I don’t dispute for one second that lockdowns have had negative effects, in a whole raft of ways: education, social development, mental health, the economy, to name but a few. And what’s more, those negative effects have been unevenly spread. ‘It’s not fair, ‘twas ever thus, I don’t know what you do about that.
The thing is - NOT locking down would also have had negative effects, in the shape of more Covid cases - or perhaps the same number of Covid cases over a shorter period of time. And THAT would have meant more deaths:-
- more Covid deaths, because more people would have caught it before they’d had the chance to be vaccinated
- more deaths from other causes, because of you think the delayed diagnosis and treatment for cancers and other things are bad now, they would have been worse without lockdown suppressing Covid.
It’s not that I think lockdown is a barrel of laughs, I don’t at all. It’s more that the consensus of the scientific bods is that it was better than the alternative, at least at the population level.