There are also questions about the methods used in the paper. Only 24 studies were included in the review and some were discarded for seemingly trivial reasons, which led to accusations the authors 'cherry-picked' studies.
But other experts said the review shows there is 'no evidence that lockdowns did any good and accused the British media of 'maintaining pandemic fear' by failing to cover the report.
Crucially, the researchers also left out studies which looked at early lockdowns in countries which managed to suppress Covid and record extremely low death rates during the pandemic through incredibly strict lockdowns and border controls — such as China, Australia and New Zealand.
Noting this limitation, the authors write: 'One objection to our conclusions may be that we do not look at the role of timing. If timing is very important, differences in timing may empirically overrule any differences in lockdowns.'
They add: 'Including these studies will greatly overestimate the effect of lockdowns, and, hence, we chose not to include studies focusing on timing of lockdowns in our review.'
No comments :
Post a Comment
ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.