EHSO home page - Free Environmental Health & Safety information, guidance and downloads of regulations and manuals online for home or EHS professional.

Do Lock Downs Work to Stop Coronavirus? Studies, Facts and Sources

By EHSO.com, the site for free, objective, practical information about the environment, health and safety in 2021!

Do Lock Downs Work to Stop Coronavirus? Studies, Facts and Sources

Do Lock Downs Work to Stop Coronavirus? Studies, Facts and Sources

The consensus against lockdowns is growing day by day, although the major new networks are trying to ignore it, as it does not fit their agenda. Cases are way up, deaths are down... but these facts do not seem to matter to some mayors and governors. There persist in imposing lockdowns.. which makes everything worse.

Medical experts who are opposed to lockdowns

A petition has been signed by 15,000 scientists urging an end to pandemic lockdowns. The letter, named the Great Barrington Declaration after the town in Massachusetts where it was written, was authored by University of Oxford epidemiology professor Dr Sunetra Gupta, Harvard University's professor of medicine Dr Martin Kulldorff and Stanford's Dr Jay Bhattacharya, a physician and epidemiologist, all saying lockdowns do more harm than good and called for a different approach to dealing with the coronavirus other than the lockdown model. See this in the Washington Times, October 8, 2020 and also reported by the BBC and the NY Post:Number of COVID-19 Deaths in the US January 2020 to Otcober 2020

The Great Barrington Declaration, which was released Tuesday and continues to gather signatures, was spearheaded by doctors from Harvard, Stanford and Oxford University.
"As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection," said the declaration.

A news story in mid-October 2020 regarding a WHO representative, Dr David Nabarro, the WHO's Special Envoy on Covid-19 pointing out that lockdowns should be used more carefully, and not as a primary means of controlling Coronavirus, has been controversial. Dr. Nabarro emphasized the consequences of lockdowns for increasing poverty. Nabarro said,


"We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus. The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we'd rather not do it... Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never, ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer. Look what's happened to smallholder farmers all over the world. Look what's happening to poverty levels. It seems that we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. CDC cases trend 2020We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition."

The Forbes article linked to above, downplay the claims that lockdowns don't work. But , many other studies and sources say lock-downs do not work.

In October 2020, a Stanford Professor, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a Professor of Medicine said Lockdowns ares More Harmful Than COVID. Yet another Stanford professor, Dr. John Ioannidis, one of the world's most renowned epidemiologists, said in December that the coronavirus might be less dangerous than assumed and that News media were overhyping the disease. He said the greater risk lay not in COVID-19 but in overzealous lockdowns to prevent its spread.

"We' re falling into a trap of sensationalism,. We have gone into a complete panic state", the Stanford University medical professor said.

And a report about quarantine measures in the United Kingdom in the British Medical Journal has suggested that as a result of the new coronavirus may have already killed more UK seniors than the coronavirus has during the peak of the virus.

The best quote on the subject is from American Enterprise Institute: April 21, 2020,

The burden of proof is to show that they do work! If you're going to essentially cancel the civil liberties of the entire population for a few weeks, you should probably have evidence that the strategy will work. And there, lockdown advocates fail miserably, because they simply don't have evidence.

Lockdowns DO cause great economic harm and increase poverty

First, substantiating what Dr. Nabarro said look at these sources: States with the tightest lockdowns have the worst economic recoveries.

May 19, 2020: More than 600 doctors signed onto a letter sent to President Trump urging him to end the lockdowns:

The letter outlines a variety of consequences that the doctors have observed resulting from the coronavirus shutdowns, including patients missing routine checkups that could detect things like heart problems or cancer, increases in substance and alcohol abuse, and increases in financial instability that could lead to "poverty and financial uncertainty," which "is closely linked to poor health."

Lockdowns cause physical and emotional harm

Whatever happened to "Flattening the curve"?

The point of lockdowns, we were repeatedly told, was to flatten the curve to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed at one time.

Dr. Mark McDonald, a California psychiatrist, said in a news story in May 2020;

"The very initial argument ... which sounded reasonable three months ago, is that in order to limit the overwhelmed patient flux into hospitals that would prevent adequate care, we needed to spread out the infections and thus the deaths in specific locales that could become hotspots, particularly New York City... It was a valid argument at the beginning based on the models that were given," McDonald said. "What we've seen now over the last three months is that no city -- none, zero -- outside of New York has even been significantly stressed."
McDonald is referring to the misconception that business closures and stay-at-home orders aimed at "flattening the curve" are meant to reduce the total number of people who will fall ill because of the coronavirus. Rather, these curve-flattening measures are meant largely to reduce the number of people who are sick at any given time, thus avoiding a surge in cases that overwhelms the health care system and causes otherwise preventable deaths because not all patients are able to access lifesaving critical care.

Senator Rand Paul (who IS a medical doctor) talking about Lockdowns and Face Masks:

On Saturday, December 19, 2020, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) told Breitbart News:

It' d be one thing if we were told you have to give up your liberty, you have to give up your freedom, we' re going to save your life. But what if you have to give up all your freedoms and they' re wrong on the science?

