We are talking late 2020, vaccination has nothing to do with anything I discussed in that post.

And the highest health authority in Germany was skeptical of ffp2 mask efficacy, why wasn't that crucial thing made public, why did they mandate them in Germany by claiming efficacy if their best experts were skeptical about efficacy?

It's illegal in most countries to claim science is x so I can mandate y, if science isn't x, as without that scientifical claim courts would remove the rule (not sure in the USA, but certainly in Italy Germany France that would be the case).

We have court rulings upending COVID restrictions on the basis of the purported scientifical claims. Except those scientifical claims were made up by politicians and we now have proof of that for Germany as well (we already did for Italy and the UK).

Lockdowns meanwhile were our generation holocaust, plain and simple.

The worst government peacetime atrocity against the whole population in western history. Most crucial constitutional rights suspended, predicated on, we now know, actual lies.

Maybe being skeptical wasn't enough? Tough to throw away the Chance of having some safety...?

Tell that to the population, then we check if local laws allow to mandate something you are not even sure will work

More sure that masks helped than harmed.

So what the fack with
oh, my little nose
woe is me

Doesn't matter with the fact that the German government kept the opinion on them , by the highest health authority in the country, secret, and mandated them on the basis on unsubstantiated pseudo -scientifical claims making up a non existent purported scientifical consensus about them.

This is ridiculous.

Which bigger violation of citizen constitutional right happened in the last 20+ years in western countries? if it's redicolous to consider lockdowns by far the worst thing to happen to citizen human rights in the last generation, what else would be our generation holocaust? or you object to the use of the word holocaust to refer to a once-in-a-generation or less heinous violation of human rights of the masses?

For the USA you have to go back to the vietnam war draft, for continental europe i think nothing comes close since ww2 (some countries might have some local mass violations in the past though, just waiting to see what you are proposing instead of lockdowns as the worst in decades)

Yes but the problem is that (allegedly) the government was actively lying to the population about the scientific information it had. You really don’t see the problem with that?

The comparison to the holocaust is ridiculous and not helping your argument at all Luciom. Even if some lockdown policy was bad, governments weren’t putting people in gas chambers, or anything remotely close to it.

He doesn't realize that that type of ridiculous hyperbole makes no one even listen to the rest of what he says. Like there's no chance I take a word he says seriously after saying something that monumentally stupid and offensive.

There was and is nothing indicating that masking is not effective against respiratory viruses. Cherry picking a few studies that were inconclusive and saying they were hidden from the public when there is mountains of evidence out there of masking's effectiveness and then using that to compare it to the holocaust is some of the most ridiculous crap I've ever seen in my life.

And it's close to it even without the holocaust stupidity.

I was mostly in favour of the mask mandates, since the downside was very small. I’m more concerned about the process of how policy was decided around lockdowns, and also the way governments were presenting information to the public.

I don’t consider myself qualified to make any claims about the actual effectiveness of lockdowns, although I’m happy enough to accept the majority view that they were overall a positive intervention.

Effectiveness is a non-issue. There is no doubt that separating people slows the spread of a respiratory virus. Arguing over that is silly. Ineffective policy is another issue entirely, of course, but the concept itself was never the issue.

Many make the mistake of comparing the results of ineffective policy with the results of a lack of any policy during a different time period (when more or less virus could be spreading, air temperatures could be different, shopping habits could be different, etc.) and many people were being cautious regardless of policy and then imagining that is some sort of controlled experiment that disproves the entire concept of not only separating people to slow the spread of a virus, but just any mitigation methods at all.

Not allegedly, the unredacted reports were clearly skeptical of mask efficacy (ffp2 efficacy! Imagine the other masks ).

Holocaust gravity is a reference for LOCKDOWNS, not mask mandates.

Lockdowns, the European ones with militaries in the streets.

House arresting 60m Italians for months is quite worse than killing 9k. Every day of illicit house arrest of 60m is 164k life years of illicit house arrest.

Even by counting 200 for a life, that's equivalent to cold blood assassination of 800 Innocents PER DAY in terms of human life lost.

We went under 72 days of Uber strict lockdowns march to may 2020 in Italy, that's equivalent to the government assassinating 56k Italians using very generous 200 years of wrongful incarceration = 1 life ratios.

For people who like freedom, so prefer death to unlawful incarceration, and have a median expected lifespan left of 50-55years, it's more than 4 times that.

Italy sent fewer than 10k Jews to the camps so we can quite clearly claim even the march-may 2020 lockdown alone was worse than the Holocaust FOR ITALY by at least an order of magnitude.

I admit for Germany the math is different (a lot more people killed there because of the Holocaust) and for Poland even more, sure.

