╌>

Lockdown Mongers Can Point Fingers, But The Science Is In: They’re To Blame

  
Via:  XXJefferson51  •  3 years ago  •  39 comments

By:   Kylee Zempel

Lockdown Mongers Can Point Fingers, But The Science Is In: They’re To Blame
Thanks to the ruling class who insisted shutting down would save lives, that became the conventional wisdom. Fauci, President Joe Biden, and their allies in the media called for nationwide lockdowns, with Biden condemning Trump for leaving the decision to states and Fauci saying this time last year, “I don’t understand why” a nationwide stay-at-home order isn’t happening. As is so often the case, however, the conventional wisdom was wrong.

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

Our ruling class certainly messed this one up.  They got it all wrong and are now being exposed for their folly.  The used their measures as a control tool in order to consolidate posed and try to reset society.  They got the science wrong on purpose for that reason.  We the people are in open rebellion against our bi coastal elitist establishment and won’t let them do it.  We followed the real science.  


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Lockdown Mongers Can Point Fingers, But The Science Is In: They’re To Blame


The ruling class is trying to blame those who were right about lockdowns from the start. Don't let them.



Anthony Fauci, leading leftists, and their malicious band of media mouthpieces have all been sticking their fingers in the dike of the lockdown strategy. But as the data blows holes in the idea of lockdown inerrancy and the science gushes out, the ruling class is getting swept up in the current of their own failures, flailing at their opponents in a desperate attempt to divert blame.

For more than a year, proponents and opponents of COVID-19 lockdowns have played tug of war over safety and freedom, with both camps declaring fealty to science despite opposite messages. Thanks to the ruling class who insisted shutting down would save lives, that became the conventional wisdom. Fauci, President Joe Biden, and their allies in the media called for nationwide lockdowns, with Biden condemning Trump for leaving the decision to states and Fauci saying this time last year, “I don’t understand why” a nationwide stay-at-home order isn’t happening.

As is so often the case, however, the conventional wisdom was wrong. A new study from Chicago University economist Casey Mulligan validates what the anti-lockdowners knew all along: Lockdowns are a bad idea. After workplaces implemented mitigation measures, they became far safer environments than people’s homes.

“Available data from schools, hospitals, nursing homes, food processing plants, hair stylists, and airlines show employers adopting mitigation protocols in the spring of 2020,” Mulligan wrote in the study. Such mitigation protocols included masking, reasonable social distancing, screening, and improving airflow — steps people wouldn’t take in their own homes. “Coincident with the adoption, infection rates in workplaces typically dropped from well above household rates to well below.”

One example Mulligan included was the Duke Health system. After Duke’s hospitals and clinics implemented strategies to mitigate COVID spread, “an hour worked in the Duke Health system went from being more dangerous than an hour outside work to being more than three times safer.”

This makes sense, of course, not only because free businesses have always possessed incentives to create safe environments for their patrons and employees, but because ordering people to stay home doesn’t account for the social impulses of human beings that rightly prevent total isolation. This is why studies have shown community COVID transmission usually occurred inside households.

“[W]orkers have been 4-5 times less safe outside their workplace than inside it,” said a press release for the study, in a direct rebuke to lockdowns. “While stay-at-home continues to be pushed as promoting public health, nobody is checking the data which say the opposite.”

Data Schmata


That data has gone out the window with all the other unsavory data, like the number of students cheated out of a full year of education and what that means for the future of our workforce, or the almost 100,000 businesses that permanently shut their doors. Lockdown proponents don’t like to talk about the fact that their policies resulted in the United States losing 3.5 percent of its GDP in 2020, without saving the more than 580,000 people whose deaths were attributed to the virus, plus untold lives lost to despair and a lack of access to preventative care. And what do we have to show for the $2.6 trillion in taxpayer cash lawmakers threw at the problem without a moment of introspection?

One fact we must not lose sight of, which the lockdown kings would prefer you’d forget, is that a number of scientists and other informed dissenters warned against locking down from the very beginning, only to be scorned and ignored by the corporate media, Fauci, Deborah Birx, and their bossy band of bureaucrats. These scientists were accused of murder, threatened with losing their esteemed jobs, and slandered by the hive-minded mob. Worse still, left-wing lockdown proponents are now pointing fingers at scientists who opposed them, trying to blame the anti-lockdown crowd for the deaths and disaster the shutdowns caused.

For instance, while the media lauded Gov. Andrew Cuomo as a pandemic hero while he locked down New York and ordered COVID patients to be housed in nursing homes alongside the pandemic’s most vulnerable, the same media excoriated leading scientists such as Dr. Sunetra Gupta, who opposed anti-science lockdowns while advocating for special measures to protect the elderly.

