“At least I didn’t die from the virus.”
Virtually every expert not directly employed by the government is rejecting the official coronavirus narrative. Accomplished professionals were censored from YouTube for daring to suggest that maybe there’s a better way of doing things than what the government is currently doing, and now a Nobel laureate is saying that the lockdown is worse than the disease.
The coronavirus lockdown could have caused more deaths than it saved, a Nobel laureate scientist has claimed.
Michael Levitt, a Stanford University professor who correctly predicted the initial scale of the pandemic, suggested the decision to keep people indoors was motivated by ‘panic’ rather than the best science.
Professor Levitt also said the modelling that caused the government to bring in the lockdown – carried out by Professor Neil Ferguson – over-estimated the death toll by ’10 or 12 times’.
Prof Levitt told The Telegraph: ‘I think lockdown saved no lives. I think it may have cost lives. It will have saved a few road accident lives, things like that, but social damage – domestic abuse, divorces, alcoholism – has been extreme.
‘And then you have those who were not treated for other conditions.’
Professor Levitt, who won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 2013 for the ‘development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems’, has said for two months that most experts predictions about coronavirus are wrong.
He also believes that the Government should encourage Britons to wear masks and find other ways to continue working while socially distancing instead.
Prof Ferguson’s modelling, on the other hand, estimated up to 500,000 deaths would occur without social distancing measures.
Prof Levitt added: ‘For reasons that were not clear to me, I think the leaders panicked and the people panicked. There was a huge lack of discussion.‘
The 73-year-old Nobel prize winner in not an epidemiologist, but he assessed the outbreak in China at the start of the crisis and made alternative predictions based on his own calculations.
Although Professor Levitt does acknowledge that lockdowns can be effective, he describes them as ‘medieval’ and thinks epidemiologists exaggerate their claims so that people are more likely to listen to them.
If the “leaders” panicked, then we need new leaders.
The amount of destruction that they’ve caused cannot be excused.
But they didn’t panic. This was carefully orchestrated.
If the rulers had panicked, they’d have lifted the lockdown as soon as data putting coronavirus at the same threat level as the flu emerged. But they didn’t do that, because the hysteria about this virus is being used to push all kinds of insane totalitarian policies on the people, like forcing everyone to get “immunity certificates” in order to interact with people and forced vaccinations.
We’re now in a weird situation where even official government data from all around the world is showing that the coronavirus is pretty much literally just the flu, while governments refuse to openly address that fact and admit that the lockdown is useless, because the coronavirus is the tool that those in power are using to take away people’s rights.
They say that you need to comply in order to save people’s lives, which automatically positions everyone resisting their kook totalitarian nonsense as someone dangerous who is risking people’s lives. But facts and data don’t support their agenda. Spreading accurate information about the virus can thwart the their plans.