Since the COVID-19 virus hit the U.S., the medical bureaucracy have acted in ways, consistent with it wanting the virus to have the maximum, destructive economic impact on our country. For example, Dr. Fauci et al, pushed a lockdown strategy, on a scale never before attempted in U.S. history. They did this in the face of the consensus of leading epidemiologists, expressing views consistent with the following note:
“A 2006 survey of disease mitigation strategies by several top epidemiologists called lockdown-style quarantines a throwback to antiquated disease theory & said it should be eliminated from serious consideration as a disease mitigation measure.”
The following is an excerpt from the related paper:
“There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza. A World Health Organization (WHO) Writing Group, after reviewing the literature and considering contemporary international experience, concluded that “forced isolation and quarantine are ineffective and impractical.”2 Despite this recommendation by experts, mandatory large-scale quarantine continues to be considered as an option by some authorities and government officials.
The interest in quarantine reflects the views and conditions prevalent more than 50 years ago, when much less was known about the epidemiology of infectious diseases and when there was far less international and domestic travel in a less densely populated world. It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease. The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration.”
No one should buy Dr. Fauci’s past assertion, that he had no thought about the economic and multi-sphere impact his recommendation would have on U.S. society. If leading epidemiologists thought through the holistic impact lockdowns have on societies like America’s, don’t you think Dr. Fauci, the nation's leading epidemiologist who headed up the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, did the same? Then there was the fact that Dr. Fauci never showed any interest or urgency in determining the mortality rate of COVID-19, which on learning how much lower it was than originally estimated, would have given him grounds to drastically curtail the draconian measures he was pushing. Finally, Dr. Fauci and his associates, hardly ever made a distinction between those most vulnerable to the coronavirus, and everyone else - for which the disease was less threatening than the flu. Dr. Fauci and his crew, along with just about every Democrat operative, happily conflated the level of risk COVID-19 posed to the most vulnerable, with the level of risk the virus posed to the rest of the population. It is this conflation of risk data, that is the foundation of the government’s overbearing control of the U.S. population. In other words, based on how the coronavirus affected the most vulnerable in our society, many Democrat politicians drafted policies regarding how everyone else should behave. That is like governors ordering the general population to stay away from beaches, because of how ultraviolet light affects Red Heads, Albinos, as well as those suffering from Photobia, and Xeroderma pigmentosum.
Americans need to get together with health experts, and start suing the government. It is tyrannical for the government to put restrictions on your activities, based on how a threat or virus affects others. If the government can reasonably manage the threat a virus poses to a relatively small set of the population, while hardly disturbing everyone else, it has a moral and constitutional obligation to do so.