It’s safe to say the approach of the Oxford University professor and leading infectious disease epidemiologists would have been superior to that of the scandal-ridden governor, but Gupta’s detractors have blamed her for deaths that her guidance likely would have prevented. In The Guardian in January, Neil O’Brien, a Tory member of British Parliament, smeared Gupta and other anti-lockdowners for their “fantasies” and “tall tales,” saying they “make stuff up” and “have a hell of a lot to answer for.” In the same pages, George Monbiot called Gupta a “pundit” and said she “makes misleading claims about the pandemic.”

Gupta worked with two other notable public health experts in October 2020 to draft the Great Barrington Declaration, which was signed by numerous other doctors and scientific experts. The declaration called for implementing “focused protection” for vulnerable demographic groups while working toward herd immunity for resilient populations and avoiding detrimental lockdowns.

Fauci, the highest-paid federal employee who has been the biggest disgrace of the pandemic (second only to Communist China), said the declaration was “ total nonsense ” and “ very dangerous .” The media called it the “ epitome of arrogance ” and reckless, implying that the Centers for Disease Control’s opposite approach of sweeping and invasive restrictions relied on “intellectual humility” — despite the latter assuming elites knew better than most Americans what would be best for each of them. The director-general of the World Health Organization, who is also a shill for the murderous CCP, called the idea “ unethical .”

Leaders such as Birx, who was the federal coronavirus response coordinator, are also pushing blame. She now says hundreds of thousands of the lives lost to the virus “could have been mitigated or decreased substantially.” “The federal government did not provide consistent messaging to the American people and that is fault number one,” Birx said.

But the truth of the matter is that the inconsistent messaging came from Birx and her team. Instead of working to protect the vulnerable elderly, Birx made personal visits to states where she undermined the president’s COVID-19 messaging, paying special attention to college students, who were at extremely low risk.

Lockdown Was ‘Pro-Contagion’


A study released last month of the effects of lockdowns in 10 countries was damning. Not only did researchers find that “mandatory stay-at-home and business closures” resulted in “no clear, significant beneficial effect … on case growth in any country,” but in some cases, lockdowns were actually “pro-contagion.”

Pair that with reporting from The New York Times on Tuesday exposing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for manipulating data and unnecessarily restrictive recommendations. While the agency said that “less than 10 percent” of COVID-19 transmission was happening outdoors, the true figure for outdoor transmission appears to be below 1 percent and might even be less than 0.1 percent. Nevertheless, the CDC has taken lockdowns a step further by attempting to micromanage how businesses and individuals behave outside.

“These recommendations would be more grounded in science if anywhere close to 10 percent of Covid transmission were occurring outdoors. But it is not,” David Leonhardt wrote in the Times’ morning newsletter. “There is not a single documented Covid infection anywhere in the world from casual outdoor interactions, such as walking past someone on a street or eating at a nearby table.”

First, note that this is the same David Leonhardt who recently wrote in a different Times newsletter that contributing to the “culture of mask wearing” by putting on a face covering is the “decent thing to do.” Like Birx, Fauci, and other ruling class elites, media personalities don’t get to shift blame when their COVID convictions turn out to be backward.

Second, note the CDC’s mammoth error. Extra cautious and invasive outdoor restrictions were as wrongheaded as other aspects of lockdowns.

The science is surfacing, and with it the reality that our ruling classes blew it big time. They failed on lockdowns. They slashed our economy. They killed the elderly, screwed students, and ruined livelihoods. They lied about transmission, flip-flopped on guidelines that they didn’t abide by anyway, and turned our cultural climate into a fearful and isolated space. When intelligent people raised alarm bells and offered alternatives, they were scoffed at and ignored.

Now the ruling class is trying to blame those who were right from the start. Don’t let them.


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1  seeder  XXJefferson51    3 years ago
That data has gone out the window with all the other unsavory data, like the number of students cheated out of a full year of education and what that means for the future of our workforce, or the almost 100,000 businesses that permanently shut their doors. Lockdown proponents don’t like to talk about the fact that their policies resulted in the United States losing 3.5 percent of its GDP in 2020, without saving the more than 580,000 people whose deaths were attributed to the virus, plus untold lives lost to despair and a lack of access to preventative care. And what do we have to show for the $2.6 trillion in taxpayer cash lawmakers threw at the problem without a moment of introspection?

One fact we must not lose sight of, which the lockdown kings would prefer you’d forget, is that a number of scientists and other informed dissenters warned against locking down from the very beginning, only to be scorned and ignored by the corporate media, Fauci, Deborah Birx, and their bossy band of bureaucrats. These scientists were accused of murder, threatened with losing their esteemed jobs, and slandered by the hive-minded mob. Worse still, left-wing lockdown proponents are now pointing fingers at scientists who opposed them, trying to blame the anti-lockdown crowd for the deaths and disaster the shutdowns caused.

