WSJ: Lockdowns should not have happened

[Matt]

When a SARS-like virus was reported spreading in Wuhan in late 2019, most Americans never imagined their own government would soon close schools, churches and businesses, order people to stay home, and spend more than $5 trillion to offset the damage. Yet a year later, here we are.

The anniversary is a moment to consider what the pandemic has wrought and how well the U.S. has responded. Healthcare workers have been courageous, drug companies ingenious, and average Americans resilient. The political class and health experts? Not so much.

Start with China and the World Health Organization, which is supposed to patrol for global health threats. China lied and the WHO played along. After censoring doctors, Beijing denied there was evidence of human-to-human transmission until shortly before it locked down Hubei province with 60 million people. Many Chinese had already left the country for Lunar New Year.

The delay cost the world vital weeks in preparing for the virus, yet the WHO praised China for its transparency. We now know the virus by late January was spreading undetected in the U.S. and Europe. China’s ability to manipulate the WHO shows how the free world has put too much faith in multilateral institutions with authoritarian governments as members.

President Biden and Democrats blame Donald Trump for 530,000 American deaths, though any Administration would have been tested. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention botched development of a Covid test, and the Food and Drug Administration was slow to authorize private alternatives. The U.S. was caught with a shortage of protective equipment and ventilators, though it mobilized fast on both.

U.S. deaths adjusted for population are comparable to Western Europe’s. Asian countries also experienced surges, though fewer deaths because of healthier populations. Island nations Australia and New Zealand closed their borders. Mr. Trump too often downplayed the virus, and his compulsion to make himself the center of the Covid story is a major reason he lost the Presidency. But most politicians and public-health officials also minimized the virus early on because they didn’t want to cause panic.

Mr. Trump’s biggest mistake was putting too much faith in health experts and their lockdown models. As hospitals in northern Italy burst with patients, epidemiologists predicted U.S. hospitals would soon be overwhelmed. On March 16, Mr. Trump ordered a 15-day national lockdown to “slow the spread,” which he later extended through April.

Lockdowns were understandable a year ago in the Northeast given how little was known about Covid. But as we warned at the time (“Rethinking the Virus Shutdown,” March 20), “no society can safeguard public health for long at the cost of its overall economic health.” As state shutdowns continued, they compounded the virus damage.

The tragedy is how poorly we’ve adapted as we’ve learned more about the risks. Studies from Europe showed nearly half of deaths were occurring in nursing homes, and children rarely transmitted the illness or became severely ill. Treatments improved as doctors learned more, but government prescriptions didn’t change. As Philippe Lemoine argues nearby, the accumulating evidence is that lockdowns don’t reduce the virus spread in the long run.

Lockdowns nonetheless became an ideological battle. The media became lockdown cheerleaders as they sought to take down Mr. Trump, with tragic results for lost businesses, lost livelihoods and health damage in late diagnoses, untreated conditions and mental illness that will compound for years.

Children have lost a year of learning, which many will never make up. The lockdown recession hurt low-income workers the most, while affluent Americans could work from home. While it’s impossible to quantify the social harm, last summer’s riots and the deepening political discord didn’t happen in a vacuum.

There was an alternative. Tens of thousands of doctors signed the Great Barrington Declaration, which recommended that government minimize deaths and economic harm by protecting the vulnerable while letting most Americans return to normal life. Individuals and businesses could adjust to the virus and socially distance as they saw fit. The media and progressive elites dismissed these voices and refused to drop their lockdown dogmatism.

The Covid pandemic has seen the greatest loss of American liberty outside wartime. Politicians closed houses of worship without regard for the First Amendment. They ordered arbitrary shutdowns that favored some businesses but punished others. Politicians and governments have used the pandemic to justify an enormous expansion of state power. Government had to act in March to avoid economic catastrophe from the lockdowns it ordered. But the politicians keep amassing power even as vaccines are rolling out.

Government spending and deficits have reached heights unseen since World War II as a share of the economy, and taxes are likely to follow. The Federal Reserve has become a de facto arm of the Treasury to finance deficits, with unknown future consequences.

The pandemic is now easing thanks largely to the ingenuity of American drug and biotech companies. The Trump Administration’s Operation Warp Speed made the inspired decision last year to invest $20 billion developing six vaccine candidates. This is the best decision government made. Vaccines typically take a decade to develop, but years of private investment and innovation have paid off in advanced technologies that have cut the time to a year.

The pandemic has been a testament to American grit and resilience—but an undeserved windfall for government. We will be paying for the lockdown excesses for generations.

