We've been looking at the incredible damage that lockdowns have done for a while now. Here's October 7's "Covid-19: "Lockdown Harms and the Silence of Economists"" and October 5's "Covid-19: The Stupidity Of Lockdowns" December 22's "WSJ: "The Fickle ‘Science’ of Lockdowns'" and October 8's Money, Money, Money: "A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Systemic Collapse and Pandemic Simulation". December 22's "COVID-19: Rethinking the Lockdown Groupthink",
Please note: this is a review article, not a refereed paper. The author sits on a comfy endowed chair at Simon Fraser University. His mountain realm looks down toward the ocean and downtown Vancouver. Our readers may know him from such hits as "The Nature of The Farm" (a play on Coase's The Nature of The Firm, ahem)
And now:
A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the
Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality
By Jonas Herby, Lars Jonung, and Steve H. Hanke
About the Series
The Studies in Applied Economics series is under the general direction of Prof. Steve H. Hanke, Founder and Co-Director of The Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise (hanke@jhu.edu). The views expressed in each working paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the institutions that the authors are affiliated with.
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis are designed to determine whether there is empirical evidence to support the belief that “lockdowns” reduce COVID-19 mortality. Lockdowns are defined as the imposition of at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI). NPIs are any government mandate that directly restrict peoples’ possibilities, such as policies that limit internal movement, close schools and businesses, and ban international travel. This study employed a systematic search and screening procedure in which 18,590 studies are identified that could potentially address the belief posed. After three levels of screening, 34 studies ultimately qualified. Of those 34 eligible studies, 24 qualified for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
They were separated into three groups: lockdown stringency index studies, shelter-in-place-order (SIPO) studies, and specific NPI studies. An analysis of each of these three groups support the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average. SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.
....MUCH MORE (62 page PDF)
HT: it's all over the internet today.
If interested see also:Covid-19: "China’s Global Lockdown Propaganda Campaign"
