• Michelle Leduc Catlin

At What Cost?

Updated: Jun 25


If you still think that the anti-lockdown movement is a right-wing thing, think again.


No group has suffered more as a result of lockdowns than the poor and working class.


And isn’t it the left who traditionally fight for the disenfranchised?


I don’t write about politics, and if you’ve been reading my blog you know that I don’t even like politics.


I write about spiritual principles and scientific evidence as they pertain to our health.


But the biggest obstacle to sharing the truth of lockdowns, masks, vaccine safety, and anything else covid-related is the perception that the right-wing is making stuff up because of some self-serving agenda.


There is an agenda at play, but it’s not the one being portrayed in the mainstream.


Why, despite pre-2019 WHO pandemic guidelines that did not recommend lockdowns, did we implement them?


Why, despite the now overwhelming data showing the complete ineffectiveness of lockdowns, have we persisted in using them?


And why, despite the fact that 98.6% of C-19 deaths occur in government facilities in Canada, is the general public still subjected to unfounded measures restricting our freedoms?


Sars-CoV-2, otherwise known as Covid-19, has not done the damage that we were told it would do.


This should be good news, not something to resist.

Here’s a visual perspective so that we can really get some context...


Unlike the disease, the measures to prevent it have done damage that is impacting billions, and will continue to do so for decades to come.


While we in the so-called developed world have suffered with the invasion of work in our homes, the suppression of children’s social development and restriction of their learning to online, this is nothing compared to the burden carried by developing countries and our own working class.


“We in the World Health Organisation [sic] (WHO) do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus….Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer.” WHO official Dr. David Nabarro

https://tnc.news/2021/01/17/just-the-facts-the-harms-of-the-lockdown/


“Virus-linked hunger is leading to the deaths of 10,000 more children a month over the first year of the pandemic, according to an urgent call to action from the United Nations…”

https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-africa-ap-top-news-understanding-the-outbreak-hunger-5cbee9693c52728a3808f4e7b4965cbd


“About 230 million Indians fell into poverty - defined as living on less than 375 rupees (US$5) per day - in the first year of the pandemic…”

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/india-covid-19-pandemic-hunger-poverty-economic-crisis-14914348


In the Concerned Ontario Doctors Covid-19 Summit interview I shared HERE, Harvard professor and epidemiologist Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said this…

“Lockdowns are focused protection of the rich….It’s the poor and working class that have born the brunt of the disease, and born the epidemiological…cost of achieving herd immunity….”

In the same interview, Oxford professor and epidemiologist Dr. Sunetra Gupta, who identifies as “left of Labour” in the UK, said this…

“Lockdowns are a luxury of the affluent.”

And here in our own Toronto Sun article, she and Stanford professor and epidemiologist Dr. Martin Kulldorff shared this graph of the disparity between the affluent affected by C-19 and the working class…


Even if lockdowns had some positive effect, they, like any health protocol, must be subjected to a cost/benefit analysis.


In other words, we must always ask, is it worth it?


From the Sun article…

“Lockdowns have generated enormous collateral damage on other health outcomes, such as plummeting childhood vaccination rates, worst cardiovascular disease outcomes, less cancer screening, and deteriorating mental health, just to name a few. Even if all lockdowns are lifted tomorrow, this is something that we will have to live with – and die with – for many years to come.
One of the basic principles of public health is to consider all health outcomes, and not only a single disease. Having thrown that principle out the window, we urgently need to bring it back to minimize mortality and to maximize overall health and well-being.”

As for the agenda, I’ll continue to share what I find and let you, dear reader, decide for yourself.


I will leave you with these images from the G7 Summit, and ask this question…


Is there a divide, some duplicity, a double standard?


You be the judge.



—————————————

If you found this blog useful, please hit the ❤️ button below.

If you’d like other people to have this resource, please share.

If you haven't already, please go to the BLOG page and subscribe.

If you can afford even the cost of a coffee each month, please consider a donation.

If you’ve got something to contribute, please leave a comment.

43 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All