>it will take ten years for us to say, I guess Ioannidis was right after all Sadly I doubt that more and more. Locking down is a win-win if what you care about

>it will take ten years for us to say, I guess Ioannidis was right after all Sadly I doubt that more and more. Locking down is a win-win if what you care about is not admitting a costly mistake. Its principal claim that it will save far more lives than it costs is essentially unfalsifiable to people who aren't willing to trust statistics, because lives lost to COVID are immediate and easily countable^, whereas someone dying of cancer in May 2021 because they did not get a diagnostic test in April 2020 but instead had to wait till July can just as easily be spun as being "death due to the virus" as "death due to the lockdown". Pointy-headed epidemiologists will publish some papers a few years from now and tease out whether the lockdown made sense (or rather, where it made sense and for how long) using mortality statistics and measures like Disability Adjusted Life Years (which make impressionable people uncomfortable due to the implicit suggestion that we should weigh a lost life by how many years of life were left to live). Will politicians admit failure as a result, if the studies suggest they locked down far too aggressively and for far too long? Never gonna happen. ^ or so the media thinks, i.e. is death with COVID = death from COVID?