But for Italy lockdowns were objectively, measurably, a lot worse than the Holocaust.

I understand most people don't realize the magnitude of the event, because they feel like "well 70 days under house arrest, it's nothing like death".

Well it actually is. When we count traffic accidents value lost we compare that to minutes lost in traffic because of lower speed! Because when you multiply that for every car route every person does it becomes worth more than many individual lives.

House arresting 60m people for months is *big*.

It was historically unprecedented in world history for a reason.

It's not hyperbolic to compare it to taking 6 buses full of people and executing them cold blood per day.

That's actually more or less the magnitude of the event.

It's like assassinating someone every 2 minutes.

Majority view AMONG WHO? Majority of what? What makes you confidently claim there is majoritarian consensus about that claim?

There is almost no trace of any comprehensive attempt to evaluate all the cons of lockdowns (all of them, numerically) and compare to the purported amount of lives saved.

Do you have any for a specific country proving that? That has everything included learning losses, mental health damage and so on, puts a number to every one of those lockdown damages, and confidently claim enough lives were saved even taking into account ALL direct and indirect costs, including supply chain disruption, recent inflation, increased public debt and so on and on, with all their long term effects?

We don't even have a clear "scientific" number to be able to claim HOW MUCH a day of lockdown costs for someone under it. What's the number? What's the price? There is no consensus and there can't be any because it's a subjective call.

I wouldn't go in lockdown for 500/day, some might for 100/day. Some might for free if it's brief for all I know.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg of costs, the pure freedom cost.

Take a country of 60m people like Italy, at 100/day/person (an ultra low ball estimate of freedom cost of lockdown, and that doesn't include all the other damages).

That's 6 billion euros per day in ultra-low estimate.

Given the expected value of a life saved from covid is low (you aren't saving young adults, rather mostly people with few years of life expectancy left), at say 10 years of LE each (already generous), 500k per life is already high end of the value.

That would mean every day of lockdown must save 12k people with an average life expectancy left of 10 years (nursing home residents have 3-4 years of LE for reference) JUST to break even with the freedom costs, before all other costs are considered.

It doesn't make any ****ing sense even in the most optimistic models even under utilitarianism. It doesn't make any sense at all even if they worked better than what the people who enacted them believed they did.

I don't know if you think you are doing anything other than making it less likely anyone is ever going to take you seriously, but you're not. Just thought you might want to consider that.

Just so you can maybe try to grab onto reality for a half a second before you continue this madness, consider these inarguable facts:

1) separating people inarguably slows the spread of respiratory viruses.
2) 6 million Jews were killed by Nazis during the holocaust.
3) 17 million people were killed by Nazis during the holocaust and by the Nazi regime's crimes against humanity.
4) you continuously comparing an attempt to keep a very dangerous virus from spreading unchecked to NAZIS LITERALLY KILLING 17 MILLION PEOPLE is insane and you should stop.

Just trying to help.

It's too bad putting someone on ignore doesn't completely get rid of having to deal with their........whatever that crap is.

well, there you go

I could see this making sense in your own mind but you have to realize you just made all of this up on the spot and its complete ****ing nonsense

Sure house arresting an innocent is worth less than 100 Eur per day really, which is why the state pays you more than that in cases of wrongful conviction

All actuarial tables value the life of old people far less than that of young adults , check them.

That's already how we assess damage in most civil cases.

That's the law that govern our lives regularly

Obviously not the same scope but for severity the violations of constitutional rights, the Patriot Act and use of FISA courts were worse.

I would argue Citizens United decision was a bigger constitutional slap in the face than lockdowns too.

But holocaust level, that's idiotic.

On the individual level sure, but scale is what makes an Holocaust-like event actually. And be careful, I compared to the Holocaust IN ITALY, while in general I said it was OUR GENERATION holocaust.

Holocaust in total did more damage to Europe than lockdowns? Yes. Not in every single European country though. (And to be clear, holocaust isn't synonym with WW2, every country which didn't have many Jews genocided OBVIOUSLY suffered a lot more from lockdowns than from the Holocaust, this shouldn't even be controversial).

Still in our generation, lockdowns were the event most akin to the Holocaust: massive violation of human rights of citizens in unprecedented scale, with the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of assassination in terms of years of life lost at a minimum.

Citizens united is a SCOTUS decision you disagree with but no individual negative right was touched (it was rather an expansion of the scope of the 1a), so there is no comparison to compressions of actual negative rights (things the government simply can't do to you full stop).

Yes mask wearing and a small period of lockdown was as bad as killing holocaust/6millions Jews.

What a bunch of stupid idiotic claim .


Btw u don’t care about science truth , If u did u wouldn’t hold the narrative u have on climate changes .
So stop Pretending ….