By Keith R. Jackson
In medicine, we are constantly balancing risk and reward. Nearly all medicines and many therapeutic treatments involve risk to the patient we hope to help. It’s time we use this same intellectual exercise to create a reasonable inquiry into the risks we took when responding to COVID-19 and balance it against the reward. If nothing else is accomplished, a better plan for future societal responses can be formulated. And if we recognize and remedy our failures in time, maybe we’ll still have a recognizable United States of America.
We have the benefit of hindsight, so we can look at the results objectively. The reward? Although we’ve lost well over 500,000 American lives to COVID-19, it could have been far worse. Even though the number is in question (as there were economically rewarding incentives to list COVID-19 as a cause of death when it could have had little to do with a person’s demise), it is still a frightening and increasing number.
But our methods to mitigate COVID-19 come at a terrible societal cost. People will die from the fallout from the governmental response. Meanwhile, politicians and the media are transparently manipulating “the science,” justifying bad and ineffective policies to erode the whole idea of the United States of America, ignoring the toll their decisions have wrought. They ignore real science, studies replicated over years, that easily prove that the COVID-19 response they chose to follow will kill far more people than it saves.
On top of that, the consequences of the world’s response have resulted in what will be millions of deaths worldwide, far outweighing mortality from the virus itself. Even knowing this, even when we are aware that the cure is worse than the disease, we remain compliant in the middle of a fear-stoked roar from complicit mainstream media and politicians, doubling down on bad policy and poorly substantiated recommendations.
Studies are accumulating estimations of potential deaths from the consequences of the lockdowns, school closings, and business closures. A recent Bureau of Economic Research study suggests that just the “unemployment shock” in America will lead to a 3% increase in mortality projected out over the next 15 years. This translates to roughly 890,000 additional deaths.
Scores of health issues that have been undiagnosed, untreated, and made worse by the isolation, depression, obesity, and substance abuse associated with the pandemic will pile up bodies in the next months to years. As an example, preventable deaths from missed breast and colorectal cancer diagnoses this past year are estimated at 10,000. Deaths of despair, suicide and drug abuse, are predicted by the mental health resource PSYCOM to be increasing by 75,000 this year. This includes a 30% increase in suicide in the military since COVID-19.
BIS Bulletin describes a nexus between recessions and mortality, with an increase in mortality rates by a third versus non-recession periods. It is exaggerated in poorer countries. Similarly, child mortality rises to 110 per a thousand compared to 78 in regular times. It is an established fact that there is increased mortality of those living in poverty, and nothing ensures poverty more than inadequate education. Remote schooling is sure to prove ineffective. Again, this will disproportionately hurt the poor, and it will be the gift that keeps on giving for years to come.
There were economic good times prior to the virus. The truth is that this recession was a predictable consequence of our response. It was a choice made because the CDC, whose original purpose was to help us in our fight against viral pandemics, believed that this was the long feared virus that would prompt “DEFCON 4.” It is well known that lockdowns lead to a sharp decline in economic activity. The CDC is aware of the potential increase in mortality caused by recessions and lockdowns. Yet it chose to push this response.
Worldwide shutdowns inspired by our CDC and other countries’ health organizations are estimated by economists at the IMF to have caused a 9-trillion-dollar cumulative loss of global GDP. The probable deaths from starvation arising from the agricultural consequences of COVID-19 alone will number in the millions. Again, this will be affecting the poorest countries disproportionately.
Apparently, the optics of standing by and allowing the virus to succumb to herd immunity, something that would undoubtedly have been horrifically portrayed, given the media of today, was too much when held up against the predictably greater loss of life caused by the response. Why else would the CDC chose this path? It did it because those running it knew that the media would hide or obfuscate the costs of the response. They did it because the deeply entrenched bureaucrats within the department hated their president and worried about his re-election.
The most shocking result of the COVID-19 response is the ease with which United States citizens gave up their freedoms. medforth.blog read more
Beyond The Roundup | Italian-led Ivermectin Meta-Analysis: Consider For Help Treating COVID-19?