For instance, while the media lauded Gov. Andrew Cuomo as a pandemic hero while he locked down New York and ordered COVID patients to be housed in nursing homes alongside the pandemic’s most vulnerable, the same media excoriatedleading scientists such as Dr. Sunetra Gupta, who opposed anti-science lockdowns while advocating for special measures to protect the elderly.

It’s safe to say the approach of the Oxford University professor and leading infectious disease epidemiologists would have been superior to that of the scandal-ridden governor, but Gupta’s detractors have blamed her for deaths that her guidance likely would have prevented. In The Guardian in January, Neil O’Brien, a Tory member of British Parliament, smeared Gupta and other anti-lockdowners for their “fantasies” and “tall tales,” saying they “make stuff up” and “have a hell of a lot to answer for.” In the same pages, George Monbiot called Gupta a “pundit” and said she “makes misleading claims about the pandemic.”

Gupta worked with two other notable public health experts in October 2020 to draft the Great Barrington Declaration, which was signed by numerous other doctors and scientific experts. The declaration called for implementing “focused protection” for vulnerable demographic groups while working toward herd immunity for resilient populations and avoiding detrimental lockdowns.

Fauci, the highest-paid federal employee who has been the biggest disgrace of the pandemic (second only to Communist China), said the declaration was “total nonsense” and “very dangerous.” The media called it the “epitome of arrogance” and reckless, implying that the Centers for Disease Control’s opposite approach of sweeping and invasive restrictions relied on “intellectual humility” — despite the latter assuming elites knew better than most Americans what would be best for each of them. The director-general of the World Health Organization, who is also a shill for the murderous CCP, called the idea “unethical.”

Leaders such as Birx, who was the federal coronavirus response coordinator, are also pushing blame. She now sayshundreds of thousands of the lives lost to the virus “could have been mitigated or decreased substantially.” “The federal government did not provide consistent messaging to the American people and that is fault number one,” Birx said.

But the truth of the matter is that the inconsistent messaging came from Birx and her team. Instead of working to protect the vulnerable elderly, Birx made personal visits to states where she undermined the president’s COVID-19 messaging, paying special attention to college students, who were at extremely low risk.

Lockdown Was ‘Pro-Contagion’

A study released last month of the effects of lockdowns in 10 countries was damning. Not only did researchers find that “mandatory stay-at-home and business closures” resulted in “no clear, significant beneficial effect … on case growth in any country,” but in some cases, lockdowns were actually “pro-contagion.”

Pair that with reporting from The New York Times on Tuesday exposing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for manipulating data and unnecessarily restrictive recommendations.

https://thenewstalkers.com/vic-eldred/group_discuss/12996/lockdown-mongers-can-point-fingers-but-the-science-is-in-theyre-to-blame
 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2  Tessylo    3 years ago

Were you ever on lockdown?  Ever?  Were you never able to go and get what you needed to eat, household goods?  Ever?

The restrictions before now were not unnecessarily restrictive - they were NECESSARY TO SAVE LIVES.  

Why so selfish?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @2    3 years ago

I pretty much went wherever whenever I wanted and frequented local small businesses that defied the lockdown when ever the opportunity was there.  I still regularly washed my hands and used social distancing.    It was the pro lockdown side that was selfish and controlling.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1    3 years ago

So who is pro lockdown if you were never on lockdown?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.2  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.1    3 years ago

Our governor was very pro lockdown for everyone but his ruling elitist self.  Fortunately I live in a part of the state distant from coastal population centers where local law enforcement enforced nothing.  We even had our local small liberal minority even write an open letter in her on line news publication begging Newscum to come up here and lock down her conservative neighbors and their defiant businesses.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.2    3 years ago

So no lockdown.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.4  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.3    3 years ago

There was one and in some parts of the state it was very aggressively and strictly enforced.  It’s just that it wasn’t here, and was largely ignored, particularly after the 15 and 30 days to stop the spread ended.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.4    3 years ago

So no lockdown.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
2.2  SteevieGee  replied to  Tessylo @2    3 years ago

When it comes to global pandemics, if it looks like you overreacted, you probably did the right thing.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3  Tessylo    3 years ago

"Anthony Fauci, leading leftists, and their malicious band of media mouthpieces have all been sticking their fingers in the dike of the lockdown strategy. But as the data blows holes in the idea of lockdown inerrancy and the science gushes out, the ruling class is getting swept up in the current of their own failures, flailing at their opponents in a desperate attempt to divert blame."

All your articles are desperate attempts to divert blame.  Every,  Single.  One.  

To divert blame off yourselves where it belongs.  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @3    3 years ago
All your articles are desperate attempts to divert blame.  Every,  Single.  One.

