Mass Murder for Nothing: Lockdowns Not Linked With Lower COVID Death Rates, New Study Finds

A study with data from 160 countries if it wasn't already obvious from the eye test

Many US states and countries around the world are imposing another round of economic lockdowns in an effort to combat the coronavirus.

The actions are certain to come with a series of devastating unintended consequences—economic destruction, surging poverty, and mental health deterioration among them—but a new study suggests the lockdowns may not do what they are designed to do: save lives.

A new study published by Frontiers in Public Health concluded that neither lockdowns nor lockdown stringency were correlated with lower death rates.

Researchers analyzed data from 160 countries over the first 8 months of the pandemic, testing several factors—including demographics, public health, economy, politics, and environment—to determine how they are correlated with COVID-19 mortality.

“Stringency of the measures settled to fight pandemia, including lockdown, did not appear to be linked with death rate,” the researchers said.

The researchers found that the criteria most associated with a high death rate was life expectancy, though higher COVID death rates were also observed in certain geographic regions.

“Inherent factors have predetermined the COVID mortality: understanding them may improve prevention strategies by increasing population resilience through better physical fitness and immunity,” the authors said.

On one hand, the findings are astonishing. After all, the lockdowns have resulted in mass collateral damage: a global recession, millions of businesses ravaged, tens of millions of jobs lost, widespread mental health deterioration, a resurgence in global poverty, and surges in suicide.

To look at the destruction lockdowns have wrought only to learn they have failed to effectively slow the spread of the virus is maddening and, frankly, nauseating.

On the other hand, the findings shouldn’t be terribly surprising. Months ago researchers had compiled enough empirical evidence to determine how effective lockdowns were in taming COVID-19.

“…there’s little correlation between the severity of a nation’s restrictions and whether it managed to curb excess fatalities — a measure that looks at the overall number of deaths compared with normal trends,” Bloomberg’s data columnist Elaine He noted back in May.

Since then the evidence has only grown stronger. Sweden, for example, which opted to not lockdown in March, has seen its mortality ranking steadily fall throughout 2020.

In September, as it passed the US, Sweden saw its COVID mortality rate fall to 11th highest in the world. Its rate of 577 COVID deaths per million people was far better than many of its European neighbors who implemented strict lockdowns, such as the United Kingdom, Spain, Belgium, and Italy. Since then, Sweden has fallen further down the list, currently standing at 23rd in the world.

While critics of Sweden’s “lighter touch” strategy point out that its mortality rate is well above that of its Nordic counterparts Norway and Finland, many fail to realize that Norway and Finland have had less restrictive government policies than Sweden for the majority of the pandemic. [And a far smaller pool of vulnerable people owing to worse flu seasons in the prior years.]

The reality is that lockdowns come with incredible collateral damage but appear to do little if anything to actually slow down the coronavirus. This is precisely why the World Health Organization reversed course in October and began advising nations to refrain from using them.

“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” Dr. David Nabarro, the WHO’s Special Envoy on COVID-19, observed.

Dr. Michael Ryan, Director of the WHO’s Health Emergencies Programme, offered a similar sentiment.

“What we want to try to avoid … is these massive lockdowns that are so punishing to communities, to society and to everything else,” Ryan said at a briefing in Geneva in October, adding that sometimes they are “unavoidable.”

Despite mounting evidence that lockdowns don’t work and are incredibly harmful, government officials around the world continue to push them. Why? Because lockdowns are designed to save lives and experts are unwilling to admit they are powerless to control the virus.

In doing so, they’re falling victim to a dangerous deception: the good intentions fallacy.

“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results,” the famed economist Milton Friedman once warned.

It’s time for the intellectual class to admit a basic reality about lockdowns.

They aren’t just horribly destructive and an affront to liberty. They’re actually failing to save lives.

Source: Foundation for Economic Freedom

  1. Raptar Driver says

    This is no joke.They are literally sacrificing you to Baal.

  2. Charles Homer says

    As shown in this article, research by MIT back in 2011 had a solution to many viral infections:

    Given that this drug has the potential to save humanity from a very wide variety of viruses, not just a single coronavirus like SARS-CoV-2, it is rather interesting to see how this ground-breaking technology has pretty much been left on the shelf. But, then again, how could Big Pharma profit if there is a single cure-all for many of the mainstream viruses that impact human lives, particularly since it was not invented in their laboratories?

    1. Bob avlon says

      Proves you can’t fool all the people all of the time. Gov’s proving they can fool most of the people most of the time.

  3. Bob avlon says

    One old peoples home had 11 with covid and 3 of the 11 died and that’s people of 70 and 80 all with different illnesses and ailments. Gov’s routinely with propaganda daily 1000 infections 50 survived 90 dead. Of course, what about the rest.

  4. Daniele Bettini says


    1. disqus_3BrONUAJno says

      This URL has been obliterated by being bisected, and Google can’t translate the language found at the repaired URL.

