Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
WHO calls for IMMEDIATE END to all global COVID19 lockdowns >

WHO calls for IMMEDIATE END to all global COVID19 lockdowns

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

WHO calls for IMMEDIATE END to all global COVID19 lockdowns

Old 10-11-2020, 03:58 PM
  #1  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Valorius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 1,846
Default WHO calls for IMMEDIATE END to all global COVID19 lockdowns

"Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer.”
-Dr. David Nabarro, WHO

https://thebullring2.blogspot.com/20...lockdowns.html

https://www.news.com.au/world/corona...1b297731c3da74

Last edited by Valorius; 10-12-2020 at 04:34 PM.
Valorius is offline  
Old 10-11-2020, 08:07 PM
  #2  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 6,214
Default

I saw that, and I think there is another piece to the picture. I also think the WHO official pointed out that increased poverty is ALSO associated with negative health outcomes. Why is this important? Well, isn't that what Trump has said from about 4 weeks into the shutdown? That deep economic pain itself kills people just like COVID kills people. Dead is dead, whether it is from COVID or from cancer that was not timely diagnosed or from substance abuse caused by economic hardship. So, you can't optimize ONLY on one parameter -- you have to optimize over MANY parameters.

Wait and see, now because some other person has said this, now it will be deemed genius and will be pushed. Plus, somehow it will be turned around that Trump did not articulate this point or argue this point.

Last edited by Alsatian; 10-11-2020 at 08:09 PM.
Alsatian is offline  
Old 10-11-2020, 08:13 PM
  #3  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,346
Default

So did WHO originally say to have long lockdowns or lockdowns no more than 2 weeks to slow the spread down and create time to develop other strategies like social distancing, wearing masks, keep high risk groups separate as much as possible, etc.? If WHO said limited length lockdowns, I'm not sure this is much of a reversal. If WHO said lockdown until a vaccine is created, then they deserve a lot of bashing and are functional idots in virus issues.
elkman30 is offline  
Old 10-11-2020, 09:03 PM
  #4  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 6,214
Default

Here is link to a really good interview with Scott Atlas from about 3 months ago. He had done an excellent analysis and published an article on the net health damage caused by lockdowns, with three co-authors, in "The Hill" on May 25, 2020. The WHO official is at LEAST 4 months late to the party. But better late than never.


Alsatian is offline  
Old 10-11-2020, 09:07 PM
  #5  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Valorius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 1,846
Default

More quotes from WHO, who has totally reversed itself:“The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganise, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

Dr Nabarro’s main criticism of lockdowns involved the global impact, explaining how poorer economies that had been indirectly affected.

“Just look at what’s happened to the tourism industry in the Caribbean, for example, or in the Pacific because people aren’t taking their holidays,” he said.

“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. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition.”

Melbourne’s lockdown has been hailed as one of the strictest and longest in the world. In Spain’s lockdown in March, people weren’t allowed to leave the house unless it was to walk their pet. In China, authorities welded doors shut to stop people from leaving their homes. The WHO thinks these steps were largely unnecessary.

Instead, Dr Nabarro is advocating for a new approach to containing the virus.

“And so, we really do appeal to all world leaders: stop using lockdown as your primary control method. Develop better systems for doing it. Work together and learn from each other.”

https://conservativelyspeakin.blogsp...-on-virus.html
Valorius is offline  
Old 10-12-2020, 04:33 PM
  #6  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Valorius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 1,846
Default

Really indepth article and multiple quotes from WHO sources:From the Foundation for Economic Eduction:

WHO Reverses Course, Now Advises Against Use of 'Punishing' Lockdowns

Even as the WHO calls on nations to refrain from imposing lockdowns, many governments continue to use this strategy.

Monday, October 12, 2020

One report states it could cost us $82 trillion globally over the next five years – roughly the same as our yearly global GDP.

Many of these initial lockdowns were justified by policy recommendations by the World Health Organization.

The WHO’s director-general Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, writing in a strategy update in April, called on nations to continue lockdowns until the disease was under control.

But now, more than six months since lockdowns became a favored political tool of global governments, the WHO is calling for their swift end.

Dr. David Nabarro, the WHO's Special Envoy on COVID-19, told Spectator UK’s Andrew Neil last week that politicians have been wrong in using lockdowns as the “primary control method” to combat COVID-19.

“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” said Nabarro.

Dr. Michael Ryan, Director of the WHO's Health Emergencies Programme, offered a similar sentiment.

“What we want to try to avoid - and sometimes it’s unavoidable and we accept that - but what we want to try and avoid is these massive lockdowns that are so punishing to communities, to society and to everything else,” said Dr. Ryan, speaking at a briefing in Geneva.

These are stunning statements from an organization that has been a key authority and moral voice responsible for handling the global response to the pandemic.

Cues from the WHO have underpinned each and every national and local lockdown, threatening to push 150 million people into poverty by the end of the year.

As Nabarro stated, the vast majority of the people harmed by these lockdowns have been the worse off.

We all know people who have lost their businesses, lost work, and seen their life savings go up in smoke. That’s especially true for those who work in the service and hospitality industries, which have been decimated by lockdown policies.

And even as the WHO calls on nations to refrain from imposing lockdowns, many governments continue to use this strategy. Schools in many US states remain closed, bars and restaurants are off-limits, and large gatherings–apart from social justice protests–are condemned and shut down by force.

The effects of the prolonged lockdowns on young people are now becoming more clear. A recent study from Edinburgh University says keeping schools shut down will increase the number of deaths due to COVID-19. Added to that, the study says lockdowns “prolong the epidemic, in some cases resulting in more deaths long-term.”