Every one of the mandates - and you look in country after country, state after state - you look at when the mask mandates went in - the incidents went up exponentially after the mandates. Restaurants, nobody can eat in a restaurant, there' s no science behind any of that.

Middle seat missing on the airplane, you really think you' re like 12 inches from the other guy instead of six inches, it really makes a difference? None of it really makes any sense, and there' s no epidemiological evidence. You know, it' s like, 'Wash your hands, stand six feet apart.'

There' s no evidence that that slowed down the [spread]. … The trajectory of the virus hasn' t been altered at all by any of these things. I think the vaccine will, and this is why I really despise people like the CNN Doctor [Sanjay] Gupta, who I think is committing television malpractice by saying, 'Oh, your mask is a much better thing than the vaccine.' Well, no, it isn' t. The masks aren' t working at all. The thing' s going through the roof and people are dying.

Studies that say lockdowns do not work:

The evidence that lockdowns not only cause great economic harm, but also simply are not effective at stopping the spread of coronavirus has been mounting for months.

News and opinion about Coronavirus lockdowns

  1. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, OCT 13, 2020 5:21 AM - Do Lockdowns Work? Let's discuss the efficacy of lockdowns.
    "Initially, experts and modelers suggested the death toll would be catastrophic if areas didn't lock down. Too rapid an increase in cases could overwhelm hospital systems, and so the initial strategy was not to stop the virus but to slow the spread.This seems like common sense: Separate people so they don't infect one another. Researchers later followed up with additional articles "proving" that they were right using further projections, though they acknowledge the difficulty in distinguishing between variables that impacted virus spread."
  2. The Wall Street Journal - The Failed Experiment of Covid Lockdowns
    By Donald L. Luskin. Sept. 1, 2020. "New data suggest that social distancing and reopening haven't determined the spread. Counterintuitive though it may be, statistical analysis shows that locking down the economy didn't contain the disease's spread and reopening it didn't unleash a second wave of infections."
  3. The Conversation - Lockdown didn't work in South Africa: why it shouldn't happen again
    October 14, 2020 9.24am EDT, Updated October 15, 2020.
    "We recently reviewed the evidence for the effectiveness of the lockdown at slowing the spread of the pandemic. The mitigation strategies initially implemented may well have gone some way to "flattening-the-curve" - that is, reducing the rate at which the virus spreads through the population. But we found no decline in either daily new cases or deaths between around 27 March, which was the first day of level 5; and the latter part of July, when cases began to tail off during level 3.Lockdown level 5 in South Africa was one of the world's strictest. Citizens weren't allowed to leave their residence except for essential purposes such as grocery shopping and medical care. All non-essential businesses were shut down, and cigarette and alcohol sales were banned."
  4. The Guardian UK - The pitched battle over lockdowns is missing the point: Covid-19 is a class issue, all about basic inequalities - and lockdown makes these worse
    John Harris, Sun 18 Oct 2020 09. "What has not been discussed nearly as much is the plain fact that the coronavirus crisis - even more so in its second phase - is all about basic inequalities, and the kind of questions of work, housing and poverty that deep crises always bring to the surface. In other words, Covid-19 is a class issue. That may sound simplistic, but what it actually denotes is an intricate set of considerations that the argument over lockdown is not acknowledging.
  5. The New York Post - Medical experts: Lockdowns do more harm than good
    By Martin Kulldorff, Sunetra Gupta and Jay Bhattacharya, October 6, 2020.
    "On Oct. 4, 2020, three preeminent experts - Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University; Dr. Sunetra Gupta, an epidemiologist at Oxford University; and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a physician and epidemiologist at Stanford University - delivered the following declaration, calling for a different approach to dealing with the novel coronavirus than the lockdown model: As infectious-disease epidemiologists and public-health scientists, we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental-health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection."
  6. CNN - Lockdown or a drip feed of Covid restrictions? One path is better for the economy
    By Zamira Rahim, Pierre Bairin and Gaëlle Fournier, CNN Business, Updated 6:38 AM ET, Thu October 15, 2020.
    "Governments across Europe are choosing between two vastly different strategies as a second wave of Covid-19 arrives in force. Most are imposing limited local restrictions and keeping their economies open. But in the UK and Ireland, scientific advisers have pushed for second national lockdowns, despite fears of an economic shock. The crisis, which hit Europe for the first time in early spring, is back - but this time around, many people feel that locking down society is too high a price to pay. "
  7. MedRXiv - Full lockdown policies in Western Europe countries have no evident impacts on the COVID-19 epidemic.
    Thomas A. J. Meunier, May 01, 2020.
    Extrapolating pre-lockdown growth rate trends, we provide estimates of the death toll in the absence of any lockdown policies, and show that these strategies might not have saved any life in western Europe. We also show that neighboring countries applying less restrictive social distancing measures (as opposed to police-enforced home containment) experience a very similar time evolution of the epidemic.
    Competing Interest Statement: The authors have declared no competing interest.
    Funding Statement: No external funding was received.

We URGE that this lockdowns be stopped. Those who are at risk (or perceive that they are at risk) should lock themselves down!