Thursday, December 4, 2025

Did the Draconian Lockdowns Kill More People than Covid-19?

Did the Draconian Lockdowns Kill More People than Covid-19?

Brownstone Journal

Did the Draconian Lockdowns Kill More People than Covid-19?

People familiar with respiratory viruses know it is impossible to lock out such viruses by locking down the society. Yet, in virtually all countries, the politicians panicked to such an extent that, two months into the COVID-19 pandemic, I dubbed it the COVID-19 panic.1

The lockdowns were foolish and illogical. Denmark closed its borders with Germany and Sweden when we had more coronavirus than they had. Golf was forbidden, which led to the absurdity that you were allowed to walk on the fairways if you didn’t look like a golfer. Tennis courts were closed, although gatherings of four people were not forbidden. Even outdoor running clubs closed.2 Life as we knew it stopped, on government orders. 

There were early warnings but they were not heeded. After India introduced a lockdown three months into the pandemic, migrant labourers feared that hunger would kill them before the coronavirus did.3 Ten months into the pandemic, the World Bank estimated that it had caused an increase of about 100 million people living in extreme poverty,4 and poverty kills.

The pandemic saw a new breed of people who had become experts overnight but knew very little about the issues. They constantly appeared on TV with sinister messages about the need for lockdowns and many other interventions, including dressing whole populations as bank robbers with face masks, although they don’t work.5

Curiously, governments all over the world preferred to listen to the false gurus rather than to the real experts. I think it was because they supported the official narratives, ideas and dogma, which were flimsily created on the spot by politicians eager to be seen as powerful people who didn’t sit on their hands but did something. 

The pseudo experts were also loved by the media. I wrote in a newspaper that after a year with the same Danish “expert” on TV, Allan Randrup Thomsen, a laboratory researcher, who was always worried and uttered trifles virtually every day about the pandemic anyone could have said, I needed a new remote control because I had used the mute button so much that it had stopped working.6 When I asked a TV journalist why they always interviewed Thomsen, he said it was because Thomsen was well prepared as he read what some journalists had written! 

Only Sweden had a real expert the politicians listened to and respected, even after a public outrage7 when mortality figures became rather high in early 2020 compared with the other Nordic countries,8,9 which was because Sweden had failed to protect the elderly in the beginning. State epidemiologist Anders Tegnell stood his ground and advised that Sweden should not change its policy, which was to keep the society open and not mandate face masks, which were rarely seen in Sweden. 

Sweden was a lone star in the darkness. I think it was the only country that didn’t panic and did the right things, and it had the lowest excess mortality in the whole western world during the pandemic9-11 (excess mortality is the increase in all-cause mortality during the pandemic compared with prepandemic levels). 

The Panickers

The most harmful panickers were researchers from the Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis at the Imperial College London.12,13 The modelling exercises of Neil Ferguson and his team played a preeminent role in shutting down most of the world in early 2020, a couple of months into the pandemic. A year later, historian Phillip Magness wrote that the exaggerated forecasts of this modelling team “may well constitute one of the greatest scientific failures in modern human history.”13

I agree, and 2020 became the most surreal and shocking year in my whole professional life. The Danish Board of Health claimed it was documented that face masks were effective, which wasn’t true, and our government decided to kill all our 17 million mink only because a mutation had been found that might make future vaccines less effective, which was also wrong.2,14 In Denmark, we have four pigs for every citizen, and I asked in a newspaper: “What if our pigs got swine flu and there was a mutation in the flu virus? Should all our 25 million pigs then be killed? Where will this madness end?”14

Magness wrote that Ferguson’s team claimed credit for saving millions of lives through the lockdown policies and explained that they arrived at this figure through a ludicrously unscientific exercise where they purported to validate their model by using its own hypothetical projections as a counterfactual of what would happen without lockdowns.13

It became very dirty. Already one month after Ferguson’s model was published, researchers in Uppsala used it and showed clear signs of faltering. Later, at the one-year mark, Sweden had a little over 13,000 COVID-19 fatalities, smaller on a per-capita basis than many European lockdown states and a far cry from the 96,000 deaths predicted.13

In a House of Lords hearing, Ferguson snapped back, disavowing any connection to the Swedish results: “First of all, they did not use our model. They developed a model of their own.”13 This wasn’t true, but Ferguson continued deceiving people: “Imperial’s work is being conflated with that of an entirely separate group of researchers.” 

Ferguson was dishonest. He had made country-level projections, which few people would find as they were hidden in an Excel appendix to the College’s report, and they showed that their results for Sweden were nearly identical to those of the Uppsala team. 