    2. Bob avlon says

      Google refuses to find this. Found it on another search. Interesting

  5. Styx says

    “Despite mounting evidence that lockdowns don’t work and are incredibly harmful, government officials around the world continue to push them. Why? Because lockdowns are designed to save lives and experts are unwilling to admit they are powerless to control the virus.”

    Excellent point.

    If only “government officials around the world” could join forces and rise to the occasion to control and eventually defeat the virus instead of the same ol political and commercially motivated squabbling.

    Fat chance, as they say it in Yorkshire ..

  6. XSFRGR says

    It’s not a matter of saving lives; the only life a Bankster values is his own. This is a matter of bankrupting $TRILLION$ in assets to allow foreclosure. Mom, & Pop, aren’t going to lose their homes, but the mortgage companies holding their notes will be food for the Banksters. Employees aren’t going to lose their jobs, but the stock of the companies will be a light snack for the Chosen. Just about every asset that has debt attached will be sucked up by the bottom feeders.

    Genesis 47:21 ,and Joseph reduced the people to servitude, from one end of Egypt to the other.

    Different time, different place, same scam, same scam artists. Don’t you dumb Goys ever learn ??

  7. Mike says

    99.98% of the world is not affected by that so-called virus and yet, governments are ruining people’s lives and their own economies. Most of them are doing so just to follow what others are doing as they fear if they do not and it gets worse, their necks are on the line. All you need to know is who benefits from this and the game becomes clear as day. Once again, big corporations, big pharmas, and BANKS! They are the ones pushing for more enslavement as they greatly profit from it. Don’t worry as it will all stop world-wide at the same time once the mass are in deep debt. Small companies closing is no big deal as others will pick them up by buying the debt (refinancing) and move on.

    Some think that this was created by a huge amount of people looking to profit from it, but they are wrong. You just need to have some people in your pocket (bought and paid for) to say what needs to be said to create fear and voila, the game is on.

    Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College of London predicted that millions would die from the covid virus and once again, yes again, he was wrong. Yet, all countries shutdown immediately after this bought and paid for stooge by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation made the announcement. Why again? This is why…

    “Imperial College epidemiologist Neil] Ferguson was behind the disputed research that sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die. There were fewer than 200 deaths.

    In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from BSE.

    In 2005, Ferguson predicted that up to 150 million people could be killed from bird flu. In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.

    In 2009, a government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a “reasonable worst-case scenario” was that the swine flu would lead to 65,000 British deaths. In the end, swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

    In 2020, last March, Ferguson stated that tens of millions would die of this new virus. “On March 16, Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London released an epidemiological model that took the world by storm. The report warned that tens of millions would die in a pandemic that was
    compared to the Spanish flu, the deadliest epidemic in modern times. The only option, warned the report, would be radical physical distancing of the entire population, potentially for 18 months, until a vaccine was available. The paper advised that less restrictive methods such as isolation of suspected cases and physical distancing of the elderly and at-risk would merely reduce deaths by half. Instead, what was needed was total isolation.” Only a few days later, countries started to follow his recommendations.

    So, after being wrong so many times, why is it that the world listened to that professor and particularly the UK? Surely, others around the globe must be smart enough to question what that bozo says, right? Nope! Why? Because the game started with the WHO pushing the same narrative immediately followed by the mass media and social media. At that point, the rules and recommendations of ‘EVENT 201’ came into play meaning controlling what you can see on TV, news, and social media. They took control of what you have to believe is the truth. Repeat the same lie over and over and it soon becomes the truth.

    When you look at the entire game at play, one name keeps on surfacing…BILL GATES! HE practically owns the WHO, is a huge contributor to the Imperial College of London and Ferguson and finally is one of three sponsors of EVENT 201. Funny enough, the other two sponsors (The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and The World Economic Forum) are actually sponsored by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. So, who is behind it all?

    They invested billions in vaccines and will make a fortune just as they did when they invested $10 billion back in 2000 for vaccines tested in Africa and India that crippled many children, and 18 years later, made $200 billion in profits. How much do you think they will make now? By the way, it will not stop with the vaccines.

    Bill and Melinda Gates are the very definition of evil.

    1. Bob avlon says

      One following the biggest in lockdown methods is the UK more or less whereas their dictator the US is more or less following some kind of herd immunity with minimal lockdowns and in some states are even banned. Mask wearing even disputed largely. John Hopkins is over there right. Bit of a mixture.

    2. Skoolafish says

      Insight: “Slaughtered on Suspicion” – Foot and Mouth 2001 & role of Prof. Neil Ferguson

      This documentary clearly sets out how it was Ferguson’s intention and role to devastate the British beef and dairy industry (and livestock industry in general) to render Britain non-self sufficient and hence vulnerable to global communist takeover.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.