Horowitz: Home orders are the worst thing you can do in a pandemic
It is clear that the mask obsession will continue indefinitely, especially in the blue states. When it comes to locks, it might seem like even all of the blue states have exited at this point. However, it is important for anyone who cares about freedom and true public health to ensure that there is a provision codified in law to prohibit home stay orders in the future. Failure to do so will ensure that lockdowns become the new basic policy response to any future influenza pandemic or even a misguided “expert” prediction of an impending pandemic.
If you listen carefully to every governor announcing the end of restrictions (with the exception of masks, of course), they don’t do so out of recognition that such policies don’t work and are in fact harmful. It’s just that the current level of business no longer justifies pursuing these policies and holding a Democratic administration politically responsible for the economic consequences of the midterm elections. But as soon as there is a warning from Fauci and his ilk of another pandemic, possibly even the return of the seasonal flu, they will immediately push the closures.
The numbers have been looked at backwards and forwards, and no one can find a single correlation between lockdowns and positive outcomes compared to a control group that did not implement these policies. Dozens of studies showed zero correlation based on geographic and seasonal comparison. The only correlation between lockouts and unique outcomes is more unemployment:
LOCKINGS AGAINST FREEDOM. Here is a view showing the impact on citizens of the government non-pharmaceutical interventionâ¦ https://t.co/wE2iNeeTeB
– KBirb (@KBirb)1620142499.0
A new discussion paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research demonstrates why this is the case.
“The micro-evidence contradicts the public health ideal in which households are places of solitary confinement and zero transmission,” concluded University of Chicago economist Casey B. Mulligan after analyzing the progression of primary and secondary attack rate by occupation and have compared them to household rates. . âInstead, the evidence suggests that ‘households have the highest transmission rates’ and that’ households are [COVID-19]. ‘”
We have always known that domestic transmission was the key ingredient in the pandemic from the start. Data from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health last year showed 83% of cases resulted from home exposure. At the same time, none of the places in a list of 21 categories – including K-12 schools, restaurants and food courts, as well as retail and services – has ever accounted for more than 2 % of business share.
So we closed our economies and left people at home for longer periods of time with less ventilation and closer quarters than they otherwise would have spent their time.
What’s worse is that when all of Fauci Inc.’s public statements, state advertisements, and road signs suggested that people should “stay home, save lives,” many fearful citizens took to the task. this literally. I have neighbors who literally never left their homes and stayed home nearby, living with depression and anxiety. Not only did this make it more likely that they would pass the virus to their homes if they caught it during any of the times they inevitably had to be with other people, it was depleting their health in a way that made them more vulnerable to it. virus. All the evidence shows that exercise, a low BMI, and exposure to the sun and vitamin D are some of the best ways to boost the immune system against serious illnesses caused by COVID-19. The lockdown mentality and policies actually ensured that people would suffer from all three of these vulnerabilities, like pouring lighter fluid on a fire.
The mix of anxiety causing panic and reduced human activity has caused Americans to gain weightâ¦ tremendously. According to a survey by the American Psychological Association, 61% experienced unwanted weight gain during the COVID panic last year, with the average weight gain being 29 pounds. Millennials have said they gain an average of 41 pounds, a trend that will create a long-term time bomb for heart disease, diabetes and an endless litany of other ailments.
It turns out, as we’ve always known, obesity is the 800-pound gorilla in the room for almost everyone under 65 who contracts a severe case of COVID-19. A March CDC study found that a “J-shaped (non-linear) relationship was observed between continuous BMI and risk” of three outcomes: ICU admissions, ventilation, and death. Overall, 78% of people in the study sample who were hospitalized for COVID-19 were overweight or obese. So we took a younger population that was largely unaffected by this virus and made a lot of them vulnerable through excessive weight gain.
Loss of exercise
Not only is exercise essential for avoiding obesity, it also puts people at an inherently lower risk of serious illness from COVID-19. A recent study of more than 48,000 people diagnosed with the virus last year found that lack of exercise makes a patient 1.73 times more likely to die from COVID, with those “constantly inactive” being 2.49 times more likely. likely to die.
âEven after including variables such as obesity and smoking in the analysis, we still found that inactivity was strongly associated with much higher chances of hospitalization, ICU admission and death. compared to moderate physical activity or any activity at all, âsaid one of the co-authors of the study, which was published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine. They found that “other than being over 60 or having a history of organ transplants, being consistently inactive confers the highest risk of death from COVID-19.”
So what did the government and the media do? Encourage everyone to stay home! They even closed gyms and arrested gym owners. Then the gyms that were opened had mask mandates, and in many places they imposed masks outside. What was the net effect? Further dissuade people from exercising, making them more vulnerable to COVID.
Another US study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine found that masking resulted in less exercise. “Sheet masks resulted in 14% reduction in exercise time and 29% reduction in VO2max, attributed to the perceived discomfort associated with wearing a mask, “concluded the authors of the randomized controlled trial.” Compared with no mask, participants reported feeling increasingly short of breath and claustrophobic at higher exercise intensities while wearing a cloth face mask. “
Lack of sun
It has already become clear from dozens of studies that vitamin D levels correlate almost perfectly with the outcome of COVID disease. Yet so many people have taken the diktat to stay home literally and have never left their homes even to soak up the sun. Most Americans already suffer from vitamin D deficiency, and the government has never warned people who do this to take high-dose daily supplements. In fact, they never informed the public that vitamin D should have been the mask and toilet paper from last spring. The result is that we have had people dying a year later after having had months to increase their vitamin D levels and instead saw them drop by avoiding vitamin D from the sun like it was the plague itself. Wearing a mask on the few parts of her body exposed to direct sunlight certainly didn’t help either.
Imagine if our government and our media had made exercise, weight loss and vitamin D the crazed obsession that was more directed towards masking and locking, which went against the three strategies of COVID mitigation. Imagine how many fewer people would have died from COVID and other illnesses.
Taken together, I don’t think the government could have found a better way to maximize deaths from both COVID and the COVID response than its approach to panic, fear, lockdowns and masking.
How prophetic the words of DA Henderson, the former dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, who is widely credited with helping to eradicate smallpox, when he wrote in 2016 that the lockdowns would produce so many negative effects that “this mitigation measure should be removed from serious consideration.” He said: “Experience has shown that communities facing epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is the least disturbed â. If only we had listened.