RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Let's Have A Federal Election In Canada ASAP !! Yes, 30 to 70% of Canadians could have become infected, that's why we had to lock down. The fact that it is now 0.3% points to the effectiveness of the lockdowns. I really don't see how you could argue otherwise. Texas currently has a positivity rate of over 25%. 1 in 4 Texans getting tested are testing positive. The disease is out of control in Texas, and it's likely that a very large percentage of the population will get the disease.
Lockdowns are necessary, but only once the disease has progressed too far within the country. Taiwan acted early and avoided the need for a shutdown. So sure, lockdowns aren't always necessary. But they can be.
I also wish we'd acted earlier with shuttered borders and masks. But once that ship has sailed, the effectiveness of lockdowns is undeniable. Look at Canada, NY, NJ... now look at Texas, Arizona, Georgia... they are complete disasters, because they refused both masks and lockdowns.
Now the other issue I have with saying, "the experts were wrong", is that science is always improving with new information. So to blame scientists for making the best projections they could based on limited info is absurd. Of course they'll get things wrong sometimes. But science is and always will be the best tool we have on which to base policy. That said, I cannot remember anyone claiming a 9% death toll for the entire population. Just one of the many things your article misrepresented. Let's look at the bullet points one by one, shall we?
1. Predictions from government officials used to justify lockdown policies were off by 1000%+
Bull.
2. Approximately 10% of developed / OECD countries did not implement full lockdowns including Japan, Sweden, South Korea and Taiwan. These countries successfully ‘flattened the curve’
I've said that Sweden's death toll is much, much higher than its neighbours, and that its own finance minister claimed Sweden's economy would be no better than the EU's. So the result of Sweden's no lockdown policy? More deaths, no economic benefit.
Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan are all countries that responded much more quickly and aggressively. So again, lockdowns are necessary only if the disease is too entrenched in the community.
3. Coronavirus death rates are approximately the same in countries that did not lockdown, relative to countries that locked down
This is completely inaccurate unless you cherry pick. Sweden: 547 per million, Norway 48, Finland 60, Denmark 107. Here I am comparing countries with similar demographics, population densities, average wealth, and climates, and more importantly 4 countries with similar responses pre-lockdown.
You can't compare Canada and South Korea for example, because South Korea reacted much more aggressively, thereby avoiding the need to lock down.
4. Countries that locked down are causing damaging side effects to public health
I really love this one. Are these "side effects" worse than dying? Well then. What about the permanent side effects of Covid-19 for those who survive: organ damage, lung damage...etc.
5. Deaths by suicide and drug overdose are claiming more lives than COVID19 among youths
From one of the articles cited by your article: "We believe that the supply chain disruption and the disruption in that illicit supply has really been a major contributing factor to the spikes in overdoses that we're seeing," Devereau said.
So while lockdowns may contribute to increased drug use, it is mostly supply chain disruptions that are to blame for overdoses.
As for suicides, the author himself states that the numbers won't be out until 2021, so it is just speculation on his part.
6. The lockdowns are pushing more than 100 million people into extreme poverty and hunger
A definite problem. One that should not be solved by having hundreds of thousands die from a disease instead.
7. Millions of people have delayed medical care, including cancer screenings and crucial immunizations
Another definite problem that should not be solved by having them die from Covid-19 instead.
8. The risk of death is 63% higher among those who experience unemployment, and the skyrocketing number of unemployed pose dire public health risks for lockdown countries
This is once again a misrepresentation based on excluding all context. We've seen that Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan cannot be included in these comparisons because of their early and aggressive responses to the virus, which enabled them to avoid the need for lockdowns. So let's look again at Sweden and Norway. The unemployment rate in Norway is currently lower than Sweden's. Norway projects that its unemployment will be back to normal within 12 months. Sweden on the other hand, projects its unemployment will remain elevated for at least 2 years.
That's because countries where the virus is under control can resume life much more quickly than countries where the disease is out of control. Had the US gotten its act together and not refused masks AND lockdowns, the border between the two countries would have been reopened by now. How many jobs do you think that would have created?
So yeah, the article is bunk.
anjz661 wrote: Disinformation, our own federal Health Minister Patty Hajdu said b
etween 30 to 70 per cent of the Canadian population could become infected with the novel coronavirus. Then we went into lock down. Thus far it is like 0.3% of the population that has contracted the virus. Little bit off I would say.
Totally agree that China has lied and tried to hide the real numbers. Taiwan was smart to act early.
I wish we acted earlier, but with shuttered borders and mask wearing, not with shutdowns and people being paid to stay home.