The following excerpt is from Chapter 11 in the book. There was a lot of information prior to this chapter that explains the science behind some of the assertions. Two of the big facts are: we were lied to about were the individual severity of COVID, especially to children, and the “problem” of asymptomatic spread. Both of those lies are exposed and debunked in the book.
But this is one of my favorite sections so I wanted to share. Yeah, it is a bit of a rant.
Here is the excerpt from the second half of chapter 11:
The lockdowns have already had devastating consequences, and we have no idea what the long-term effects are going to look like. I am not even talking about the economic repercussions here. Everyone agrees there are going to be massive and long-lasting economic consequences from the lockdowns.
But that isn’t even the proper discussion because the economic consequences are just the beginning. The argument that this is a question of lives over money is simply specious nonsense meant to distract us from the real cost.
- Trump is bad and dangerous.
- Trump cares more about making money than saving lives.
- Lockdowns save lives, and lives are more important than money.
Blah, blah, blah. It is a specious argument because it feels good superficially, but it ignores the true costs. I am so glad you can feel good about yourself and shame others because of your bullshit argument. How about we look at the real-life costs of the lockdowns?
Do you remember how COVID severity reduces significantly with age?
As of May 16th, there are 12 deaths from COVID in the USA from children under the age of 15. That is 1 death for every 5 million children.
I am literally getting angry writing this because I know where this is going.
Stanford Children’s Health estimates that 2000 children under the age of 15 die each year from accidents in the home. Children are 166 times more likely to die in a home accident than COVID. We locked them up in their homes, which are 166 times more dangerous to them than COVID.
But that little stat is just for perspective on how little risk children are at from COVID.
This is where I want to cry; it upsets me so much.
The following snapshot is from the American Psychological Association.
We were so damn busy arguing how children are the “silent carriers” that are going to kill their grandparents that we forgot our duty to protect one of our most vulnerable populations, our children. How many children were locked away in bad situations only made worse by the stress? And with no supports? How come that is not all over the damn press?
I love how the article points out that even parents with solid skills will be tested while being locked down with their children. Remember all the jokes on Facebook about parents having to deal with their kids?
Think about homes where there are already severe challenges because of issues with the parents, the children, or both. Now magnify that by locking them together 24/7 with no supports in place. How do you think that went?
1,720 children die each year from abuse or neglect, 143 times more than have died from COVID, according to the report from childwelfare.gov. Do you think that number decreased with 24 hours a day, seven days a week containment? Do you figure everything went well?
Add in no social interaction, the inability to get respite and just take a break, or get help, and no opportunity for someone to intervene, provide supports, or notice the effects of abuse and report it was all gone.
And 1,720 is just the number of deaths. How many other children will suffer from a lifetime of trauma due to what happens to them during this time? My day job is working with troubled young children, many of whom suffered from horrible abuse, so I have witnessed its effects. There are real costs to the lockdown beyond the economic ones.
If you argued this debate was a tradeoff between lives and money, you should be embarrassed. If you ever made the argument that children are dangerous instead of vulnerable, you are complicit in the adverse effects suffered by those decisions. It was “selfish” to expose one of our most vulnerable populations for your political and emotional gain.
Children were never at risk from COVID, but they were selfishly put at risk because we could not take an honest look at the information. We knew they were not at risk from COVID before any school shut down. We knew they were not at risk from COVID before any shelter in place was issued.
Children were not at risk from COVID, but we put them at risk from a variety of much worse things. And now we are keeping them at risk over bullshit politics and our emotional needs. Absolutely disgusting!
And this is just one issue; there are the health effects of people locked in their homes for extended periods of time, drug and alcohol issues, the mental health needs that developed, were exasperated, or underserved, the child hunger issues, the impact of social isolation on children, and on, and on, and on.
This article was from the Washington Post on May 4th.
I will leave you with one more. This report is from ABC7 news on May 21st.
“Suicides on the rise amid stay at home order, Bay area medical officials say.”
But yeah, this is all about lives being more valuable than money. If you made this false argument to avoid discussing the real dangers of lockdown, you should be ashamed. The lockdowns did not save lives; it just traded them. The lockdowns did not slow the spread of COVID; at best, they only delayed the spread. The lockdowns were an attempt to fight a mythical monster that had devastating consequences.