Lockdowns had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality?

Photo by Martin Sanchez on Unsplash

Authorities have long maintained that lockdowns were necessary to limit COVID-19 infections and deaths. Source. We reported earlier that they plunged numerous people into poverty, whilst the rich got richer, and they could negatively affect our health in other ways.

Now we learn from a study published by Johns Hopkins University that lockdowns were not particularly effective, at least in terms of limiting COVID-19 deaths: “The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the effect of lockdowns on COVID-19 mortality based on available empirical evidence. … Stringency index studies find that the average lockdown in Europe and the United States in the spring of 2020 only reduced COVID- 19 mortality by 3.2%. This translates into approximately 6,000 avoided deaths in Europe and 4,000 in the United States. SIPOs were also relatively ineffective in the spring of 2020, only reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.0%. This translates into approximately 4,000 avoided deaths in Europe and 3,000 in the United States. Based on specific NPIs, we estimate that the average lockdown in Europe and the United States in the spring of 2020 reduced COVID-19 mortality by 10.8%. This translates into approximately 23,000 avoided deaths in Europe and 16,000 in the United States. In comparison, there are approximately 72,000 flu deaths in Europe and 38,000 flu deaths in the United States each year. When checked for potential biases, our results are robust. Our results are also supported by the natural experiments we have been able to identify. The results of our meta-analysis support the conclusion that lockdowns in the spring of 2020 had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality.” Source.

Okay then.