Hard to argue with ANY point in this editorial...

[zzand]

Nailed it

[Rate This]

When a SARS-like virus was reported spreading in Wuhan in late 2019, most Americans never imagined their own government would soon close schools, churches and businesses, order people to stay home, and spend more than $5 trillion to offset the damage. Yet a year later, here we are.

The anniversary is a moment to consider what the pandemic has wrought and how well the U.S. has responded. Healthcare workers have been courageous, drug companies ingenious, and average Americans resilient. The political class and health experts? Not so much.

Start with China and the World Health Organization, which is supposed to patrol for global health threats. China lied and the WHO played along. After censoring doctors, Beijing denied there was evidence of human-to-human transmission until shortly before it locked down Hubei province with 60 million people. Many Chinese had already left the country for Lunar New Year.

The delay cost the world vital weeks in preparing for the virus, yet the WHO praised China for its transparency. We now know the virus by late January was spreading undetected in the U.S. and Europe. China’s ability to manipulate the WHO shows how the free world has put too much faith in multilateral institutions with authoritarian governments as members.

President Biden and Democrats blame Donald Trump for 530,000 American deaths, though any Administration would have been tested. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention botched development of a Covid test, and the Food and Drug Administration was slow to authorize private alternatives. The U.S. was caught with a shortage of protective equipment and ventilators, though it mobilized fast on both.

U.S. deaths adjusted for population are comparable to Western Europe’s. Asian countries also experienced surges, though fewer deaths because of healthier populations. Island nations Australia and New Zealand closed their borders. Mr. Trump too often downplayed the virus, and his compulsion to make himself the center of the Covid story is a major reason he lost the Presidency. But most politicians and public-health officials also minimized the virus early on because they didn’t want to cause panic.

Mr. Trump’s biggest mistake was putting too much faith in health experts and their lockdown models. As hospitals in northern Italy burst with patients, epidemiologists predicted U.S. hospitals would soon be overwhelmed. On March 16, Mr. Trump ordered a 15-day national lockdown to “slow the spread,” which he later extended through April.

Lockdowns were understandable a year ago in the Northeast given how little was known about Covid. But as we warned at the time (“Rethinking the Virus Shutdown,” March 20), “no society can safeguard public health for long at the cost of its overall economic health.” As state shutdowns continued, they compounded the virus damage.

The tragedy is how poorly we’ve adapted as we’ve learned more about the risks. Studies from Europe showed nearly half of deaths were occurring in nursing homes, and children rarely transmitted the illness or became severely ill. Treatments improved as doctors learned more, but government prescriptions didn’t change. As Philippe Lemoine argues nearby, the accumulating evidence is that lockdowns don’t reduce the virus spread in the long run.

Lockdowns nonetheless became an ideological battle. The media became lockdown cheerleaders as they sought to take down Mr. Trump, with tragic results for lost businesses, lost livelihoods and health damage in late diagnoses, untreated conditions and mental illness that will compound for years.

Children have lost a year of learning, which many will never make up. The lockdown recession hurt low-income workers the most, while affluent Americans could work from home. While it’s impossible to quantify the social harm, last summer’s riots and the deepening political discord didn’t happen in a vacuum.

There was an alternative. Tens of thousands of doctors signed the Great Barrington Declaration, which recommended that government minimize deaths and economic harm by protecting the vulnerable while letting most Americans return to normal life. Individuals and businesses could adjust to the virus and socially distance as they saw fit. The media and progressive elites dismissed these voices and refused to drop their lockdown dogmatism.

The Covid pandemic has seen the greatest loss of American liberty outside wartime. Politicians closed houses of worship without regard for the First Amendment. They ordered arbitrary shutdowns that favored some businesses but punished others. Politicians and governments have used the pandemic to justify an enormous expansion of state power. Government had to act in March to avoid economic catastrophe from the lockdowns it ordered. But the politicians keep amassing power even as vaccines are rolling out.

Government spending and deficits have reached heights unseen since World War II as a share of the economy, and taxes are likely to follow. The Federal Reserve has become a de facto arm of the Treasury to finance deficits, with unknown future consequences.

The pandemic is now easing thanks largely to the ingenuity of American drug and biotech companies. The Trump Administration’s Operation Warp Speed made the inspired decision last year to invest $20 billion developing six vaccine candidates. This is the best decision government made. Vaccines typically take a decade to develop, but years of private investment and innovation have paid off in advanced technologies that have cut the time to a year.

The pandemic has been a testament to American grit and resilience—but an undeserved windfall for government. We will be paying for the lockdown excesses for generations.

