| | | Well, there is nothing scientific about lockdowns. In fact, it is decidedly anti-science. A friend of mine who is a doctor summarized it nicely for me. He said that doctors are always taught to weigh the costs and benefits of any treatment option. He said that in the case of COVID, he says lockdowns are well known to create so much widespread damage to people's lives, mental and physical health, that he does not recommend it. He'd far prefer people to wear masks, but go about their lives normally.
On the contrary, he says that only people over the age of 70 with co-morbidities should potentially engage in quarantines, since they are the ones most at risk. In other words, if you are fearful of catching COVID, then you should quarantine yourself, not force all others to quarantine themselves despite their minimal risk in order to assuage your fears. Generosity of spirit means that you deal with your own fears and don't demand the world change for you, but you change for the world.
Common sense is in short supply. If you really believe in "the science", then I challenge you to look at what the CDC data tells you about your own COVID risks of hospitalization, ICU, or mortality. My own risk of mortality = 0.18%. Most people that are healthy and below 70 have similar, minimal risks. That is why in a very real sense, this is a hoax. We are being fed a steady diet of non-scientific artifice, narrative, and propaganda. What we are all starved for is the sustaining substance of data, facts, and truth, which unadulterated science can provide, if it wasn't being censored by the well-meaning, but fearful Mandarins running our social media empires and bureaucracies in the US.
Follow the data science and take the test. Then tell me what your risk is and let me know if that risk changes your mind:
calculator.covid-age.com |
|