How Effective Were the COVID Vaccines?

Yet again, the foremost deceptor was the team at the Imperial College London. They published a seriously misleading modelling study in a Lancet journal about the global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination.15

It became the most-cited study of the number of lives saved, which they estimated as 14.4 million avoided COVID deaths and 19.8 million excess deaths, with remarkably narrow uncertainty intervals, which their data and methods did not allow: 13.7 to 15.9 million and 19.1 to 20.4 million, respectively. 

In 2025, John Ioannidis and colleagues published a study that estimated that, during five years, from 2020 to 2024, the vaccines had averted 2.5 million deaths, with sensitivity analyses suggesting between 1.4 and 4.0 million.16

Considering that the College only looked at the first year of vaccination, the discrepancy between the two estimates is gigantic.

Even so, there were critical comments on John’s paper on the journal’s website that I agreed with and I also published my own.17 I noted that I had never seen a paper with so many assumptions before and that I found the estimates for vaccine effectiveness much too high, e.g. a reduction of 75% in mortality overall and 50% for the Omicron variant. 

The essential issue is that there were, and always will be, too many assumptions for estimating the effect of the COVID vaccines on mortality reliably. 

AstraZeneca’s Self-Congratulatory Estimates of Lives Saved

In March 2024, AstraZeneca withdrew its COVID adenovirus based vaccine from the market worldwide, officially due to a surplus of updated vaccines that targeted new variants of the virus,18 but with drug companies, we rarely know what the real reason is. 

Many newspapers quoted an AstraZeneca statement that, “According to independent estimates, over 6.5 million lives were saved in the first year of use alone,” but strangely, not a single newspaper provided any link to the source. 

As I got nowhere by searching on the Internet, I went to the company website where, mysteriously, I could not find anything either about the saved 6.5 million lives. But in a press release from May 2022, the vaccine, called Vaxzevria, was claimed to have “helped prevent 50 million COVID-19 cases, five million hospitalisations, and saved more than one million lives worldwide, based on model outcomes assessing COVID-19 worldwide.”19

These were monstrous lies. COVID-19 vaccines cannot prevent infection of other people because they produce IgG antibodies in the blood, not IgA antibodies in the respiratory mucosa.20 The whole idea of getting vaccinated to protect others, which we have heard constantly about in the media, is simply not true.

Interestingly, the 6.5 million lives saved were said to be an “independent” estimate, and the reference to the 1 million lives saved had only an internal reference: “Data on File Number: REF-131228.”

Non-traceable statements and unavailable data on file in a drug company should not be trusted and I could not find any of them, even though I searched intensely on the AstraZeneca website. But I found a press release from November 2021, six months earlier, which also claimed that 1 million lives had been saved.21 So, apparently no lives were saved between November 2021 and May 2022. 

Pascal Soriot, AstraZeneca’s CEO, found it remarkable that a million lives were saved less than a year after the vaccine’s approval. So do I, but not for the same reason. 

I suggest that Neil Ferguson and his team at the Imperial College London look for highly paid jobs in the drug industry. The industry also loves wild exaggerations about how dangerous diseases are and how many lives they can save. This is what they announce all the time. As I have explained, the drug industry doesn’t sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs.22

Can We See Anything on the Mortality Graphs?

If the huge numbers of lives saved claimed by Ferguson and AstraZeneca were correct, it should be possible to see an effect of the vaccine rollout on mortality in a graph. But the cumulative vaccine rollout and mortality ascribed to COVID are both smooth graphs:23,24

In contrast to the COVID vaccines, the measles vaccine is highly effective and when it was introduced in the USA in 1963, the incidence of measles dropped immediately and dramatically:25

These data are from the CDC, which, in an earlier publication, showed a graph that went further back in time. It is no longer available but is included in my vaccine book.2 The graph shows that the measles incidence was rather stable before the vaccine came on the market (the arrow is misplaced, should be moved two years to the left): 

The major differences to measles are that COVID-19 was caused by a new virus, highly likely manufactured in Wuhan,8,26 and that it was still spreading in a non-immune population when the vaccines were introduced, in December 2020 onwards. This makes it difficult to conclude anything about lives saved with the vaccines, but the graphs do not suggest any major effect on mortality. 

People Killed by the Draconian Lockdowns

It is futile to try to estimate the number of lives saved by the Covid vaccines. There were far too few deaths in the randomised trials to be of any use and the uncertainties in observational studies are far too many and too large to allow trustworthy estimates.

