UK Envoy to WHO Calls for End to Global COVID-19 Lockdowns: They're "Doubling" World Poverty - But remember, "the science is settled"!


The debate over how to respond to Covid-19, which shows no signs of disappearing anytime soon, continues to rage the world over. In the UK, there is an increasingly loud chorus of scientists and experts claiming that strict social distancing measures are doing more harm than good. The UK’s envoy to the World Health Organisation (WHO) has called for governments across the globe to cease national lockdown measures because of the socio-economic downturns they are producing. In an interview with The Spectator’s Andrew Neil, Dr David Nabarro slammed what he called the “ghastly global catastrophe” being caused by the use of lockdowns as “the primary means of controlling this virus.” He said that lockdowns should only be utilised to “buy you time to reorganise, regroup rebalance your resources” and to “protect your health workers."

The scientist offered up the grim prophecy that if the lockdowns continue on the current trajectory then there will be a “doubling” in the levels of world poverty and child malnutrition by 2021. Lockdowns make “poor people an awful lot poorer” he said. “I want to say it again: We in the World Health Organisation do not advocate lockdowns as a primary means of controlling this virus…Look what's happening to poverty levels - it seems we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition because children are not getting meals at school and their parents, in poor families, are not able to afford it,” he added.

Dr Nabarro, who previously worked as a Special Representative of the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, elaborated to The Daily Mail that too often the options that governments can take to combat the spread of Covid-19 are presented as a “stark choice” between lockdown or a Covid-19 rampage resulting from no lockdown. He said that he has now “become more and more convinced” that lockdowns should only be used as “a last resort.” “This is because of the way they impact on people’s livelihoods, mental health, non-Covid illnesses, access to education and more.” He has called upon governments to “develop better systems” by “work[ing] together and learn[ing] from each other” to beat the virus.

“If clusters and outbreaks do appear, they should be slowed and then suppressed promptly and that is why localised and targeted movement restrictions, implemented jointly by local actors and national authorities, will be needed from time to time. They should be kept as time-limited as possible.”
Dr Nabarro’s comments come hot on the heels of a letter which was written by Oxford University’s Dr Sunetra Gupta and has been signed by more than 6,500 scientists which warns that lockdowns and stringent social distancing measures are having “damaging physical and mental health impacts.”
The scientists claim that most of the population is not at risk of dying if they catch Covid-19 and that the majority should therefore be Abel to continue their lives as normal while the vulnerable are given extra protection.

“Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal,' the scientists say… keeping these [lockdown] measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed,” the letter says. Globally, there are around 36 million confirmed cases of Covid-19, with over 1 million deaths. In the UK, there are approximately 576 thousand confirmed cases, with 42,679 deaths so far.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since when did authoritarians worry about the economy instead of their agenda? Too bad the damage has already been done.
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of the economic damage could've been mitigated if the lockdowns didn't keep getting extended by two weeks and the politicians didn't come up with increasingly arbitrary (and impossible) requirements to reopen. Sure, we'd still be in a recession if the lockdowns largely ended in June, but that's a far better alternative than entire industries rotting away and the looming prospect of a new depression.
Agreed and it's how the lockdowns are implemented and how far they are willing to go with it. There were already warning signs last year in China about it but most politicians and governments didn't gave a shit about it till it reached further out and that's when the morons in charge started coming up with different ideas and how they think they knew how to deal with it and that it won't be a problem till it came knocking on their door and they panicked, completely changing their plans but at that point it was already too late.

This was pretty much incompetence and lack of balls at it's finest. They half arsed the 1st step, tripped on the 2nd step, fell back to the ground and half arsed their 1st step again and now they are going to trip on the 2nd step again.

I knew if I was in charge I would of had this outline.

1. Stop travel from other countries temporally, wait to see which country has their act together and which one has massive hotspots. Once a country has very limited amount of cases as well as the R rate shrinking and has taken precautions than open travel between them. Close travel immediately if cases start poping up between either country.

