APPARENTLY the wealth of the most affluent people in the world increased dramatically, by the trillions, in fact. That’s another piece of the puzzle. You’re saying that the laptop class, so to speak, got this focused protection as a result of the policy, also while being told that they were on the right side of things morally, because of doing their part to stop the spread – Jan Jekielek, Epoch TV, April 5 2022
Lockdown reorganised society to protect the wealthy while sacrificing the poor and the vulnerable. It has proved to be the biggest driver of inequality in our lifetime. That is the judgment of Dr Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University, one of the epidemiologists behind the Great Barrington Declaration, one of the dissenting scientists whom US Covid czar Anthony Fauci immediately set out to censor and demonise instead of engaging with their rational policy response advocacy.
In a recent interview with Jan Jekielek of American Thought Leaders and Epoch TV, Bhattacharya reveals why he was sceptical from the start about the science behind the ‘fifteen days to slow the spread’ promise. He immediately anticipated a wide range of collateral damage. Whatever form lockdowns over the world have taken they have had one thing in common, he says. They have proved a catastrophic failure: catastrophic ‘on its own terms of protecting people from getting and contracting Covid’ and catastrophic ‘in terms of all of the collateral harms it has had on societies around the world’. Lockdown, he says, is the single biggest public health mistake in history.
He is particularly condemnatory about the illusion of consensus that Tony Fauci, US health chief Francis Collins and Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust which funds many epidemiologists and scientists in the UK, worked to create by their ‘marginalising of scientists that disagreed with them, by working with the press and Big Tech to suppress the voices of scientists who did’.
He reserves particular anger for the impact of lockdown on the poor and on children: ‘We stopped the lives of these children for nothing. One other note to add to this about children, it’s not equally distributed. Parents of richer children sent their kids to private schools. In private schools that actually met in person, they had tutoring pods, where they would hire teachers who didn’t have anything to do because their school was out. They would hire these tutors and they would come to their home and teach the kids. Poor parents didn’t have that option. So you’re a poor family, maybe you’re a single mom, you have to go work. Your kids stay at home on Zoom school, and no one’s supervising them. Again, it was an example of trickle-down epidemiology. One group, the poor, have to pay the harms for compliance with this lockdown order that, again, didn’t do very much.’