If we want to avoid any more harm, we should immediately end these disastrous policies. Any fresh calls to impose lockdowns should now be viewed with the utmost skepticism.

It’s time for the madness to end. Not only because the World Health Organization says so, but because our very lives depend on it.

As the doctors and scientists stated in the Grand Barrington Declaration signed this month in Massachusetts, the “physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies” have themselves caused devastating effects on both short and long-term health.

We cannot continue to risk our health and well-being in the long-term by shutting in our economies and our people in the short-term. That’s the only way forward if we seek to recover from the ruinous effects of government policy surrounding COVID-19.
Valorius is offline  
Old 10-14-2020, 01:31 AM
  #7  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,697
Default

these are supposed to be smart people ... did they not know shutdowns did this ? I'm a simple guy .. I figured it out pretty fast
Ranger77 is offline  
Old 10-14-2020, 05:40 AM
  #8  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 6,214
Default

I'm not sure WHO has the right picture yet. Looking at the information posted in this thread the focus by WHO seems to be on economic damage in the lower classes. I saw nothing that indicated WHO was concerned about economic harm to upper middle class or to upper class. Also . . . I didn't see anything that indicated WHO was concerned with negative health impacts of the lockdown policies themselves: vaccinations missed, chemotherapy sessions missed by cancer patients, cancer screenings missed, stroke sufferers who do not timely seek medical attention because of fear. Maybe I am reading the tea leaves wrong, but maybe this ISN'T a realignment of WHO thinking but only a minor adjustment to give a sop to the proletariat -- to make sure the workers know that the elites have the right social consciousness of their pain. I'm serious.

I would also say the language is bloody well wish-washy. What is meant by not relying "primarily upon lockdowns?" They don't exclude use of lockdowns only not to use them as a primary method. Pretty sketchy.

Still, I hope this is indicative of a movement towards sanity on the subject of lockdowns. And, if it is such a movement, it is going to put some wind in Trump's sails if he pushes that story. He was DEFINITELY there before WHO on the damages caused by lockdowns. All the way back in April, I think, Trump was saying the cure -- lockdowns -- can't be worse than the disease. But this is exactly what we are observing -- the negative public health consequences of the lockdowns kill more people than the lockdowns preserve through suppressing COVID.

By the way. It does seem to me this illustrates well the lack of prudence of Leftists and Democrats and progressives. They ALWAYS come up with some lame brained all-encompassing dramatic solution which takes no consideration of the unintended consequences. How often have your heard "the law of unintended consequences" invoked? Here the law of unintended consequences is definitely on display -- the unintended consequences of deaths caused by the lockdowns are greater in number than the number of lives purportedly saved by the lockdowns. I say this repeated failure of Leftist/Democrat/Progressive policies along these lines of unintended consequences proves they are unsuited to govern -- that their governing principles are irremediably flawed. I suppose this is not surprising because usually they are just looking to "check the box" on some Leftist/Liberal/Progressive bromide. If they can check the box . . . that is all that counts in their world. Actually effecting positive results is beyond their vision. A good example of this, by the way, is Obamacare.

They CLAIM -- they check the box -- that Obamacare is a great boon and has given tens of millions of otherwise neglected people health insurance. As I understand it -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- is that when you look into this, it isn't quite what it appears in the glitzy headlines of the liberal news media. I understand the premiums for Obamacare insurance are very expensive and the deductibles likewise are very high. Now, you tell me, if a poor person relies upon Obamacare for health insurance and the annual deductible is $15,000 . . . .how much real benefit has actually been provided to those people on Obamacare? My guess is most of them would say "Please! Take this away! It doesn't do me any good!" If they are actually paying any money in for premiums -- rather than having the government itself pay their premiums for them, to whit "subsidies" -- they probably feel they are paying something in exchange for nothing!!! But don't worry! The Democrat politicians can check the box on providing universal health insurance for these needy people!

Last edited by Alsatian; 10-14-2020 at 05:50 AM.
Alsatian is offline  
Old 10-14-2020, 06:04 AM
  #9  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,346
Default

WHO is trying to skate out of being held responsible for consequences they should have considered.
elkman30 is offline  
Old 10-15-2020, 01:36 AM
  #10  
Spike
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 4
Default

I believe the "lockdowns" are largely unnecesary, and the "new policies" associated with it are wrong, and ineffective.

I had an accidental injury to my right foot yesterday, that nearly smashed a toe, and did rip a toenail out by the root. At the urgent care center I was initially met with a no firearms permitted sign, which should have turned me away to find help elsewhere, but I needed help. My wife was not permitted in the room with me, despite my protests, citing "policy related to Covid 19", yet, without asking permission, a young man who turned out to be a medical student entered the room, alongside the girl taking information, and remained even after a nurse practitioner came in to examine me. The room was too small for "social distancing" to begin with, yet my wife was kept out and THREE people were crowded into the room! Please explain how the "policy" of not allowing the woman I've shared a bed with for more than thirty years is preventing the spread but three strangers in a cramped room, not even allowing social distancing is slowing the spread.

This whole "Covid" concept has been nothing but a politized flu, which we are learning despite political best efforts to hide the facts, has been reputed to kill many more than it actually has. Most are people WITH Covid who died of underlying causes, and it's been reported that as few as 6% died BECAUSE of Covid. Of the 214,000 reported deaths they claim are Covid, how many would be Covid deaths if the election were over, and, GOD forbid, Biden somehow got in.

Please keep in mind this is a flu for which there is presently no vaccine, but if the regular flu was here with no available vaccine the death toll would meet or exceed Covid.

Last edited by Pa flintlock; 10-15-2020 at 01:39 AM.
Pa flintlock is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.