Hard to argue with ANY point in this editorial...

Glosses right over Trump praising China’s response too in order to blame the WHO for the lack of pressure on the Chinese for starters. Tries to argue that the lockdowns and restrictions are permanent expansions of government power. There’s lots wrong with it. I expect nothing less from a biased newspaper. The rights equivalent to the New York Times. Thanks Matt Talks.

[bmw]

RT - you don't think that the lockdowns and restrictions are a permanent expansion of government power? While the lockdowns and restrictions will inevitably end SOME day, you're naive if you don't believe that this hasn't set precedent and created a template for government responding to any future "crisis."

And the author didn't even mention how Democrats took advantage of the crisis that fell upon their laps to tweak our election system in their favor with the end goal of Republicans never again holding significant power in this country. If the Dems succeed in their efforts, then the expansion of government power we see today will pale in comparison to what Democrats do to expand government power in 10 to 20 years down the road.

[Rate This]

RT - you don't think that the lockdowns and restrictions are a permanent expansion of government power? While the lockdowns and restrictions will inevitably end SOME day, you're naive if you don't believe that this hasn't set precedent and created a template for government responding to any future "crisis."

And the author didn't even mention how Democrats took advantage of the crisis that fell upon their laps to tweak our election system in their favor with the end goal of Republicans never again holding significant power in this country. If the Dems succeed in their efforts, then the expansion of government power we see today will pale in comparison to what Democrats do to expand government power in 10 to 20 years down the road.

They haven’t tweaked our election system to give themselves an advantage. The fact that Republicans gained in the house and the senate is a tie attests to that. A bad presidential candidate did them in at the top. Democratic turnout was on par with normal — it’s just that they voted absentee. So if they had tried to do what you allege they failed miserably.

The Republicans should try to have ideas and a platform instead of yelling about everything. You can’t beat something with nothing. They’ve got to adapt to the 21st century. They are chasing a world that no longer exists. Doubling and tripling down on conservatism under the idea that they weren’t conservative enough and the voters punished them for it (I’ve heard multiple conservatives argue this) is absolutely non-sensical. To remain relevant in 20 years or so when there simply aren’t enough baby boomers left to sustain a political party the Republicans have to adapt. They have to have bold ideas to make government work better and try to make people’s lives better so they get more support. All we see now are conspiracy theories, people saying no to everything and a whole lot of snowflake behavior around things that have absolutely nothing to do with governing and everything to do with grievances. The end goal is tax cuts for the rich using these idiotic grievances to get elected. There’s a reason they have been running on culture war issues for 50 years and never put their money where their mouth is and do something to settle these issues. It would cease to be an issue they could run on and get elected and the tax cuts could cease. Congratulations you’re a pawn and a sheep all at once. Bravo, that’s a tough thing to accomplish.

On a local level in the Spanish Flu pandemic there were lockdowns and business closures and school closures and mask mandates. None of that set a precedent for anything nor did it happen again 10 or 20 years later. You act like this is something unprecedented. It’s really not. It’s simply that states and the federal government are more organized than they were 100 years ago. A modern western country should function in an organized and well regulated fashion. This isn’t the Wild West anymore where anything goes and everything is la dee dah. That went out in the depression. Reach down and get your panties out of a wad. It’s going to be ok.

[Matt]

Glosses right over Trump praising China’s response too in order to blame the WHO for the lack of pressure on the Chinese for starters. Tries to argue that the lockdowns and restrictions are permanent expansions of government power. There’s lots wrong with it. I expect nothing less from a biased newspaper. The rights equivalent to the New York Times. Thanks Matt Talks.

You have failed the Trump challenge yet again, but he did quickly pivot and close down travel from China. Nancy Pelosi told people to go to Chinatown. Gretchen Whitmer held rallies for a man with dementia. The Matt Talks was a low blow. This was clearly marked as an opinion piece and it was copied in its entirety.

[Rate This]

Glosses right over Trump praising China’s response too in order to blame the WHO for the lack of pressure on the Chinese for starters. Tries to argue that the lockdowns and restrictions are permanent expansions of government power. There’s lots wrong with it. I expect nothing less from a biased newspaper. The rights equivalent to the New York Times. Thanks Matt Talks.

You have failed the Trump challenge yet again, but he did quickly pivot and close down travel from China. Nancy Pelosi told people to go to Chinatown. Gretchen Whitmer held rallies for a man with dementia. The Matt Talks was a low blow. This was clearly marked as an opinion piece and it was copied in its entirety.