But in the trials, there was an interesting difference between vaccine types. Overall mortality for the mRNA vaccines was not reduced, risk ratio 1.03 (95% confidence interval 0.63 to 1.71) whereas it was reduced for the adenovirus-vector vaccines, risk ratio 0.37 (0.19 to 0.70).27

One of the many uncertainties is that the virus mutates rapidly. Another obstacle is that the WHO advised already in April 2020 that:28 “A death due to COVID-19 is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness, in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID disease (e.g. trauma).” 

This meant that some deaths ascribed to COVID were not caused by the virus, and the opposite was also true. Some people who died for various reasons without having been tested for COVID might have been killed by it. 

The lockdowns killed a huge amount of people but we will never get anywhere near a realible estimate, for at least seven reasons. 

First, as noted, lockdowns increased poverty dramatically.4 In an analysis by John Ioannidis and colleagues that compared 17 vulnerable countries defined as those with a low gross domestic product or large income inequality (which included the USA and the UK) with 17 other countries, there were 3,046 excess death per million inhabitants in the former group and only 500 per million in the latter.29

Second, it has been estimated, albeit in a modelling study, that lockdowns, lack of staff, and fear of getting infected increased maternal and child mortality in low- and middle-income countries so much that hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost.30 This is disastrous because it is loss of lives right from life’s beginning, childbirth, and the deaths of tens of thousands of young mothers. In contrast, the median age of those who died from COVID in the UK was 83 years.31

Third, people have died because they were not allowed to go to hospital, e.g. young people with meningitis. 

Fourth, people have died because they were afraid of going to hospital, as they might get a COVID infection. Hospital avoidance behaviour has been documented for heart disease,32-34 which led to increased mortality for heart attacks35,36 and heart failure.34 In Hong Kong, emergency department visits dropped by 25% while the 28-day mortality of non-COVID-19 deaths increased by 8%.37

Fifth, the lockdowns increased risk factors for cardiovascular diseases, e.g. because of low physical activity, stress, and unhealthy diet, and for other diseases, too, e.g. psychiatric ones.

Sixth, living closely together increases the risk of dying from a respiratory virus substantially because people get a high infectious dose and therefore may not mount an adequate immune response before it is too late. This was shown for measles in ground-breaking research by Peter Aaby, both in Africa38 and in one hundred-year-old historic Danish data.39 During the pandemic, people were asked to work from home, and if infected, they were quarantined, which increased mortality. The index person – the one who gets infected in the community – will often have a good prognosis because of low viral load, but when that person is ordered to stay at home, secondarily infected people in the household will have a considerably higher risk of dying.

Seventh, deaths caused by the lockdowns are still occurring. For example, lack of cancer care may lead to shorter survival in future. 

However, we could at least estimate how many lives that might have been saved, if other countries had had the same low excess mortality as Sweden. In the United States and in the United Kingdom, around 600,000 and 100,000 lives could have been avoided.40 These estimates agree reasonably well with the difference in population size. They do not take into account that many factors are different, e.g. many more people are obese in the US than in Sweden. On the other hand, that was also the case before the pandemic. Ioannidis estimated that the United States would have had 1.6 million fewer deaths if it had performed as Sweden.29

The Total Death Toll of COVID

Since we cannot separate virus deaths from deaths caused by lockdowns, we are left to estimate the total number of deaths the pandemic caused.

A study comprising the years 2020 and 2021 estimated that there were 6 million COVID deaths worldwide and 18 million (95% uncertainty interval 17 to 20 million) excess deaths (which include the COVID deaths).41 Another study, which also included only 2020 and 2021, provided a similar estimate, an excess mortality of 16 million (15 to 17 million).42 

In Europe, 66% of the excess mortality during 2020 to 2023 occurred in the first two years.11 If we adjust the average worldwide estimate of 17 million for this, we get 26 million excess deaths. 

The Economist has also estimated the total number of excess deaths in the world during the pandemic.40 A graph shows that the estimated number of COVID deaths was 7 million whereas the estimated number of excess deaths was 27 million, with an uncertainty interval from 19 to 37 million. This is remarkably similar to my adjusted estimate of 26 million. 

The 34 countries studied by Ioannidis et al. had a total population of 983 million.29 If we extrapolate their 2 million excess deaths to the world, we get 17 million deaths. But as there were vastly more deaths in poor countries, this is likely a substantial underestimate.

