Systemic Review of Covid Lockdowns Reveals No Benefit, Many Drawbacks

In a way it is somewhat like the novel 1984. Endless wars and "soma" for the masses.
Today's dumocraps always remind me of 1984. Trump is their Emmanuel Goldstein and they love to have their two minutes of hate. Their crackdown on criticism of the left disguised as misinformation and disinformation and desire to control speech and narratives is classic 1984. There are many other analogies to the film.
 
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.

A Reich Wing Nut Job Site for Reich Wing Nut Jobs. Find a better source.
 
Today's dumocraps always remind me of 1984. Trump is their Emmanuel Goldstein and they love to have their two minutes of hate. Their crackdown on criticism of the left disguised as misinformation and disinformation and desire to control speech and narratives is classic 1984. There are many other analogies to the film.
Trump is their Emmanuel Orangestein.
Two-minutes is never enough.
24/7/365 x a DECADE.
TRUUUUUUUUUUMP :aargh:
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom