Lockdown Madness: Time to Say No

We really must resist harmful and counterproductive lockdowns:

While much of the rest of the world is opening up, Australia is heading in the opposite direction, with each of the fiefdoms (states and territories) trying to outdo each other in the race to see everything locked down because of the Rona. Even NSW, which had been much better at proportionality and targeted responses, is now getting into the act sadly.

Many have said for over a year now that all these lockdown policies are not actually helping matters, and seem to in fact be counterproductive – they actually make matters worse. Various studies along the way have been showing these truths. One very new study has just been released on this. It is not only the latest but, it seems, the most thorough of the studies so far.

Produced by scientists from the Rand Corporation and the University of Southern California, it is titled: “The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Policy Responses on Excess Mortality”. The Abstract of the 37-page report reads as follows:

As a way of slowing COVID-19 transmission, many countries and U.S. states implemented shelter-in-place (SIP) policies. However, the effects of SIP policies on public health are a priori ambiguous as they might have unintended adverse effects on health. The effect of SIP policies on COVID-19 transmission and physical mobility is mixed. To understand the net effects of SIP policies, we measure the change in excess deaths following the implementation of SIP policies in 43 countries and all U.S. states. We use an event study framework to quantify changes in the number of excess deaths after the implementation of a SIP policy. We find that following the implementation of SIP policies, excess mortality increases. The increase in excess mortality is statistically significant in the immediate weeks following SIP implementation for the international comparison only and occurs despite the fact that there was a decline in the number of excess deaths prior to the implementation of the policy. At the U.S. state-level, excess mortality increases in the immediate weeks following SIP introduction and then trends below zero following 20 weeks of SIP implementation. We failed to find that countries or U.S. states that implemented SIP policies earlier, and in which SIP policies had longer to operate, had lower excess deaths than countries/U.S. states that were slower to implement SIP policies. We also failed to observe differences in excess death trends before and after the implementation of SIP policies based on pre-SIP COVID-19 death rates. www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w28930/w28930.pdf

Some media outlets such as the Australian have covered the story. The subtitle of Adam Creighton’s piece is this: “The evidence supporting lockdowns is shockingly weak, resting on little more than anecdote, faith and tendentious modelling.” He says this:

“Imagine if lockdowns caused more harm than good. That would be a shocking thought for our public health grandees who, with every fresh handful of Covid-19 cases, have been locking down the nation’s largest cities during the past 15 months. But it’s more than a theoretical possibility for Sydneysiders to chew over during their second lockdown.”

He looks at the details of the study and then concludes:

The prospect of more lockdowns will hover over personal and business decisions for years. Witness calls for harder lockdowns sooner and creation of a pandemic early warning system. Let’s hope there are no false alarms. “The whole lockdown idea started with mathematical models, which assumed without lockdowns people would go about their lives unchanged, but of course they don’t,” says [report co-author] Sood. “And second, these models looked only at the short run, so they tended to show lockdowns preventing cases, rather than delaying them, and at significant collateral cost.”

 

He also might have added: and they put zero value on human interaction and choice, assuming people can be directed like drones. “We do not estimate the effect of ‘ideal’ SIP policies or of improved compliance with SIP policies, but rather evaluate the ‘real world’ impact of SIP policies that were implemented,” the authors stress in their NBER paper.

 

It doesn’t matter if, like communism, lockdowns work in theory if they don’t work in practice. Blaming the public for being complacent when cases crop up illustrates the failure of the models, not people. Interestingly, in only three nations did lockdowns appear to reduce excess mortality, according to the NBER study: Australia, Malta and New Zealand. Either each nation shared uniquely brilliant health bureaucrats, alongside hyper-compliant populations or they had the good fortune to be islands. You pick. www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/what-if-lockdowns-dont-save-lives/news-story/5a7b69881d3323d5edd51698270e2422

Somewhat surprisingly, leftist newspapers like the Age and the Sydney Morning Herald have also reported on this. Gigi Foster penned this piece: “Stop this human sacrifice: the case against lockdowns”. She begins this way:

Sydney has now plunged into the darkness that Victoria has known on and off for months. The word “lockdown” seems to have gone out of favour, perhaps a signal that counter-narratives are gaining traction, but the policies enacted by NSW’s political leadership quack and walk just like the shelter-in-place orders colloquially termed “lockdowns” that have been issued around the world for over a year.

 

These policies have enormous human costs, and NSW has had more than a year to realise that fact and factor it into decision-making. Last August, I produced a draft cost-benefit analysis for the Victorian Parliament as a demonstration of how such an exercise should be conducted. Costs of locking down must be weighed against the projected benefits, with nothing ever known for certain but best guesses made in the wide range of areas directly affected by lockdown policies.

 

These costs include the loss of happiness due to loneliness from social isolation, the crowded-out healthcare for problems other than COVID, the long-term costs to our children and university students of disrupting their education, and the economic losses that have shuttered businesses, damaged whole sectors, increased inequality, and will depress our spending on everything from roads to hospitals for years to come. Deaths from causes other than COVID may well result.

She too discusses the new study and then concludes:

Australia has had a good result in terms of COVID deaths, and our measured GDP is back to pre-pandemic levels. However, these results are not due to blanket lockdown policies. Instead, JobKeeper and a stack of lucky cards have produced these results about which our politicians are now crowing. Two of Australia’s most potent aces have been our geography and our demography.

 

What is going on here is not the fight of our lives against a fearsome pestilence. It is politicians willingly sacrificing their people’s welfare, hoping the people see their actions as a sufficient offering. It’s the modern analogue of killing virgins in the hope of getting a good harvest.

 

We need to stop this madness. Right now, we need to focus our attention and protection on the people in our population who are actually vulnerable to serious effects of this virus. We need to buy medicines and establish treatment protocols that work to reduce the severity of COVID symptoms, while offering vaccinations to anyone in vulnerable groups who wants them – with no compulsion, and no tethering of population vaccination rates to border openings.

 

The good news is that much of the world seems to be waking up to the fact that shelter-in-place directives are tantamount to a ritualistic human sacrifice. They’re losing their religion, slowly but surely. We can’t lose ours soon enough. www.smh.com.au/national/stop-this-human-sacrifice-the-case-against-lockdowns-20210627-p584o7.html

A better approach

Enough of these failed policies that cause more harm than good. We need to take more rational and enlightened approaches, such as that taken by Singapore. They have decided to stop the foolish obsession with numbers and cases, and the vain attempt to eradicate the Rona. They are now taking a more sensible approach: learn to live with it. One report says this:

A country that has been one of the world’s most successful at combating Covid-19 has announced it will soon fundamentally change how it manages the pandemic. The city state of Singapore has stated covid will be treated like other endemic diseases such as flu.

 

There will be no goals of zero transmission. Quarantine will be dumped for travellers and close contact of cases will not have to isolate. It also plans to no longer announce daily case numbers. But you may need to take tests to head to the shops or go to work. Senior Singaporean ministers have said it is the “new normal” of “living with covid”.

 

“The bad news is that Covid-19 may never go away. The good news is that it is possible to live normally with it in our midst,” wrote Singapore’s trade Minister Gan Kim Yong, finance minister Lawrence Wong and health minister Ong Ye Kung said in an editorial in the Straits Times this week. “It means that the virus will continue to mutate, and thereby survive in our community.” www.news.com.au/world/asia/singapores-surprising-new-plan-to-live-with-covid-revealed/news-story/52fa2c29252daeb4a3c634e1658f6901   

The Warrenton Declaration

Another sensible approach to this whole affair, including how to think about mandatory medical treatments, be they masks or vaccines, has been covered in a brand-new document: “The Warrenton Declaration on Medical Mandates, Biblical Ethics, & Authority”. It is written by a number of American and overseas pastors and Christian leaders.

The 36 points found in the Declaration offer both sensible as well as biblical commentary on how we might proceed. It emphasises the need for all people to make properly informed choices when it comes to dealing with the virus. As an indication of the balance and thoughtfulness of the document, let me offer here the last four points it contains:

XXXIII. WE DENY that all instances of requiring masks for church meetings are necessarily sinful or divisive in such cases where the meeting is held at a venue where the property managers are not the local church and such property managers require mask wearing for entrance. This is a property issue. In such cases, those who choose not to fellowship because of the mask mandate at the meeting venue should not be said to be in violation of any biblical commands regarding regularly meeting with the saints. To the extent possible, church officers should seek to secure a meeting venue where the local congregation will not be forced to exclude non-masking individuals due to the whims of the building owner.

 

XXXIV. WE AFFIRM that maintaining personal health and personal health decisions, including decisions about which medical interventions to adopt or forego, are the role and jurisdiction of each individual and their family.

 

XXXV. WE DENY that parents are guilty of neglect or abuse if they choose to forego a given medical intervention such as a medical procedure or vaccine due to the fact that they are not convinced of the short and long term risk profile or effectiveness of the action.  This remains true regardless of what recommendations they have or haven’t received from a doctor. 

 

XXXVI. WE AFFIRM that it is anti-scriptural for a parent to categorically deny all medical interventions to their children at all times with the rationale that all medical intervention is, as a category, evidence of a lack of faith in God (1st Tim 5:23).

You can see the entire Declaration (as well as sign it) here: warrentondeclaration.com/

[1856 words]

17 Replies to “Lockdown Madness: Time to Say No”

  1. Bill, it looks like these lockdowns wont stop until the majority of the population is vaccinated.
    This i believe is their end game.

  2. Yes Bill, we really must resist harmful and counterproductive lockdowns.

    Please all ponder seriously:

    The people who rule you know that if you won’t even fight for your right to breathe properly, the sky’s the limit for your perpetual enslavement.

  3. These lockdowns are never going to stop and these lockdowns will continue and will keep happening. It’s all about power and control and it’s all about manipulating and controlling people and taking away peoples freedom and rights and conditioning people and getting people to comply and do as they are told and bringing in a one world government. It’s only going to get worse and it’s going to become more restrictive and more oppressive.

  4. I was clear right at the start about the circle work risk and my expectations have largely come to fruition .
    One of the most powerful disappointments was watching Morrison fail to set the course – if he had the States would still operate to give him their best advice (Rom 13) but they wouldn’t have eroded the unity and been so vulnerable to changing and making direction changes — and winning popular public vote scores.
    As predicted they took the precautionary principle and used it to justify in moral terms what isn’t acceptable by the ignorant. Most of the ongoing saga was captured as it happened.

    I expect that when the limitations of vaccinations and an infection are recognized (and the proper risks listed hasn’t been done yet), the attention getters in the States will have stalemate and be forced to find something else to worry about.
    start here http://fearmongers.blogspot.com
    my career work was in applied microbiology and working with ministers and endless change agents who really had no experience in using the precautionary principle (part of my tool kit) as they tried to focus on risk management.

    On the folly of testing and tracing see ” Snowballs in a Blizzard”

  5. WWJD – those four letters allow leftist to get clueless Christians to do anything. Most are so naive, so biblically illiterate, they have NO idea what Jesus would do! Far to many who claim the name of Christ are stupid sheeple who will follow satan anywhere as long as he tells them it’s the Christian thing to do. “By following me blindly you’re doing God’s work”.

    Today’s left knows religion is a sugar to sweeten their poison pill so that Christians will follow them to the ovens.

  6. Once again the feckless churches in Australia haven’t stood up to government. The core human needs for social interaction, for freedom of movement and association, for being not trapped in house arrest have been set aside.
    In my clinical practice I’m picking up the pieces of children whose diagnosed anxiety has gone through the roof, whose socialisation has gone backwards and whose educational attainment has been impaired. All for a case fatality rate of…. (0.11 at last check), and with known epidemiological profile.
    The Swedish response was the best…and also recognised the balance of freedom, noting that overall fatality trends have been pretty much unchanged.

  7. Hello Bill,

    This is another great article, thank you so much for all you are doing.

    I was wondering about another article as I was reading (I think you wrote) to do with what Peter and Paul meant in regards to honouring the government. And that we could / should honour the government but obey God.

    As I said I am not sure if it was something you wrote or something I picked up somewhere else, I tried searching your site but couldn’t see what I was looking for, could you or any other readers point me in the right direction.

    Thanks in advance.

    God bless.

  8. New ‘variants’ will be used by power hungry health tyrants to unleash authoritarian lockdowns, mask mandates and other demands. They demand you consent and comply to every new vaccine and if you take this vaccine you will be free. What people fail to realise is there will be no freedom at any point. There is NO scenario where these tyrants release their iron grip. The goal of the elites is a never-ending enslavement under the pandemic industrial complex. The precedent has been well and truly set.

  9. Bill I thought you might be interested in reading this article written in the Wikipedia regarding the Spanish Flu. The similarities between the methods used to eradicate the virus is very similar to the ones that they are using today. Including vaccines, lockdowns, masks etc. They even had groups who protested against wearing masks. Really bizarre when you think about it and you have to ask yourself it is just a coincidence or is there something more sinister going on. Of course there were far more deaths however the virus did pass as will the Covid no doubt. Also interestingly enough they also infer that it could have came from China and that China had very little deaths compared to the rest of the world. Sound familiar. Love to hear you views on it Bill.
    https://www.bing.com/search?q=spanish+flu+wikipedia&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=spanish+flu+wikipedia&sc=1-21&sk=&cvid=3640DFA6A65B44669AA7F58249F2BF9D#

  10. Apparently my body my choice only applies to what you want taken out of or off of your body. Going in is still none of your business as far as they’re concerned (penises being the exception).

  11. I wouldn’t trust Wikipedia. Very progressive. And known for rewriting things to better serve the progressive agenda!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: