COVID-19 Social Distancing Was Not Based On Scientific Data, Fauci Admits

Evidence increasingly suggests that the majority of governmental policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic were largely ineffective. Perhaps the best example of this can be seen in an analysis published in 2022 by researchers at Johns Hopkins University in the United States, which found that pandemic lockdowns only prevented 0.2 per cent of global deaths from the coronavirus. Based on a review of 34 independent COVID-19 studies, the analysis revealed that school and border closures, confining people to their homes, and limiting public gatherings had virtually no effect in reducing the number of deaths.

The Johns Hopkins researchers concluded that there was “no evidence” such measures had any noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality. Given the “devastating effects” of lockdowns, the researchers recommended they should in future be “rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument.” Revealingly, border closures were found to be even less effective in saving lives than the lockdowns themselves, with mortality rates being reduced by just 0.1 percent.

Similarly, despite many governments making them mandatory in certain settings, it turns out that standard cloth masks barely filter any particles at all, thus essentially making them almost useless for preventing the spread of COVID-19. A study conducted by researchers at the University of Bristol in the UK suggests such masks may even have contributed to the spread of the pandemic as they encouraged the people wearing them to believe they were acting safely.

To read about research into the use of so-called N95 masks, which, while supposedly offering the highest level of protection against viruses, may potentially even increase overall mortality risk, see this article on our website.