Again, you make the mistake of others of not considering the side effects of the lockdown. The lockdown came at a HUGE price- lagging student learning, increased depression and anti-social behavior, business bankruptcies, and inflation.
When was this table formulate? Well into the pandemic?
Neil and the Imperial College was scaring world leaders to death at the onset of the pandemic.
Do you still actually believe the lockdowns were a good idea?
The table was published March 16, 2020. If memory serves me right that was around the time our POTUS was saying Covid would magically disappear by Easter Sunday.
Yes I do, the US suffered a Covid death rate of 1.1% and the UK had a death rate of 0.9%. Thatās 0.2%, (2,247 dead Americans) more deaths than the UK suffered. Who knows what our death toll would have been with your suggestion of zero lockdown efforts.
How much inconvenience do you think 2,247 American lives is worth?
How many deaths would you suggest not having a lockdown would be worth?
This is an excerpt from an NIH funded study:
In Sweden, the number of people who died with COVID-19 was 577 per million inhabitants, resulting in an estimated 6,350 life years lost per million inhabitants. In Denmark, where a strict lockdown strategy was installed for months, the number of people dying with COVID-19 was on average 111 per million, resulting in an estimated 1,216 life years per million inhabitants lost. The incremental costs of strict lockdown to save one life year was US$ 137,285, and higher in most of the sensitivity analyses.
So far off topicā¦
I cannot believe it. A lockdown true-believer still exists! Some people are incapable of retrospective learning.
Read the first paragraphs.
I guess you also approve of the FBI censorship of the lab leak in social media?
Yeah, I know. I have heard the argument. Any amount of totalitarianism is justified just to save 1 life.
Trouble is, all the lives that were lost BECAUSE of the lockdown to to social dysfunction. Not to mention the livelihoods destroyed.
Sorry, I cannot take the word of an anti-democratic Austrian anarcho-capitalist organization over my own government.
You need to find someone more gullible than I. Your Libertarian roots seem to be taking nourishment from some pretty interesting sources my friend.
The Mises Institute website you linked is dedicated to promoting, not American interest, but Austrian interests. Their intellectual underpinnings are a tad extreme for me, but if you prefer an unrestrained capitalistic way of life to our form of government, then have at it, itās a free country.
Their attempt to discredit the FBI is simply another step in their attempt to do away with our stable democratic republic and replace it with some hare-brained idea of a country run by competing capitalist interests making the rules up as they go.
Now youāre venturing into silly-land!
If what you say was true, then how you explain the mortality rate difference between Finland and Sweden? Based on Swedenās fatality rate, Finland would have had 11,976 deaths if they had followed the same protocols. Instead they had 8,431, thatās 3,545 FEWER deaths
Note: Population in 2021 of Finland = 5.541M, Sweden = 10.42M
I canāt believe it! A lockdown true believer! I would be less amazed if I encountered a Holocaust denier or someone who thought the earth was flat. And to contend there has been no active FBI censorship as well despite the e-mails to Twitter Elon Musk uncovered! Truly incredible!
This is the essential difference between you and me. I believe individuals should be left free to take risks as they see fit in their āpursuit of happiness,ā as guaranteed by our Constitution.
You believe that elites should be given unlimited power to āprotectā ignorant citizens from making the āwrongā choices in life. And collateral economic and social damage that comes with the edicts should not be taken into account.
Some people learn from policy mistakes. Others never do.
Actually this post touches on many things. One is the flawed Ferguson predictions that caused global overreaction.
You ask the wrong question. How much more societal misery, how many more business bankruptcies, and how far behind students in schools would you tolerate in order to save one more life?
I beginning to understand now how much you value money. So just how much money do you think a human life is worth?
In my way of thinking, a bankruptcy, financial setback or crisis can be corrected and overcome, a human death is not, to my knowledge, a reversible event.
And itās not about one human life, itās about millions of human lives.
Your āinformativeā post is a link to a right-leaning blog. Itās an April 9, 2020 opinion piece claiming that Ferguson set off a costly and unnecessary āoverreactionā is the product of fringe theorists.
As proof of their claim that Fergusonās warnings were overstated your blog article linked to a March 17, 2020 Washington Post article. In that article the author, William Booth, said:
āIf Britain and the United States pursued more-ambitious measures to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus, to slow but not necessarily stop the epidemic over the coming few months, they could reduce mortality by half, to 260,000 people in the United Kingdom and 1.1 million in the United States.ā
In fact, after Britain and the US implemented those suggested measures, Britain actually had 233,791 deaths, and the US actually had 1,169,666 deaths.
It appears the Dr. Fergusonās predictions, were pretty much right on target. Present-day facts bear that out and prove your sources were wrong.
Why do you believe that garbage?
BTW: When I Google āFerguson Effect,ā I get thousands of hits dealing with the negative effects of public scrutiny influencing police actions taken on street crime, mostly a negative phenomena. I hope that was an oversight on your part and not an attempt to confuse the issue at hand. 
I am beginning to understand how little you value liberty. Saving lives should subordinate every other human desire. There is no limit to the activities the government should restrict to save lives. For example:
- Mandatory mask use forever in public.
- Outlaw mountain climbing, motorcycle riding, parachuting, scuba diving, and private aviation. These all contribute to a higher mortality rate.
- Outlaw anal sex, an important vector for fatal infectious diseases.
No matter how much fun it is, any recreational activity that increases mortality risk should be outlawed. Those who oppose it should be shamed by telling them they do not value human life.
Thinking people can decide what risks they are willing to take. Thinking people do not want to live under totalitarianism even if they are safer. You apparently do.
Although your posted examples of regulatory actions to back up your silly claims are imaginative and colorful, they not real. It appears to be a sign of desperation to prove a point that canāt be defended by real facts. None of those things have been prohibited by law for the reasons you claim. But feel free to try and find some archaic blue laws that you might feel justifies your position, I canāt wait to see what you come up with.
Thinking people can, and do whatever they wish, Iāve done a lot of risky things in my life.
But no one has a right to take actions which infringe on the rights of their fellow Americans. Thatās why a person isnāt allowed to bring a rabid pit bull into your office and leave it in the waiting room while you treat them. Itās why itās illegal for you to decide that itās OK to drive on the wrong side of a highway just because you feel like it.