Conclusions

The two current NIH directors have explained that we need a new pandemic playbook so that we don’t repeat the mistakes.43 The subtitle of their paper is telling: “The old one failed to cope with COVID and may even have caused it.” They outline how insane it was to allow the dangerous gain-of-function experiments in Wuhan with US financial support that rendered a harmless virus deadly. 

The combined effect of fabricating the virus, the serious lack of appropriate safety precautions in the Wuhan lab in China, and the non-evidence-based draconian lockdowns created one of the worst man-made disasters ever in public health, with an estimated 27 million deaths.  

China has killed many people before. The so-called Great Leap Forward under Chairman Mao is estimated to have led to between 15 and 55 million deaths in mainland China during 1959 to 1961. Mao’s so-called cultural revolution from 1966 to 1976 likely also caused millions of deaths. 

For comparison, the number of deaths in the two world wars has been estimated as 40 million in WW1 and 70 to 85 million in WW2. 

What I miss the most is for the WHO to call for a total ban on gain-of-function research. Perhaps there is a reason for WHO’s foot dragging.2 On December 31, 2019, Taiwan alerted WHO to the risk of human-to-human transmission of a new virus, but WHO did not pass on the concern to other countries. China had ensured that Taiwan is not a member of WHO, and WHO’s cozy relationship with China was criticised, particularly when WHO overly praised China’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak despite the fact that China did everything it could to cover it up.2,8,26

I consider this the biggest cover up in medical history and in the US, particularly Anthony Fauci also did what he could to deceive the public, which included lying to Congress and at a White House press briefing.26,44

The COVID saga demonstrates that the monomanic focus on just one disease increases deaths from other diseases. This is not public health and I wonder why the media have betrayed us to the extent they have, acting as uncritical microphone holders for our politicians without asking the relevant questions. 

Time has come for the media to discuss the many millions of deaths all the unwise decisions have caused. We also need documentary films that can help us never forget what happened. Public memory is surprisingly short-lived.

References

1 Gøtzsche PC. Covid-19: Are we the victims of mass panic? BMJ 2020;Mar 8.

2 Gøtzsche PC. Vaccines: truth, lies, and controversy. New York: Skyhorse; 2021.

3 Kuloo M. “Hunger will kill us before coronavirus does”: Migrant labourers in Kashmir say

incomes have dried up and relief shelters are inadequate. Firstpost 2020;Apr 8.

COVID-19 to add as many as 150 million extreme poor by 2021. World Bank 2020;Oct 7.

5 Gøtzsche PC. False propaganda about face masks and Cochrane editorial misconduct. Institute for Scientific Freedom 2023;Sept 11.

6 Gøtzsche PC. Åbn Danmark igen, og gør det frivilligt at bære mundbind. Jyllands-Posten 2021;Feb 18.

7 Vogel G. Sweden’s gamble: The country’s pandemic policies came at a high price – and created painful rifts in its scientific community. Science 2020;Oct 6.

8 Gøtzsche PC. The Chinese virus: Killed millions and scientific freedom. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom; 2022 (freely available).

9 Burström B, Hemström Ö, Doheny M, et al. The aftermath of COVID-19: Mortality impact of the pandemic on older persons in Sweden and other Nordic countries, 2020-2023. Scand J Public Health 2025;53:456-64.

10 Gøtzsche PC. Sweden did exceptionally well during the COVID-19 pandemic with its open society. Brownstone Journal 2023;March 28.

11 Pizzato M, Gerli AG, La Vecchia C, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on total excess mortality and geographic disparities in Europe, 2020-2023: a spatio-temporal analysis. Lancet Reg Health Eur 2024;44:100996.

12 Ferguson NM, Laydon D, Nedjati-Gilani G, et al. Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand. London: Imperial College, UK Govt 2020;March 16.

13 Magness P. The failure of Imperial College modeling is far worse than we knew. The Daily Economy 2021;April 22. 

14 Gøtzsche PC. Har mundbind nogen effekt? Og hvad med minkene? Eller svinene? Dagens Medicin 2020;Nov 9.

15 Watson  OJ, Barnsley  G, Toor  J, et al. Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: a mathematical modelling study. Lancet Infect Dis 2022;22:1293-1302.

16 Ioannidis JPA, Pezzullo AM, Cristiano A, et al. Global estimates of lives and life-years saved by COVID-19 vaccination during 2020-2024. JAMA Health Forum 2025;6:e252223.

17 Gøtzsche PC. Too many assumptions for estimating the effect of Covid-19 vaccines on mortality. JAMA Health Forum 2025;Sept 12. 

18 Davey M. AstraZeneca withdraws Covid-19 vaccine worldwide, citing surplus of newer vaccines. The Guardian 2024;May 8.

19 Vaxzevria approved in the EU as third dose booster against COVID-19. AstraZeneca Press Release 2022;May 23.

20 Siri A. Vaccines, Amen. The Religion of Vaccines. Injecting Freedom LLC; 2025. 

21 Two billion doses of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine supplied to countries across the world less than 12 months after first approval. AstraZeneca Press Release 2021;Nov 16. 

22 Gøtzsche PC. Deadly medicines and organised crime: How big pharma has corrupted health care. London: Radcliffe Publishing; 2013.

23 COVID-19 vaccine. Wikipedia 2024;June 18. Data from Our World in Data

24 https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/.

25 Measles cases and outbreaks. CDC 2025;Nov 19.

26 Gøtzsche PC. Origin of COVID-19: The biggest cover up in medical history. Brownstone Institute 2023; Oct 9.

27 Benn CS, Schaltz-Buchholzer F, Nielsen S, et al. Randomized clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines: Do adenovirus-vector vaccines have beneficial non-specific effects? iScience 2023;26:106733.

28 International guidelines for certification and classification (coding) of covid-19 as cause of death. WHO 2020;April 20. 

29 Ioannidis JPA, Zonta F, Levitt M. Variability in excess deaths across countries with different vulnerability during 2020-2023. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2023;120:e2309557120.

30 Roberton T, Carter ED, Chou VB, et al. Early estimates of the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and child mortality in low-income and middle-income countries: a

modelling study. Lancet Glob Health 2020;8:e901-8.

31 Average age of those who had died with COVID-19. UK Government 2021;Jan 11. 

32 Krumholz HM. Where have all the heart attacks gone? New York Times 2020;April 6.

33 Wilcock AD, Zubizarreta JR, Wadhera RK, et al. Factors underlying reduced hospitalizations for myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Cardiol 2024;9:914-20.

34 Ponzoni M, Morabito G, Corrao G, et al. The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a change in therapeutic management and mortality in heart failure patients. J Clin Med 2024;13:2625.

35 Qamar A, Abramov D, Bang V, et al. Has the first year of the COVID pandemic impacted the trends in obesity-related CVD mortality between 1999 and 2019 in the United States? Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev 2024;21:200248.

36 Lippi G, Sanchis-Gomar F, Lavie CJ. Excess mortality for acute myocardial infarction in the United States during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2024;85:120-1.

37 Wai AK, Yip TF, Wong YH, et al. The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Non-COVID-19 Deaths: Population-Wide Retrospective Cohort Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2024 Feb 13;10:e41792.

38 Aaby P. Malnourished or overinfected. An analysis of the determinants of acute measles

mortality. Dan Med Bull 1989;36:93-113.

39 Aaby P. Severe measles in Copenhagen, 1915–1925. Rev Infect Dis 1988;10:452-6.

40 Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Our World in Data (undated). 

41 COVID-19 Excess Mortality Collaborators. Estimating excess mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic analysis of COVID-19-related mortality, 2020-21. Lancet 2022;399:1513-36.

42 GBD 2021 Demographics Collaborators. Global age-sex-specific mortality, life expectancy, and population estimates in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations, 1950-2021, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet 2024;403:1989-2056.

43 Bhattacharya J, Memoli MJ. NIH Directors: The world needs a new pandemic playbook. City Journal 2025;Nov 13.

44 NIH infectious disease researcher calls for end of dangerous virus studies. The DisInformation Chronicle 2025;May 4.


Author
  • Dr. Peter Gøtzsche co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration, once considered the world’s preeminent independent medical research organization. In 2010 Gøtzsche was named Professor of Clinical Research Design and Analysis at the University of Copenhagen. Gøtzsche has published over 100 papers in the “big five” medical journals (JAMA, Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, British Medical Journal, and Annals of Internal Medicine). Gøtzsche has also authored books on medical issues including Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime.

-----------------------------
Source

https://brownstone.org/articles/did-the-draconian-lockdowns-kill-more-people-than-covid-19/

Monday, December 1, 2025

AEI and Johns Hopkins Attempt a Covid Redo

AEI and Johns Hopkins Attempt a Covid Redo

Brownstone Journal
AEI and Johns Hopkins Attempt a Covid Redo

The experts have not been quick to assess, let alone apologize for, their performance during Covid. I took note, therefore, when two elite institutions that led the pandemic response co-hosted a retrospective event on Thursday, November 6. 

Johns Hopkins University is home to a world-renowned medical center and the Bloomberg School of Public Health. The American Enterprise Institute is one of Washington, D.C.’s oldest and largest public policy think tanks. Both helped shape pandemic policy and perception from its earliest days. 

The two organizations have been collaborating for the past year, and they framed their first event on November 6 around the book In Covid’s Wake: How Our Politics Failed Us, a critique of lockdowns written by two Princeton political scientists, Frances Lee and Stephen Macedo.

Given their vocal insistence on maximal Covid impositions, Hopkins and AEI deserve credit for finally highlighting an opposing view. 

Let’s recall how central the two organizations were in the early days, and even before. In October of 2019, Hopkins had, with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and World Economic Forum, co-hosted Event 201, a tabletop pandemic planning exercise. Participants from the CIA, the Chinese CDC, and various public relations firms discussed how they would manage a future novel coronavirus outbreak, focusing especially on how to combat “misinformation” and shape public behavior. Just two months later, Covid hit. 

Then, in the spring of 2020, AEI fellow and former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration Scott Gottlieb co-authored with Johns Hopkins infectious disease specialists a major lockdown blueprint. Gottlieb was a key Republican demanding lockdowns. Meanwhile, millions of people were hitting refresh on Johns Hopkins’ Internet dashboard map, which counted Covid “cases” and helped drive panic across the globe. 

There are still giant holes in AEI and Hopkins’ understanding – especially on the Covid vaccines – and I’ll address those in the second half of this article. But first, the good stuff. 

The Good

“A wartime mentality took hold,” Frances Lee explained at the November 6 event. The message was, “‘We all have to pull together, we’ve chosen a strategy.’ We didn’t get a servicing of the necessary questions.”

“Educated elite institutions,” Macedo followed, “were pushing a point of view that seemed to be worth questioning, and was to a remarkable extent not questioned adequately.”

“There’s not enough dissent in public health,” Macedo charged. They suffer from “tunnel vision and groupthink,” Lee followed up. 

Macedo briefly criticized social media censorship, noting that “Not a single law school conference that we know of has been held to discuss the First Amendment issues with regard to speech.”

The authors emphasized a central defect of Covid policy interventions – the failure to weigh not just supposed benefits but also costs. Science advisors and policymakers simply denied any potential trade-offs. 

Macedo and Lee found that lockdowns radically departed from pre-pandemic recommendations and were not effective in slowing virus spread or reducing mortality. Benefits were elusive. Lockdowns did, however, impose gigantic economic and social costs. 

AEI’s Roger Piekle, Jr., seemed to approve of some “shadow science advice” efforts, such as the Great Barrington Declaration, though he didn’t elaborate.

Macedo and Lee especially condemned extended school closures, noting that most European schools had reopened in spring 2020, to no harmful effect. The US media was loath to report this fact, Macedo highlighted. 

I myself had advised former Indiana governor Mitch Daniels, who in the spring of 2020 was president of Purdue University. He wanted to open the campus in the fall of 2020 and asked for empirical support. We assembled the data showing young people were at near-zero risk, which he relied on in May 2020 to courageously announce, first among all major US colleges, that, yes, Purdue would reopen. At the end of the semester, Daniels explained it was a huge success

Many of the AEI-Johns Hopkins event participants agreed that schools stayed closed too long. It’s become a comfortable acknowledgment for those who want to concede at least some Covid policy missteps. Macedo even endorsed David Zweig’s book Abundance of Caution, a devastating takedown of school closures.

However welcome, this admission appears something of a “limited hangout” – the minimal confession needed to reestablish credibility while shielding far broader and deeper blunders from exposure and accountability. 

The Bad

While the political scientists offered moderate criticism of lockdowns and groupthink, the public health experts appear to have learned approximately nothing. 

John Hellerstedt, the former Texas Health Commissioner, summed up the attitude. When a moderator asked if there should have been more “red teaming” to air alternative views, Hellerstedt objected. “I am frankly befuddled by the notion that there should have been more debate, there should have been more opposite opinions,” he said. “Somebody had to decide.”

Hellerstedt praised Texas Governor Greg Abbott because “he never pushed back on the science.” The governor listened and did as he was told. 

Other doctors tended to blame any unspecified mistakes on failures of “communication” and “organization.” But outside of war, has a mass movement ever been better communicated or organized?