It’s a reference to the fact that TC Talks regularly posts New York Times op-eds. Like it or not there is literally no difference between the two papers opinion pieces. One comes at it from the left and one from the right. Therefore your behavior and his is equivalent in this case. Too bad.

As for Trump... he was praising China into April. Sure he closed down travel from Wuhan province (not all of China, just Wuhan and one or two others) but they did a joke of a European ban that EXCLUDED other countries.

[Matt]

Glosses right over Trump praising China’s response too in order to blame the WHO for the lack of pressure on the Chinese for starters. Tries to argue that the lockdowns and restrictions are permanent expansions of government power. There’s lots wrong with it. I expect nothing less from a biased newspaper. The rights equivalent to the New York Times. Thanks Matt Talks.

You have failed the Trump challenge yet again, but he did quickly pivot and close down travel from China. Nancy Pelosi told people to go to Chinatown. Gretchen Whitmer held rallies for a man with dementia. The Matt Talks was a low blow. This was clearly marked as an opinion piece and it was copied in its entirety.

It’s a reference to the fact that TC Talks regularly posts New York Times op-eds. Like it or not there is literally no difference between the two papers opinion pieces. One comes at it from the left and one from the right. Therefore your behavior and his is equivalent in this case. Too bad.

As for Trump... he was praising China into April. Sure he closed down travel from Wuhan province (not all of China, just Wuhan and one or two others) but they did a joke of a European ban that EXCLUDED other countries.

The WSJ editorial board definitely leans right, but I've posted editorials where they have clearly criticized Trump. I also clearly marked that it was from the WSJ in my title. We only sometimes get TCT to either link or acknowledge where his copy/paste job originated. The WSJ has a hard paywall, so that is why I did not link.

[Rate This]

Glosses right over Trump praising China’s response too in order to blame the WHO for the lack of pressure on the Chinese for starters. Tries to argue that the lockdowns and restrictions are permanent expansions of government power. There’s lots wrong with it. I expect nothing less from a biased newspaper. The rights equivalent to the New York Times. Thanks Matt Talks.

You have failed the Trump challenge yet again, but he did quickly pivot and close down travel from China. Nancy Pelosi told people to go to Chinatown. Gretchen Whitmer held rallies for a man with dementia. The Matt Talks was a low blow. This was clearly marked as an opinion piece and it was copied in its entirety.

It’s a reference to the fact that TC Talks regularly posts New York Times op-eds. Like it or not there is literally no difference between the two papers opinion pieces. One comes at it from the left and one from the right. Therefore your behavior and his is equivalent in this case. Too bad.

As for Trump... he was praising China into April. Sure he closed down travel from Wuhan province (not all of China, just Wuhan and one or two others) but they did a joke of a European ban that EXCLUDED other countries.

The WSJ editorial board definitely leans right, but I've posted editorials where they have clearly criticized Trump. I also clearly marked that it was from the WSJ in my title. We only sometimes get TCT to either link or acknowledge where his copy/paste job originated. The WSJ has a hard paywall, so that is why I did not link.

He’s been better about it of late. The point still stands. They are old guard style Republicans. They will criticize Trunpism when it doesn’t suit the moneyed interests policy wise.

[Matt]

You have four posts in this thread where you have attacked alleged omissions and keyed in on particular statements, but what are your thoughts on a year of shutdowns. Was it necessary?

[Rate This]

You have four posts in this thread where you have attacked alleged omissions and keyed in on particular statements, but what are your thoughts on a year of shutdowns. Was it necessary?

All of the ribbing we do to each other and the snark from me aside (all in good fun) here is the reality of where I’m at on this:

100% in the middle. I’ve never been so torn on something in my life. On the one hand there has been a lot of pain and suffering by folks who have gotten the virus and those suffering long term effects and the 500,000+ who have died. On the other hand people’s lives including my own have been upended and their livelihoods altered or eliminated. Government at all levels completely botched it from jump. There are no easy answers here.

I will say that this was predictable both by the restrictions put in place during the 1917-19 pandemic and the foreshadowing during the SARS scare in 2003 when there was talk of similar measures being a possibility were it to get out of control as well as a potential race for a vaccine. Nobody reinvented the wheel here.

[Robert Faygo]

Nobody reinvented the wheel here.

A few tried, Sweden being the biggest example and, to a lesser extent, Florida. It's not that they reinvented the wheel as much as went against the convention of shutdowns compared to states like Michigan, New York, and California.