Part 1 of a 10-parts series about the Fall of the Cabal by Janet Ossebaard
Part 1: THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO HMMMMM…
Beginning the search for the Truth, left & right in politics, Wikileaks, the inauguration of Donald J. Trump, and the birth of the Q-phenomenon…
English spoken Part 1 of 10
- Posted by Amy Mek
- On March 27, 2021
- 1 Comments
- Amy Mek, climate alarmists, Climate Change, climate crisis, climate deniers, climate scare, German Environmental Aid Association, Global Warming, Great Reset, Karl Lauterbach, Timothy Patterson, Tom Harris, Ursula Heinen-Esser, World Economic Forum
Lockdowns across the globe triggered by the coronavirus pandemic this year shut down businesses, took cars off roads and kept huge portions of population at home, ostensibly causing a reduction in hydrocarbon emissions. Based on the drop in emissions, “Climate change” activists are proposing we morph pandemic lockdowns into climate lockdowns, permanently.
Under a “climate lockdown,” left-wing groups propose governments would limit private-vehicle use, ban consumption of red meat, and impose extreme energy-saving measures, while fossil-fuel companies would have to stop drilling.
To avoid such a lockdown scenario the left is demanding we overhaul our economic structures and “do capitalism differently.” This is exactly what the World Economic Forum is calling for under the umbrella of their “Great Reset“. By doing things “differently”, they really mean the citizens would own nothing and they would own everything.
Leaders such as Germany’s Social Democratic MP Karl Lauterbach, is already suggesting restrictions ‘similar’ to Coronavirus lockdowns to fight climate change.
As previously reported by RAIR Foundation USA, Climate scientist Tom Harris warned “governments will use the so-called ‘climate crisis’ to lock down citizens in the same way the coronavirus is being used to strip citizens of their rights.” He explained that their goal “is a complete societal shutdown almost indefinitely.”
One year ago, the idea of “climate lockdowns” would seem absurd. However, after watching citizens across the world surrender their freedoms for a virus with a 99.8% survival rate, they seem more than possible, even likely.
The following article was posted by German newsite JournalistenWatch:
Socialism. Bear in mind that in under Socialism the elite, the leaders do not share the common misery to which they subject the general population.
Globalist Elitists Discuss Reshaping the World’s Economy During Davos
RAIRFoundationUSA Published March 30, 2021
In this panel discussion called “Delivering Social Justice in the Recovery” elitists at the World Economic Forum’s Davos Conference discuss how to reshape the global economy. Themes include harping on so-called “stakeholder capitalism” (i.e. socialism), “inequality,” (i.e. class war) and “white supremacy.”
The duty of a nation is to enforce the law and defend its borders. Everything else, from maintaining the roads to creating a welfare state, is extra and often unnecessary. It is the defense of the nation and maintenance of the rule of law that is what is most important.
Unfortunately, the Biden Administration seems intent on ignoring both of those responsibilities in favor of opening the border and not enforcing immigration laws. The mobs of migrants in Central America have taken note of Biden’s pro-illegal immigrant, anti-rule of law proclamations; according to a recent Gallup poll, 42 million migrants might soon be on their way. Here is exactly what was found and what the CEO of Gallup said in a recent blog post:
“There are 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. Roughly 450 million adults live in the region. Gallup asked them if they would like to move to another country permanently if they could.
A whopping 27% said “yes.”
This means roughly 120 million would like to migrate somewhere.
Gallup then asked them where they would like to move.
Of those who want to leave their country permanently, 35% — or 42 million — said they want to go to the United States.”
There are about 330 million American citizens. There are already somewhere between 10 and 30 million illegal immigrants here. If about 42 million migrants come here in addition to the illegals already squatting across America, that would mean that anywhere from 50-70 million illegal immigrants would be occupying America. That would mean 13%-17.5% of our nation would be composed of illegal immigrants! Gen Z Conservative read more
Climate Change is coming, but not what you think