Within a matter of weeks, swarms of media-savvy doctors convinced the world to shut down and persuaded people into ridiculous performative acts. Remember the green middle school saxophone pods and bulldozed skate-parks? Within two years, they injected billions of people with radically experimental gene therapies.

Imperfect “communication” and “organization” are often tactics of bureaucratic deflection – anything to avoid admitting you were wrong on the substance. On the science.

Unfortunately, the AEI-Hopkins participants didn’t do much science.

In fact, there was almost no discussion of biology, medicine, or data. There was no debate over vaccine mandates or their ill effects. No mention of the denial of early treatment with cheap, safe, generic drugs. Only the briefest mention of the CDC and no mention of the FDA. No mention of dangerous gain-of-function virus research. No mention of the way giant, consolidated health systems purged good doctors and drove the top-down Covid machine. 

Nor was there mention of the inflation unleashed by $8 trillion in extra federal spending, which raised the permanent budget baseline, and which, if lockdowns were ineffective, was totally unnecessary.

Nearly three hours into the event, Steven Teles, a political scientist at Johns Hopkins, called out his fellow conferees for their complacency. 

“I do not think how angry this book is has gotten across in this conversation,” Teles scolded. “This is a very angry book. And legitimately angry. I think there has been a lot so far of trying to downplay just how crazy this entire society went for a particular period of time.”

Teles was incredulous at “the number of expert failures for which there’s been no consequence” – from Iraq to the Great Financial Crisis to Covid.

If AEI, Johns Hopkins, and other elite policy and scientific institutions wish not only to regain credibility but also truly understand what happened during Covid, they are going to have to dig much deeper. The scientific issues are technical and profound. 

And if you understand just how badly our public health officials and medical institutions performed on “the science,” you may conclude the failures of our truth-seeking, sense-making, and democratic institutions were even worse than the conference acknowledged. 

Before moving on, I should acknowledge some relevant context. In 2013, I co-founded the Technology Research program at AEI. For 10 years, I studied a broad range of Internet and tech policy – semiconductors, wireless spectrum, net neutrality, productivity growth, A.I., and free speech, to name a few. When I criticized Big Tech censorship and Covid policy in a July 2023 Wall Street Journal commentary, however, AEI fired me. 

The Evidence

Yuval Levin is a brilliant and thoughtful political scientist at AEI. He moderated the initial book panel with Macedo and Lee. Knowing there might be plenty of discussion of what went wrong, he began the conference with a different question – What did we get right?

Macedo didn’t hesitate. “We’re not vaccine skeptics,” he quickly replied. “We think the vaccines were a signal success.” 

This simple assertion stood throughout the rest of the conference, unchallenged and unexplored. Just assumed and repeated. 

Mountains of evidence say the reverse. 

In highly vaccinated nations around the world, both Covid and non-Covid mortality exploded after the shots were introduced. In 2021, Americans took 520 million vaccine doses. Yet US Covid deaths in 2021 were 35% higher than in no-vaccine 2020. In the United Kingdom, between August 2021 and March 2022, 85% of all Covid deaths were among the vaccinated. In the following months and years, the vaccinated accounted for more than 90% of UK Covid deaths. 

Non-Covid mortality also spiked to unprecedented levels. Young and middle-aged healthy people had endured the initial pandemic year of 2020 with relative success. In 2021, however, they suddenly began suffering a wide range of acute (and often deadly) afflictions: heart attacks, strokes, pulmonary embolisms, kidney failure, and even aggressive cancers. The life insurance data is unequivocal. 

In diverse wealthy nations across the globe, excess mortality, which was mild or nonexistent in 2020, shot up in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Germany, Japan, Ireland, Singapore, Taiwan, Australia, Canada, and South Korea – all suffered far worse health after the vaccines arrived.

In 2021, disability roles began a sharp multi-year rise to historic levels. Varied neuropathies and autoimmune conditions soared as never before. Lockdowns may account for part of this general health decline. But the timing and types of injuries match perfectly with known vaccine harms. 

Some of the most granular data comes from the UK’s disability system, known as PIP (Personal Independence Payments). Ed Dowd of Phinance Technologies was the first to highlight it. 

Beginning in 2021, nearly every indicator of vaccine injury began a multi-year upward explosion. Cardiac arrhythmias and neuropathies nearly tripled. Pulmonary embolisms, even in young people, rose 500%. Blood disorders rose by more than 400%. (We could list dozens more, and in fact, we link here to numerous charts.) In all, the number of newly disabled Brits rose from a long-stable annual level under 500,000 to more than 750,000 in 2022 and 2023. 

