| > Are they? This reads as petty reasoning of someone who refuses to admit they were wrong even though that data screams in their face, and instead try to grab hold of nonexistent data to justify their personal beliefs. Oh, absolutely. In fact, I am rather confused which of the items in the list are even in question by you. Health issues - does anyone deny that many other health issues were not dealt with over lock-down [eg. our dentist refused to deal with anything not emergency level for over a year], or that elderly were left unattended because of lock down? Mental Heath issues - this has been discussed recently on HN, but it is pretty obvious, IMO. Business effects - China sets a perfect example, but why do you think all these relief bills were set up? Societal effects - also alot on HN, people are interacting less, and it is reflected in multiple ways. The data is literally in your face on this, though I am always happy to see if there is something I am missing. Do you have links? > This reads like a rebranding of the whole "Fauci wants to take over as dictator" conspiracy theory. Wibber, wat? I don't mean Fauci. And hypocrites in politics exists on all sides of the spectrum. Many are the country and county where the one in charge used lock-downs as a way of getting the subjects be much further under their thumb. China is a great example. > the people most vulnerable to their propaganda are now disproportionately hit by the disease Nope. I actually happen to have facts. In one heavily tracked city [Jerusalem], the community that was most lax about lock-downs also had the least deaths per age overall. Vaccines are a whole other story [my family was vaccinated, and for better or worse, one got sick from it] - not directly related to the article. |