Over 12,000 Scientists Say Lockdown Measures Will Cause Irreparable Damage

Wadaich

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
https://www.newsweek.com/over-12000...&utm_source=Twitter&__twitter_impression=true

"Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short- and long-term public health," the petition said. "Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed."​

The declaration, which was named after the town in Massachusetts it was signed in, has signatures from 12,070 medical and public health scientists, 34,973 medical practitioners and 634,836 concerned citizens from around the world.

The number of signatures on the petition has increased since October 16, when it had signatures from approximately 10,233 medical and public health scientists, 27,860 medical practitioners and 504,875 members of the public.

The petition was written on October 4 and co-authored by Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine at Harvard; Sunetra Gupta, a professor at Oxford University; and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor at Stanford University Medical School.
Over 12,000 scientists worldwide have signed the Great Barrington Declaration, a petition that suggests that coronavirus lockdowns will have irreversible consequences.

"Lockdowns have caused enormous collateral damage on public health," Kulldorff told Newsweek in an email. "This is directly observed by medical professionals and scientists in a wide variety of fields, including pediatrics, geriatrics, oncology, cardiology, surgery and psychiatry. Hence, it is not surprising that thousands of them have co-signed the Great Barrington Declaration."

Bhattacharya, in an email, said he is "delighted, but not surprised, that so many scientists have signed on."

According to the declaration, lockdowns have caused "lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health," which will lead to greater mortality rates in the near future.

Instead, the petition's authors recommend an approach they call "focused protection."

"As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all—including the vulnerable—falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity," the petition said. "Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity."

While the petition stated that "adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19," it noted that "those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal."

Despite the petition's suggestion that mortality and social harm should be minimized until herd immunity is reached, Kulldorff told Newsweek in October that the authors "are not advocating a 'herd immunity strategy.'"

"Herd immunity is not a strategy but a scientifically proven phenomena, just like gravity, and you would not say that an airplane pilot is using a 'gravity strategy' to land a plane. No matter what strategy is used, we will reach herd immunity sooner or later, just as an airplane will reach the ground one way or another," Kulldorff said.

In a Newsweek op-ed published on October 30, Kulldorff, along with the other authors, said that the key to minimizing mortality is avoiding the collateral damage from lockdowns while better protecting the old and other high-risk groups.

The petition was drafted by the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian organization.
 

chacha jani

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
This covid thing is real if spread out we won't be able to control it. Every person react differently but for middle aged and elderly people it will be difficult. Watch out and pay attention!
 

Wadaich

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
This covid thing is real if spread out we won't be able to control it. Every person react differently but for middle aged and elderly people it will be difficult. Watch out and pay attention!
Can we have data of total deaths in Pakistan in 2019 and compare it with the number of deaths in 2020. It may give us an idea about COVID-19 which has mortality rate even less than normal flue.
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Can we have data of total deaths in Pakistan in 2019 and compare it with the number of deaths in 2020. It may give us an idea about COVID-19 which has mortality rate even less than normal flue.

That number wont tell us anything, in lockdown fewer people die from all causes including car accidents and homicide.
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
What's the point of this declaration. Any idiot will tell you that there are upsides and downsides of every government policy.

Every action has a cost and the cost alone wont tell you whether that action is a good action or not. If a marketing campaign is costing you $100,000. That number alone cant tell you if its a good investment or not. What are you gaining from investing that $100,000 is a better question.

So the right question here is not whether there are side effects of lockdown, that would be a very dumb question. The real question is: What would be the cost if we don't do a lockdown and is that cost higher than the cost of the lockdown?
 

bigrabbit

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
Can we have data of total deaths in Pakistan in 2019 and compare it with the number of deaths in 2020. It may give us an idea about COVID-19 which has mortality rate even less than normal flue.
i hope none of your elderly family member gets it... i always though u r a bit sensible person but alas....
 

Sohail Shuja

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Can we have data of total deaths in Pakistan in 2019 and compare it with the number of deaths in 2020. It may give us an idea about COVID-19 which has mortality rate even less than normal flue.
The same point has been hammered by IK's Government that prevention from a pandemic is one thing, whilst getting trodden down by the economical aftermaths is another. We are in a situation of choosing between the devil and the deep sea. More people will die of hunger and the problems created by lockdowns than corona.

Therefore, we should devise a strategy which should also minimize the economic aftermaths of total lockdowns. Lockdowns are not a long term solution, they are just a fight or flight response. We should come up with a strategy.

This petition makes a good prima facie case. However, without knowing the details of the plan/strategy, I am unable to throw in my two cents of opinion. Though, in principle, it is an agreeable paradigm.
 

Wadaich

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
The same point has been hammered by IK's Government that prevention from a pandemic is one thing, whilst getting trodden down by the economical aftermaths is another. We are in a situation of choosing between the devil and the deep sea. More people will die of hunger and the problems created by lockdowns than corona.

Therefore, we should devise a strategy which should also minimize the economic aftermaths of total lockdowns. Lockdowns are not a long term solution, they are just a fight or flight response. We should come up with a strategy.

This petition makes a good prima facie case. However, without knowing the details of the plan/strategy, I am unable to throw in my two cents of opinion. Though, in principle, it is an agreeable paradigm.
It will be easier for you to throw your two cent if you have the information for comparison of the deaths caused by corona vs the ones caused by other diseases. If the deaths caused by corona are 10, whereas caused by other diseases say x, y, z are 20, 30, and 100 respectively of vice versa then the decision will be easier.
 

Sohail Shuja

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
It will be easier for you to throw your two cent if you have the information for comparison of the deaths caused by corona vs the ones caused by other diseases. If the deaths caused by corona are 10, whereas caused by other diseases say x, y, z are 20, 30, and 100 respectively of vice versa then the decision will be easier.
Actually, it is not a matter of linear mathematics which goes 2+2=4.
Its an organic term we are dealing with. I can explain with the quote of Bernard Shaw here:

"Suppose if you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange those apples, then you have an apple and I have an apple. But, if you have idea and I have an idea and we exchange those ideas, then both of us will have two ideas".

Likewise, pandemics like Covid are like such ideas :-)

The numbers at any given time just reflect the rate of spread of the disease, not the real potential of the malady's impact. If with lockdown, the deaths are @10%, then will it be the same if the lockdown is lifted? So, its a variable, not a constant.

Yet again, I agree to the fact that the risks posed by the pandemic vis a vis to the economic aftermaths are to be weighed proportionately. Lest, we face more troubles than what this pandemic entails in its entirety.