is well worth a read.

(And the ridiculous extent of the lockdowns is like a comedy show. Grocery store arrows? Masks walking to the bathroom, but not at the table? Closing beaches and parks? Can anyone defend this now?)

Horrifying New Research into Damage from Covid Lockdowns​

A massive new systematic review of over 130 studies of Covid policies was published recently in Health Affairs Scholar by writers from the Department of Health Policy, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health in Indianapolis, synthesizing the research into ancillary outcomes from lockdowns, school closures, and other mandates. The goal of this systematic review was to find the “unintended health effects” resulting from those policies. Essentially, putting Covid aside, what were the results when it came to various important measures of health?

They write that while policymakers and public health authorities have produced years of reports and lectures on the importance of mandates and lockdowns in reducing viral transmission, there’s a large “gap in the literature” regarding what other impacts may have resulted from “shelter-in-place/stay-at-home orders, workplace closures, and school closures.”

While peer-review isn’t a guarantee of accuracy, all 132 studies included in the analysis were peer-reviewed. Those 132 studies resulted in finding over 450 unique outcomes. And spoiler alert, the overwhelming majority of those outcomes were negative.

What makes their results even more infuriating is that there was, as they explain, “very low quality” evidence that lockdowns would be effective, as well as a “lack of information on potential unintended downstream consequences.” Yet decision-makers plowed forward anyway, despite the “serious ethical, economic, health equity, and human rights concerns” resulting from such policies.

The Shocking Damage Caused by Covid Policies

The Covid lockdowns may not have been effective, but at least they harmed people and created negative impacts that we’re still dealing with.

brownstone.org

Can't wait to see this on the 6:30 news tonight. I mean, they will report this, won't they?

 

[Independent thinker]

In other news, water is still wet according to leading scientists! LOL

Is that peer reviewed or just another conspiracy theory from Fox News?

 

[odanny]

The initial reaction was for a disease people thought had a 1%-3% general mortality rate amongst the entire population.

You make a terrible point here, which runs counter to your argument.

I understand the rest of your post, though, and the over reactions were sometimes hilarious, and sometime just ridiculous, but I managed them. It was businesse's being shuttered that was the most egregious mistake. Schools being closed was also wrong, teachers at risk could teach their classes online.

The kids were fine, but some teachers were liikely at risk.

 

[Independent thinker]

It wasn't hard to QB back then. Arrows on grocery store floors? Like someone is two feet ahead of me that's fine, but if we PASS, the virus will getcha?

Surgical masks for viral protection? Not to mention the masks sewn from Grandma Barb's old curtain material.

I loved the:

1. My mask protects you and you're mask protects me but your mask doesn't protect you and my mask doesn't protect me.

2. When going to a restaurant you must be wearing your mask to enter because that is where Covid spreads. But, you can take your mask off at your table because you can't catch Covid while sitting at your table. But, when it's time to leave you have to put your mask back on because you will then be able to catch Covid again as you go out the door.

 

[toobfreak]

Systemic Review of Covid Lockdowns Reveals No Benefit, Many Drawbacks​

Oh I dunno--- I had nothing but positive outcomes from my Covid experience!

1. I got to buy hundreds of stinky, dirty masks that made it hot and hard to breathe, but which added greatly to the coffers of the mask makers!
2. I got a lot of extra exercise standing in and going through long lines just to get into a store!
3. All the fat, smelly, farty people had to stay 6' away from me.
4. I did a lot more shopping at Amazon.
5. My kid got to stay home a lot more from school, of course, I wasn't allowed near him.
6. I saw first hand what it was like to be shot with rubber bullets by the curfew police for daring to sit out on my patio.
7. I got to try an experimental vaccine that made my hands burn but at least it was free.
8. And it was highly educational too. I learned that the government lied when they said the vaccine would save lives, and I also got to learn that you can create a pandemic killing millions and never go to jail for it neither just so long as covering that up protects the government.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Well, duh. The entire point of the released virus and subsequent lockdowns was to undermine what was a robust economy and discourage voters from voting for trump. When they realized that wasn’t working, dems used the lockdown as an opportunity to manufacture votes and steal the election.

 

[Muhammed]

In other news, water is still wet according to leading scientists! LOL

But how wet is it? And how can we make it even wetter?

 

[WEATHER53]

I loved the:

1. My mask protects you and you're mask protects me but your mask doesn't protect you and my mask doesn't protect me.

2. When going to a restaurant you must be wearing your mask to enter because that is where Covid spreads. But, you can take your mask off at your table because you can't catch Covid while sitting at your table. But, when it's time to leave you have to put your mask back on because you will then be able to catch Covid again as you go out the door.

If you are black and rioting en masse in the streets then Covid won’t spread
Lib101

 

[Lockback]

I mean, no kidding. We knew this. But for the crowd who loves the peer-reviewed, feast your eyes below. The entire article is well worth a read.

(And the ridiculous extent of the lockdowns is like a comedy show. Grocery store arrows? Masks walking to the bathroom, but not at the table? Closing beaches and parks? Can anyone defend this now?)

Horrifying New Research into Damage from Covid Lockdowns​

A massive new systematic review of over 130 studies of Covid policies was published recently in Health Affairs Scholar by writers from the Department of Health Policy, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health in Indianapolis, synthesizing the research into ancillary outcomes from lockdowns, school closures, and other mandates. The goal of this systematic review was to find the “unintended health effects” resulting from those policies. Essentially, putting Covid aside, what were the results when it came to various important measures of health?

They write that while policymakers and public health authorities have produced years of reports and lectures on the importance of mandates and lockdowns in reducing viral transmission, there’s a large “gap in the literature” regarding what other impacts may have resulted from “shelter-in-place/stay-at-home orders, workplace closures, and school closures.”

While peer-review isn’t a guarantee of accuracy, all 132 studies included in the analysis were peer-reviewed. Those 132 studies resulted in finding over 450 unique outcomes. And spoiler alert, the overwhelming majority of those outcomes were negative.

What makes their results even more infuriating is that there was, as they explain, “very low quality” evidence that lockdowns would be effective, as well as a “lack of information on potential unintended downstream consequences.” Yet decision-makers plowed forward anyway, despite the “serious ethical, economic, health equity, and human rights concerns” resulting from such policies.

The Shocking Damage Caused by Covid Policies

The Covid lockdowns may not have been effective, but at least they harmed people and created negative impacts that we’re still dealing with.

brownstone.org

Yes, but Lord Fauci recommended closing everything down.
And Ye shall not question the Lord ...

 

[Concerned American]

I mean, no kidding. We knew this. But for the crowd who loves the peer-reviewed, feast your eyes below. The entire article is well worth a read.

(And the ridiculous extent of the lockdowns is like a comedy show. Grocery store arrows? Masks walking to the bathroom, but not at the table? Closing beaches and parks? Can anyone defend this now?)

Horrifying New Research into Damage from Covid Lockdowns​

A massive new systematic review of over 130 studies of Covid policies was published recently in Health Affairs Scholar by writers from the Department of Health Policy, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health in Indianapolis, synthesizing the research into ancillary outcomes from lockdowns, school closures, and other mandates. The goal of this systematic review was to find the “unintended health effects” resulting from those policies. Essentially, putting Covid aside, what were the results when it came to various important measures of health?

They write that while policymakers and public health authorities have produced years of reports and lectures on the importance of mandates and lockdowns in reducing viral transmission, there’s a large “gap in the literature” regarding what other impacts may have resulted from “shelter-in-place/stay-at-home orders, workplace closures, and school closures.”

While peer-review isn’t a guarantee of accuracy, all 132 studies included in the analysis were peer-reviewed. Those 132 studies resulted in finding over 450 unique outcomes. And spoiler alert, the overwhelming majority of those outcomes were negative.

What makes their results even more infuriating is that there was, as they explain, “very low quality” evidence that lockdowns would be effective, as well as a “lack of information on potential unintended downstream consequences.” Yet decision-makers plowed forward anyway, despite the “serious ethical, economic, health equity, and human rights concerns” resulting from such policies.

https://brownstone.org/articles/the-shocking-damage-caused--covid-policies/

And it continues today. WA department of health have been playing this waste of taxpayer $$$ on prime time tv for a couple of months now. No mention of what can be done or suggestion of what you can do if you suspect it, but it definitely wastes $$$$. Long Covid.