It's a seeded article from The Federalist.  What do you expect?  Honesty?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1    3 years ago
biden_red_sea-390x220.jpg
Ben GarrisonMay 7, 2021
0

Xi to Shining Xi United States of China – Ben Garrison Cartoon

China sits back and laughs Joe Biden may talk tough when it comes to China. He says he won’t lift…

Read More »
 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.1    3 years ago

Another irrelevant stupid ass 'cartoon'

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.3  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1    3 years ago

From The Federalist honesty is exactly what we get, every time.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.4  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.2    3 years ago

It seemed right on topic and right on as well to me!  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.5  Ozzwald  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.1    3 years ago
China sits back and laughs Joe Biden may talk tough when it comes to China. He says he won’t lift…

15 times Trump praised China as coronavirus was spreading across the globe

Trump on China’s Xi: ‘We love each other’

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
3.1.6  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.3    3 years ago

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits  one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the  deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence ( Learn More ). Sources listed in the Questionable Category  may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not  considered  fake news  unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source.  See all Questionable sources.

  • Overall, we rate The Federalist Questionable and far-Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that always favor the right and promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, and numerous failed fact checks.

Detailed Report

Questionable Reasoning: Conspiracy Theories, Propaganda, Failed Fact Checks
Bias Rating: RIGHT
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

I guess they have changed a lot in the past 4 years

The are about 1/8th of an inch from being banned here...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.5    3 years ago

Didn't they send each other love letters?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Split Personality @3.1.6    3 years ago

Didn't the Federalist used to be considered somewhat reliable and factual?

Now it seems to be nothing but garbage.  

I honestly don't know how a lot of these 'articles' are able to be posted because of the questionable content and 'sources'.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  Split Personality @3.1.6    3 years ago

Several posters here post a lot of that garbage from the Federalist.  I honestly wish it would be banned.  It's pure hate against Democrats/Liberals/Progressives, of course.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.10  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.7    3 years ago

Didn't they send each other love letters?

I think that was Kim Jong-un.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.1.11  MrFrost  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.1    3 years ago

512

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.12  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Split Personality @3.1.6    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.13  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.9    3 years ago

Eventually enough conservative sources will be banned that conservatives will simply migrate away to more tolerant open minded places.  We will not moderate our use of favorite sources to be accepted here just because a site full of lying liars keeps on re rating so many of our favored sources.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.14  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.8    3 years ago

Nothing about it and quite a number of conservative sites has changed at all except how certain small minded bigots at a certain biased site view them.  

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.1.15  MrFrost  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.1    3 years ago

512

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.16  Ozzwald  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.12    3 years ago
removed for context

Would Liz Cheney be considered as a conservative source?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.17  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.13    3 years ago

[DELETED]

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.18  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.17    3 years ago
You're calling this site 'full of lying liars'?

That would be a self fulfilling prophesy on his part.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.19  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.17    3 years ago

I’m not significantly on any of those places you mentioned and I’m still here and one other place somewhat  similar to this.  I have more time to use on places like this while off work on disability while doctors try to figure out what’s going on inside of me.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.20  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.18    3 years ago

I never said that about this site.  Read more carefully and you can figure out exactly what site I did say that about.  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
4  Ozzwald    3 years ago

My favorite is:

Birx made personal visits to states where she undermined the president’s COVID-19 messaging

What was Trump's messaging?

440px-20200401_Trump_coronavirus_quote_timelines_-_Washington_Post.svg.png

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5  Tessylo    3 years ago

Where was that 'tremendous control'????????????????Code for doing absolutely nothingFUBAR

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @5    3 years ago

Where was that 'tremendous control'????????????????Code for doing absolutely nothingFUBAR

I thought "executive time" was his code for doing nothing.

 
 
 
Hallux
Masters Principal
6  Hallux    3 years ago

"... the Great Barrington Declaration, which was signed by numerous other doctors and scientific experts."

Still bring this up? Those numerous other 'experts' included 1000's of 'doctors' and 'scientific experts' who were not. Most were whack jobs offering up concoctions made of bark or swimming with whales 'therapies'. Several of these 'doctors' all had degrees from an offshore university based on an island off the coast of northern Australia, an island that had no residents and no buildings.

BTW, the mask mandate has ended ... I guess the commies aren't going to take over after all ... looks like you'll need to find another squirrel to chase.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
6.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Hallux @6    3 years ago

They had no choice but to end it when half the states didn’t have one and so many were openly mocking it and defiantly not complying with it. They had to either end it or resort to force and coercion to enforce it.   That’s how to deal with a statist democrat regime. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Masters Principal
6.1.1  Hallux  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1    3 years ago

Do all Trumpists get a free garage full of excuses when they bend the knee?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
6.1.2  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Hallux @6.1.1    3 years ago

We will never bend the knee before the Biden regime or his supporters.  We stand tall in open defiance.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7  Tessylo    3 years ago

When did he do anything in the first place?  

 
 

Who is online