Science has spoken: End the lockdown

We agree that the lockdown was a choice that could not be avoided at the beginning of the pandemic. But we knew from the very beginning that lockdown is temporary. It was never meant to eradicate the coronavirus, nor was it designed as a long-term approach.

But here we are in the Philippines, three months into the longest lockdown in the world. Millions of workers have lost their livelihood, and even greater are those who have been forced to extreme poverty. Depression and anxiety plague even the young. But even with lockdowns in almost every city in the Philippines, case rates continue to increase. Citizens are now clueless and hopeless: however will we be able to get out of this situation?

The solution is simple: The Philippine government must mandate the end of all lockdowns. Restrictions on mobility for the healthy population must be lifted, as the country adapts a more targeted approach. No, we do not mean the gradual lifting of lockdowns. Rather, our demand is clear and straightforward: LIFT ALL LOCKDOWNS TODAY.

Why do we demand the lifting of lockdowns?

We have studied various resources that led us to the same conclusion: lockdowns no longer serve its intended purpose. It will not control the spread of the virus, nor will it protect those who are most vulnerable to COVID-19. Refusing to lift it will cause undue suffering for millions of otherwise healthy individuals. It will damage an entire generation of children who are forced to leave school and study at home. 

We have collated in this article a few of the hundreds of resources we read in the course of publishing for this website. We hope that you will go through each one of them, and on your own, discover why our position for the lifting of all lockdowns is so strong. 

We have arranged the articles by topic to help you navigate this issue.

Most lockdowns did not achieve their health objectives

Many countries around the world are lifting lockdowns, not because they need to reboot their economies, but because they discovered that lockdowns do not work. Atleast one country has already said that even if another coronavirus outbreak happens in the fall (which typically begins around September), lockdowns will no longer be implemented due to its ineffectiveness. 

Furthermore, lockdowns have massive societal imapcts

Perhaps the worst part of lockdowns is that it causes undue suffering. In the few months it has been implemented, it has threatened to overturn all the progress we have made in poverty reduction, human development, and human rights. 

Some countries were successful in dealing with COVID-19 without lockdowns

The experience of several countries have shown us that lockdowns may not have been necessary at all. 

Children are going back to school

For most countries, the reopening of schools have become a priority because children are the least affected with the coronavirus. Massive school closures in March were found to have huge impacts on the wellbeing and development of children. Today, atleast 22 countries in Europe have re-opened their schools and none have noted a surge in coronavirus infection.

Methodological defects plagued the lockdown approach

Current tests for COVID-19 are not accurate

Today, there is only one test that can confirm whether a person is infected with the coronavirus. Unfortunately, the accuracy of the RT-PCR is in question as the very inventor of the test has spoken against using it for diagnosis.

Mathematical models were not accurate

In the early days of the pandemic, countries around the world used the Imperial College coronavirus model to estimate the transmissibility of the virus. According to this model, at least 500,000 people in Great Britain and 2 million people in the US would die as a result of COVID-19. None of the original case and death estimates have come to pass.

For some, the huge disparity between the estimates and actual figures are due to the implementation of lockdowns. But this isn’t true – the problem is that the model used to project the impact of the coronavirus to countries is massively overestimated. 

Both created the COVID-19 hysteria

Yes, COVID can kill, but it is not as deadly as we think. All the panic and anxiety we have been subjected to in the past few months is a product of sensationalization and the lack of critical thinking among our leaders and the media. We have been manipulated into thinking that we are powerless against this virus. 

Inaccurate cumulative cases of infections gave rise to massive fear

The rate of infections had actually been declining

Even though the cumulative infections per country continue to rise, the rate at which daily infection is increasing is much lower. Moreover, new studies are showing us that some people who do get the coronavirus do not become infectious.

Infectiousness does not equate to deadliness

But even if the new coronavirus is in fact infectious, it does not mean that it is deadly. In fact, current estimates show that a majority of individuals who are infected with the virus do not exhibit any symptoms, while those who are indeed symptomatic only experience mild illness.

The death rate of COVID-19 is comparable with a strong flu

Recent estimates COVID-19 death rate shows that it is even less deadly than the common flu.

COVID-19 death reporting skewed to produce illusion of massive deaths

Current researches are showing that COVID-19 deaths are over estimated. In some countries, there is an outright manipulation of statistics. In others, the lack of clarity in reporting has caused the problem. Whatever the reason, we must remember, reported fatality rates for COVID-19 are much lower compared to other diseases such as pneumonia, and heart diseases. 

Most of the human population are immune to COVID-19 excerpt for certain age groups

Majority of people who contract the coronavirus will not develop any symptom. Also, very few truly healthy individuals die of COVID-19. Studies show that most fatalities come from the elderly, and those who have comorbidities. This points to one reality: the state of our current health determines the impact of the coronavirus on our bodies. There is no point in putting entire populations of healthy individuals on a community quarantine when we know exactly how the government can effectively control the COVID-19 devastation.

Vaccines are not needed for society to return to a real normal

Vaccines are not the ultimate solution. Safe COVID-19 vaccines will take years to create, not to mention the fact that it may no longer be unnecessary if we are individually, and collectively healthy. They present dangers that we are only beginning to understand.

Instead the “new normal” will result in a world of massive loss of freedoms and widespread violations of human rights

All over the world, people are deprived of their right to free movement. Governments can continue to repress civil liberties, all at the pre-text of safeguarding citizen health.

Big Tech has censored highly credible and independent scientists, virologists, medical experts who questioned prevailing narrative

Our immediate sources of information are highly controlled. Any individual or organization that dares to contradict the common narrative is censored or discredited.

The ultimate solution to COVID-19 is to strengthen our immune system

No medicine or therapy can cure COVID-19, and yet we hear of recoveries daily. COVID-19 positive patients are recovering because their immune systems are fighting against the virus.

We have been betrayed. It is now time for constructive action to defend our freedoms and full humanity.

Fear not only causes the decline of our immune system, it also prevents us from thinking critically. It paralyzes us from seeing truths and unraveling lies. The coronavirus panic has prevented us from seeing initially that lockdown are nothing more than a massive experiment. Moreover, panic caused us to ignore the science of the coronavirus which shows that the threat is minimal. If your country is still on a lockdown, ask yourself this important question: what is the government’s ulterior motive for refusing to lift these mobility restrictions, when the science and the evidence is clear?