2. If our country has coof cases, here's my thinking depending on how far it's spread.

2.1. If one region has a case of it, Local lockdown the region where it came from and the regions surrounding it. Keep the rest of the country as normal. Have police & possible military surrounding the borders of the regions to stop any stragglers or plague rats from reaching the other regions/areas. Split the infected region into areas and block the regions from visiting each other for a period of time to get a grasp on which areas have covid cases. After a period of time and there are no cases of covid in the surrounding areas and regions of the infected area, unlock while keeping the closed borders towards still infected areas and regions. In enough time, the cases will start shrinking and the affected areas will slowly shrink.

2.2. If multiple regions have it and they are bordering each other, same way as 2.1 but on a wider scale.

2.3. If multiple regions have it and they are a fair distance from each other than this is where it gets tricky, at this point a full lockdown of the country has to be implemented. Take the scenario of 2.1 and apply it for each region having borders between each region without spliting any region into areas as at this point as the main idea at this point is to find which region hasn't had contact with the virus. Depending on how long the incubation period of the virus is which I think is about a maximum of a week and a few days? (Need to be clarified on that), lockdown for that length of time + a few days just to be sure. Once time has passed and certain areas have been free of Covid cases, open them up to surrounding regions that also don't have it either. At this point, the splitting of regions into areas begins and to monitor which areas have covid. After a certain amount of time again, open up areas that have no known cases while keeping the border towards infected areas. Do this for as long as it needs to be.

2.4 If all regions have it than fuck than it's either no lockdown or 2.2 for the whole country.

The plan is to snuff it out quickly and harshly, not let it spread as it will be a lot harder, more costly and lead to more loss of life if it's to let spread by half arsing it. Authoritarian as hell but it will get the job done if dealt with quickly.

Of course this is just a one man theory with spare time thinking out loud. Possibly just sheer nonsense or noise.
 
How many high-ranking officials who were calling covid dangerous broke the lockdown orders in various countries?

Do you think you have more information about it than they do? Equivalent amounts of info? If you do you're fucking stupid.

I mean, it's too bad we didn't just execute all the gays when they were Aids riddled back in the day. Would have saved us all a lot of problems.

No, the equivalent here would have been to have a government order for them to all stay inside and wear condoms if they went outside.
 
I know you're stupid, but you can't possibly be this stupid. While the virus is all over the world, people are still able to spread it and expose others who haven't been exposed yet.

Again, I know you're known for being slow around here, but even you can grasp this one.

Am I spreading the virus, or the pandemic?

According to you, I'm now Coronachan incarnate, like an ebil Santa Claus, traveling the world and gifting dat 'rona to all countries I visit. Man I wish I could just point my fingers and fuck shit up. Don't get my hopes up like that.

(:_(

Agreed and it's how the lockdowns are implemented and how far they are willing to go with it. There were already warning signs last year in China about it but most politicians and governments didn't gave a shit about it till it reached further out and that's when the morons in charge started coming up with different ideas and how they think they knew how to deal with it and that it won't be a problem till it came knocking on their door and they panicked, completely changing their plans but at that point it was already too late.

This was pretty much incompetence and lack of balls at it's finest. They half arsed the 1st step, tripped on the 2nd step, fell back to the ground and half arsed their 1st step again and now they are going to trip on the 2nd step again.

I knew if I was in charge I would of had this outline.

1. Stop travel from other countries temporally, wait to see which country has their act together and which one has massive hotspots. Once a country has very limited amount of cases as well as the R rate shrinking and has taken precautions than open travel between them. Close travel immediately if cases start poping up between either country.

2. If our country has coof cases, here's my thinking depending on how far it's spread.

2.1. If one region has a case of it, Local lockdown the region where it came from and the regions surrounding it. Keep the rest of the country as normal. Have police & possible military surrounding the borders of the regions to stop any stragglers or plague rats from reaching the other regions/areas. Split the infected region into areas and block the regions from visiting each other for a period of time to get a grasp on which areas have covid cases. After a period of time and there are no cases of covid in the surrounding areas and regions of the infected area, unlock while keeping the closed borders towards still infected areas and regions. In enough time, the cases will start shrinking and the affected areas will slowly shrink.

