Follow the science

Vincent J. Curtis

17 Jan 21

How many times have we heard the command: “Follow the science”?  Well, let’s do just that.  A few weeks ago, I challenged the Spectator (and everybody else!) to find the scientific studies which showed the effectiveness of lockdowns in controlling the spread of COVID-19.  After ten months, there ought to be at least one.  It was, and is, my belief that restrictions did nothing, except perhaps promote the spread, at least initially.  It turns out that there is now a study ready for publication by authors who are connected with Stanford University Medical Department.

The paper is entitled, “Assessing Mandatory Stay-at-Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID-19” and was written by Eran Bendavid, Christopher Oh, Jay Bhattachary, and John I.A. Ioannidis.

This is what they found: “Conclusions:  While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find any benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs (i.e. Non-pharmaceutical interventions).  Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions.”  NPI is the term they used for lockdown restrictions as a means of controlling spread.

Let’s follow the science.  The findings are that lockdowns are worthless for controlling spread.  But they do wreck the economy and cause other medical, psychological, and social ills to the population as a whole.  Their arbitrary and, as it turns out senseless, unscientific rules and enforcement are testing our belief in the rule of law.

The scientific conclusion is obvious: end the lockdowns now!  Follow the science!

-30-