I don't know that there is a way to satisfactorily quantify the difference between more people dying from the virus vs. more people dying from the effects of lockdowns in terms of delayed medical care, eroded mental health, etc.

Clearly to me, the virus death toll is only a small part of the real toll of this pandemic.

There is probably no way to ever 'win' this argument since there are so many equally compelling and valid points to take into consideration.

[bmw]

As time goes on, my opinion continues to move in the direction that when history looks back on 2020-2021 in 50 years from now, it will determine that the draconian measures taken by not just our government, but governments around the world, in reaction to Covid, were some of the worst decisions governments have made in the past 300 years. The impact of what we've done will be felt decades from now, and I'm not at all convinced that we saved any significant number of lives by doing what we're doing.

While I was dead wrong with my very early predictions that Covid wouldn't be a big deal here in the US (and I wasn't alone - Dr. Faucci was saying the same thing at the same time I was), my opinion changed drastically once those early studies were published showing R0 values (how contagious it is) of Covid somewhere around 2.6 in China (1 person infects an average of 2.6 people). Considering that no pandemic in the 20th century came even close to those numbers, and considering how many people get the cold or flu every year (with R0 values usually between 1.3 and 1.6), it very quickly became obvious to me (and should have became obvious to everyone else - especially those in government making these decisions) that this virus was going to run its course and that there was no amount of social distancing or mask-wearing that was going to stop that from happening.

The goal SHOULD have been to reach herd immunity as quickly as possible while flattening the curve," the latter of which was a strategy that the media was pushing early on and was a good one. Do just enough to try to slow down the virus just enough so that the hospitals aren't overflowing. But once hospital resource use peaked in early April of 2020 and began declining, instead of easing restrictions to hurry herd immunity on its way, government instead doubled down on its draconian measures.

One other thing to add - and this is pure speculation on my part. I can't help but wonder if government interference with mother nature's herd immunity has exasperated the current problem of new variants? In other words, if we had let the virus run its course, could this pandemic have ended before this became a problem?

[Rate This]

As time goes on, my opinion continues to move in the direction that when history looks back on 2020-2021 in 50 years from now, it will determine that the draconian measures taken by not just our government, but governments around the world, in reaction to Covid, were some of the worst decisions governments have made in the past 300 years. The impact of what we've done will be felt decades from now, and I'm not at all convinced that we saved any significant number of lives by doing what we're doing.

While I was dead wrong with my very early predictions that Covid wouldn't be a big deal here in the US (and I wasn't alone - Dr. Faucci was saying the same thing at the same time I was), my opinion changed drastically once those early studies were published showing R0 values (how contagious it is) of Covid somewhere around 2.6 in China (1 person infects an average of 2.6 people). Considering that no pandemic in the 20th century came even close to those numbers, and considering how many people get the cold or flu every year (with R0 values usually between 1.3 and 1.6), it very quickly became obvious to me (and should have became obvious to everyone else - especially those in government making these decisions) that this virus was going to run its course and that there was no amount of social distancing or mask-wearing that was going to stop that from happening.

The goal SHOULD have been to reach herd immunity as quickly as possible while flattening the curve," the latter of which was a strategy that the media was pushing early on and was a good one. Do just enough to try to slow down the virus just enough so that the hospitals aren't overflowing. But once hospital resource use peaked in early April of 2020 and began declining, instead of easing restrictions to hurry herd immunity on its way, government instead doubled down on its draconian measures.

One other thing to add - and this is pure speculation on my part. I can't help but wonder if government interference with mother nature's herd immunity has exasperated the current problem of new variants? In other words, if we had let the virus run its course, could this pandemic have ended before this became a problem?

All of that is impossible to test. We know that when things were locked down the numbers dropped and when they opened up they increased again. That’s been a pattern that’s repeated again and again. That’s not really disputable.

What is a definite possibility is having dragged this out longer than it needed to go. The question is whether hospitals would have been overwhelmed had we done that. I suspect it would have gotten quite bad for a few weeks or a couple months maybe had we gotten it over with. So sure it would have been quicker but the cost might have been a little higher.

[MotorCityRadioFreak]

Matt, we have studies out of the UK and U-M(your alma mater) that say the Gretchen led lock downs saved lives. Academia doesn't agree that they were useless. States like Florida and Texas are still struggling with cases. And even if they don't lead to deaths, the great cost and "legacy" of COVID will be the long haulers and amount of long term disability faced. This will put a H*** strain on our PCP's. More than likely, we will see these cases of heart failure surge in the next 5-10 years. Right wing conservatives will blame obesity, but it will be COVID related. Just watch.