Connect with us

Coronavirus

Study: Lockdown “Will Destroy at Least Seven Times More Years of Human Life” Than it Saves

“Likely more than 90 times greater.”

Published

on

Getty Images

A study has found that the “stay at home” lockdown order in the United States will “destroy at least seven times more years of human life” than it saves and that this number is “likely” to be more than 90 times greater.

As we have repeatedly highlighted, the untold cost of the lockdown in terms of untreated serious illnesses and the impact on mental health will not be fully known for years, but discussion around the issue has been limited in the mainstream media.

Now a new study finds that debilitating stress and anxiety caused by the lockdown, including turmoil caused by huge job losses, could lead to a plethora of negative health problems that will have a far greater overall toll on human life than the number of lives saved by the lockdown.

“Based on a broad array of scientific data, Just Facts has computed that the anxiety created by reactions to Covid-19—such as stay-at-home orders, business shutdowns, media exaggerations, and legitimate concerns about the virus—will destroy at least seven times more years of human life than can possibly be saved by lockdowns to control the spread of the disease. This figure is a bare minimum, and the actual one is likely more than 90 times greater.”

Research shows that at least 16.8% of adults in the United States have suffered “major mental harm from responses to Covid-19.”

Extrapolating these numbers out, the figures show that “anxiety from responses to Covid-19 has impacted 42,873,663 adults and will rob them of an average of 1.3 years of life, thus destroying 55.7 million years of life.”

This contrasts with “a maximum of 616,590 lives (which) might be saved by the current lockdowns, and the disease robs an average of 12 years of life from each of its victims, which means that the current lockdowns can save no more than 7.4 million years of life.”

The seven times figure is a massively conservative estimate which minimizes the impact of the negative consequences of lockdown and maximizes the number of lives affected by lockdown.

“Under the more moderate scenarios…anxiety will destroy more than 90 times the life saved by lockdowns,” states the study.

The study lists a number of reasons why the lockdown has increased anxiety and depression, one of which includes the media’s role in exaggerating the deadliness of COVID-19 and “using false denominators that exaggerate its death rate.”

“This research is engaging and thoroughly answers the question about the cure being worse than the disease,” concluded Joseph P. Damore, Jr., M.D., who reviewed the study.

As we highlighted earlier, psychiatrists wrote 86% more prescriptions for psychotropic drugs, including antidepressants, during the lockdown months of March and April compared to January and February.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.

Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading
Comments

Coronavirus

Biden: “Get Vaccinated or Wear a Mask Until You Do”

Vaccine refusniks could be forced to cover up indefinitely.

Published

on

Alex Wong via Getty Images

Joe Biden has suggested that Americans who don’t take the COVID-19 could be forced to wear masks indefinitely.

“The rule is now simple: get vaccinated or wear a mask until you do,” tweeted Biden. “The choice is yours.”

The direct missive followed an announcement by the CDC that Americans who had taken the vaccine could remove their masks indoors.

However, the updated advisory came with a laundry list of exemptions. Masks will still be mandatory on all forms of public transport, in airports as well as for doctor and hospital visits, nursing homes, jails and homeless shelters.

It is not known how those who have been vaccinated will prove they’ve taken the shot, nor how enforcement of mask wearing for those who haven’t will be conducted.

In lecturing Americans who don’t take the jab that they’ll be forced to mask up for potentially months or even years longer, the Biden administration is creating a second class of citizens, presumably as a punishment for “anti-vaxxers.”

Earlier today, he called on Americans to treat those who choose to wear masks “with kindness and respect,” despite there being significantly more incidents of ‘Karens’ screaming at and harassing people for not wearing a mask.

The lifting of mask mandates for those who’ve taken the shot comes after weeks of complaints that there was no incentive for taking the vaccine given that it didn’t change anything for those who had it.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Coronavirus

Video: Rand Paul Continues Fauci Feud; “He Could Be Culpable For The Entire Pandemic”

“The person they hired to investigate the lab for the WHO perspective is the guy who gave the money”

Published

on

Steve Watson

Screenshot

Senator Rand Paul continued to slam White House medical advisor Thursday, saying that Anthony Fauci could be culpable for the entire coronavirus pandemic.

Paul was attacked by leftist media Wednesday for merely questioning Fauci’s extensive role in granting funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology at a Senate hearing.

CNN’s Anderson Cooper declared that Paul should “have more respect at least for medical science.”

Paul hit back, noting that Fauci is lying about the NIH’s involvement in funding of the Wuhan lab.

Now in a further appearance on Fox And Friends, Paul has gone even deeper, accusing Fauci of being personally to blame for the global pandemic.

“The person they hired to investigate the lab for the WHO perspective is the guy who gave the money,” Paul urged.

“So NIH gave the money to EcoHealth. The head of EcoHealth – they got him to investigate whether Wuhan was doing anything inappropriate in their lab. But if they were then wouldn’t he be culpable?” The Senator questioned.

“Doesn’t he have a self interest in smoothing things over,” Paul continued, adding “I’m not saying he did cover things up but you wouldn’t appoint someone who is in the line of the supply chain of giving the money to them.”

“Ultimately here’s the rub. I don’t know whether it came from the lab. But who could be culpable? Dr. Fauci could be culpable for the entire pandemic!” Paul emphasised.

Watch:

As Infowars reported in April 2020, the NIH awarded a $3.7 million grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology to conduct coronavirus gain of function research.

Additionally, the results of the US-backed gain of function research at Wuhan was published in 2017 under the heading, “Discovery of a rich gene pool of bat SARS-related coronaviruses provides new insights into the origin of SARS coronavirus.”

Fauci has come under increased scrutiny as the NIH’s involvement with the Wuhan lab is being called into question.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/ PJW Shop

ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.

Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Coronavirus

Merriam-Webster Expands Definition of ‘Anti-Vaxxer’ to Include Those Who Oppose Forced Jabs

Polls suggest that’s 79% of Americans.

Published

on

Spencer Platt via Getty Images

The Merriam-Webster dictionary has expanded its definition of “anti-vaxxer” to include those who oppose mandatory jabs.

Yes, really.

The full definition of ‘anti-vaxxer’ now states, “a person who opposes vaccination or laws that mandate vaccination.”

It’s not known when the change was made, although in doing so Merriam-Webster has labeled millions of people ‘anti-vaxxers’ even if they don’t consider themselves to be anti-vaccination in principle.

The expanded definition means that even those who don’t doubt the efficacy or safety of vaccines and personally take them, but simply oppose the government having the power to forcibly inject someone, are now “anti-vaxxers.”

“Today I begin my new life as an anti-vaxxer,” tweeted Matt Walsh.

“When the Left controls the language, they control the narrative,” pointed out the Young America’s Foundation.

Indeed, a poll conducted by Morning Consult in December found that only 21% of Americans supported mandatory vaccinations, which means that 79% of Americans are now anti-vaxxers, according to Merriam-Webster’s definition.

“Anti-vaxxer” was the most-searched definition Wednesday on Merriam-Webster’s website,” reports RT. “Users of the site posted comments under the definition, complaining of “politics in the dictionary.” One observer said, “I, along with most of America, do not believe that trusting vaccines is synonymous with mandating them. We can’t even trust the dictionary anymore.”

In light of the roll out of the COVID-19 vaccination, the media has vehemently demonized “anti-vaxxers,” despite the AstraZeneca jab being pulled in several European countries due to its link to blood clots.

This is not the first time Merriam-Webster has changed definitions in a bid to amplify establishment narratives.

Last June, Merriam-Webster expanded its definition of “racism” to include “systemic oppression” of one racial group by another in response to a Black Lives Matter activist’s complaint.

Last October, the dictionary also edited its definition of “preference,” asserting that it was “offensive” to use it in the context of referring to someone’s “sexual preference.”

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Trending