2.2. If multiple regions have it and they are bordering each other, same way as 2.1 but on a wider scale.

2.3. If multiple regions have it and they are a fair distance from each other than this is where it gets tricky, at this point a full lockdown of the country has to be implemented. Take the scenario of 2.1 and apply it for each region having borders between each region without spliting any region into areas as at this point as the main idea at this point is to find which region hasn't had contact with the virus. Depending on how long the incubation period of the virus is which I think is about a maximum of a week and a few days? (Need to be clarified on that), lockdown for that length of time + a few days just to be sure. Once time has passed and certain areas have been free of Covid cases, open them up to surrounding regions that also don't have it either. At this point, the splitting of regions into areas begins and to monitor which areas have covid. After a certain amount of time again, open up areas that have no known cases while keeping the border towards infected areas. Do this for as long as it needs to be.

2.4 If all regions have it than fuck than it's either no lockdown or 2.2 for the whole country.

The plan is to snuff it out quickly and harshly, not let it spread as it will be a lot harder, more costly and lead to more loss of life if it's to let spread by half arsing it. Authoritarian as hell but it will get the job done if dealt with quickly.

Of course this is just a one man theory with spare time thinking out loud. Possibly just sheer nonsense or noise.

Not even. At least in Canada people were trying to get the government to close the borders in Dec/Jan/Early Feb. but the federal government's response was "no dats waysis, Corona isn't a problem". And then all of a sudden, the entire country was on house arrest for no reason.

All they had to do was halt travel to China, send a plane to go scoop up citizens that were there, bring them all home and stick 'em in a hotel for two weeks. Anyone who didn't come when the government rolled in would have had to just stay in China until the travel ban was lifted.

But instead, we're run by a bugman.

Then again, you could just put sick people in quarantine at the hospital and let herd immunity do it's work.

Remember the lockdowns in response to H1N1 in '09? Oh, wait.
Remember the lockdowns in response to SARS in '03? Oh, wait.
Remember the lockdowns in response to Zika Virus? Oh, wait.
Remember the lockdowns in response to Ebola a few years ago? Oh, wait.

I think you see the pattern.
 
They kept getting extended by two weeks because they didn't shut the borders and still left tons of stuff open. If you're going to have a lockdown, you need to crush the virus, half-assing the lockdowns is worse than not locking down at all.

The lockdowns were always going to BE "half-assed" because you CAN'T (legally, morally or practically) weld everyone into their homes for a month to "crush the virus", those measures are repugnant to a healthy free society, unavailable to the authorities and will always have enough 'leaks' in quarantine that it was going to get out anyway

There was NO way to stop this once China let it fly. The ONLY chance at quarantine was bungled at the source, ON PURPOSE.

Once a critical-mass of the planet got infected, the only option was to let it run it's course.

And it was all an over-reaction anyway, the death toll when compared to population and infection rate do not justify the measures taken, as @muh_moobs points out, there were already several pandemics that nobody freaked about in the 90's and early 00's that came and went with similar loss of life, but for whatever reason, this time we all lost a year to a man-made panic on top of an actual (not that deadly) disease.
 
The lockdowns were always going to BE "half-assed" because you CAN'T (legally, morally or practically) weld everyone into their homes for a month to "crush the virus", those measures are repugnant to a healthy free society, unavailable to the authorities and will always have enough 'leaks' in quarantine that it was going to get out anyway

There was NO way to stop this once China let it fly. The ONLY chance at quarantine was bungled at the source, ON PURPOSE.

Once a critical-mass of the planet got infected, the only option was to let it run it's course.

And it was all an over-reaction anyway, the death toll when compared to population and infection rate do not justify the measures taken, as @muh_moobs points out, there were already several pandemics that nobody freaked about in the 90's and early 00's that came and went with similar loss of life, but for whatever reason, this time we all lost a year to a man-made panic on top of an actual (not that deadly) disease.

People freaked out because it's an election year and the best bet to unseat an incumbent President is to tank the economy.
 
The lockdowns were always going to BE "half-assed" because you CAN'T (legally, morally or practically) weld everyone into their homes for a month to "crush the virus", those measures are repugnant to a healthy free society, unavailable to the authorities and will always have enough 'leaks' in quarantine that it was going to get out anyway
I don't believe in a 'free society' and this is among the many reasons why, it's yet another example of the inability of 'free societies' to deal with real issues.

There was NO way to stop this once China let it fly. The ONLY chance at quarantine was bungled at the source, ON PURPOSE.
If you think it was on purpose you're overstating the Chinese government's competence.

Once a critical-mass of the planet got infected, the only option was to let it run it's course.
There were literal months before we had reached a critical mass.

And it was all an over-reaction anyway, the death toll when compared to population and infection rate do not justify the measures taken, as @muh_moobs points out, there were already several pandemics that nobody freaked about in the 90's and early 00's that came and went with similar loss of life, but for whatever reason, this time we all lost a year to a man-made panic on top of an actual (not that deadly) disease.
Yeah no.
 
Am I spreading the virus, or the pandemic?

According to you, I'm now Coronachan incarnate, like an ebil Santa Claus, traveling the world and gifting dat 'rona to all countries I visit. Man I wish I could just point my fingers and fuck shit up. Don't get my hopes up like that.

(:_(

Talk about obtuse, you were spreading the virus causing the pandemic. If you can't interpret "spreading the pandemic" to mean that, you are even more retarded than I thought.
 
I know you're stupid, but you can't possibly be this stupid. While the virus is all over the world, people are still able to spread it and expose others who haven't been exposed yet.

Again, I know you're known for being slow around here, but even you can grasp this one.
A virus that's killed what, 1 million of the 7.8 billion people on the plant?
 
huh guess the holocaust wasn't that bad
Stop making clown arguments, the Jewish population of 1939 Europe was around 16,500,000

If you want to use your smooth brain math; if the Holocaust was as bad as Covid 19 than than 2,263 Jews would have died during it.

More Americans die annually due to medical malpractice than have died of the Shanghai Shivers.
 
Last edited:
And testing of asymptomatic people coming back largely negative shows that you can't spread it unless you have symptoms.

Alberta completed over 1 million tests on asymptomatic people prior to ending testing except for those who are exposed. Results showed that only 7 in each 10,000 were positive.

COVID by the numbers:
Rate of contraction: 0.0007%
Recovery rate: 99.95% for the average person.
Fatality rate: 0.05% for the average person.

Both lockdowns and masks are unnecessary. Numbers gathered in the US and elsewhere prove this and are further backed up by Sweden. The only person I've seen throwing a temper tantrum has been you. Consistently. Each time these things come up in a thread, you're the first person to start calling people names and trying to shame them for valuing liberty over fear.

The US deaths wouldn't be nearly what they are if it weren't for Democrat governors ordering that Coronavirus patients be sent to nursing homes instead of hospitals which in turn spread the virus through the immunocompromised all as a means to pump up the numbers and try to make people afraid so they'd bend the knee to the state.

Leftist authoritarians, including you for supporting these politicians, are the ones with the blood on your hands, and no amount of mental gymnastics and shifting the blame will absolve you of your abhorrent decisions that have cost people their lives all so you can feel better about yourself.

I would say "shame on you", but I know Nazis are incapable of feeling guilt.
Nigga you literally showed up in a thread HHH wasn't even in and started autistically screeching about him, lol calm down
 
A virus that's killed what, 1 million of the 7.8 billion people on the plant?

And? That's with pretty strict measures in place. There's been 210k deaths in the US alone and it's not even close to being over or even at the peak yet.

Is it really that hard to wear a mask?
 
Back