The same devastating pattern hit the US, where, starting in 2021, the number of disabled workers rose by around 2.6 million, or 45%.

In the rare case that a public health official or policymaker is confronted with these figures, they usually mumble “long Covid” and then quickly change the subject. 

In fact, there’s little mystery why this is happening. 

We have the autopsies. We have 4,000 published case reports. We understand the microbiology of these deaths and injuries.

In short, upon vaccination, billions of lipid nanoparticles containing modified mRNA enter tissues all over the body. The mRNA instructs your cells to produce the Spike protein from the SARS2 virus and display it on the cell surface. Our immune systems detect the foreign Spike protein as an unwelcome invader. Then, just as nature intended, our killer lymphocytes target those “infected” cells for destruction. 

If those destroyed cells are in your deltoid muscle, you get a sore shoulder. Pfizer mistakenly assured us that’s the worst that would happen. They also said the mRNA would dissolve in a day or two. Unfortunately, the vaccine circulates and transfects cells everywhere. It can stick around for months, or years. If your immune system is killing cells in your heart, brain, or kidneys, the result can be severe injury or death. 

Scientists have pinpointed this mRNA vaccine pathology in exquisite cellular detail. One group found Spike protein from the vaccine and attacking T cells in the brains of stroke victims 17 months after vaccination. Another ultra-high-resolution imaging study, published in Nature Biotechnology, showed that mRNA Spike reaches heart tissue, inducing “immune activation and blood vessel damage.” (Here are 60 slides with mountains of published evidence.) 

Meanwhile, a group of European pathologists, led by the late Dr. Arne Burkhardt, performed 75 autopsies on Germans who had died soon after vaccination. They found both mRNA Spike protein and attacking lymphocytes in the brain, lung, heart, kidneys, adrenal glands, ovaries, testes, liver, thyroid, prostate, spleen, and blood vessels large and small, from the aorta to capillaries. 

Of the 75 decedents, they judged that at least 58, or 77%, died from the mRNA vaccine. Thirty-one of those cases were sudden cardiac deaths – 16 from blood vessel damage and 15 from myocarditis. A few of these victims were young men, supposedly the only group that suffers from myocarditis. None of the cases were initially reported as vaccine deaths, let alone myocarditis, which helps demonstrate the monumental rate of undercounting that has underpinned the denial of mRNA harms. 

Another underreported story is the epidemic of kidney failure since the vaccine rollout. John Beaudoin, an electrical engineer from Massachusetts, obtained digital death certificate files from several states stretching back a decade. Beyond the better-known stroke and cardiac damage, he found an even stronger signal of vaccine harm – astronomical rates of fatal acute kidney injury (AKI), also known as acute renal failure. See the nearby charts of kidney deaths in Florida.

South Korean scientists picked up the same strong signal. They looked at 120 million records over more than 50 years and found numerous kidney harms associated with the mRNA Covid vaccines – a 138% increase in acute renal failure, a 1,241% increase in glomerulonephritis, and a 143% increase in tubulointerstitial nephritis. 

Expanding his analysis to all 50 states, Beaudoin estimates that sudden kidney failure deaths associated with Covid vaccines in the US approach 250,000. That translates to roughly 1.25 million worldwide. 

The evidence keeps pouring in. 

  • A new actuarial study out of Germany, by Christof Kuhbandner and Matthias Reitzner, found a “strong positive correlation” between Covid vaccination and excess mortality. In a previous study, they showed German excess mortality, after a quiescent 2020, spiked for nearly all age groups in 2021 and 2022 – that is, after vaccination began. 
  • Japan and dozens of other highly vaccinated nations suffered nearly identical patterns (see charts). 
  • A study of UK data found that “compared with unvaccinated, vaccinated with one or two doses show, in the period April 2021-May 2023, a substantially higher risk of all-cause and non-COVID-19 deaths.” 
  • Nigerian scientists looking at worldwide WHO data found a “Paradoxical increase in global COVID-19 deaths with vaccination coverage.” 
  • Italian researchers analyzed all 245,000 residents of the Pescara province and found significant mortality hazard ratios of 2.40 (140% worse) and 1.98 (98% worse) for those vaccinated with one and two doses, respectively, versus the unvaccinated. They concluded: “the subjects vaccinated with two doses lost 37% of life expectancy compared to the unvaccinated population during the follow-up considered.”

We’ve not even discussed (1) serious DNA contamination of both mRNA vaccines and the dangerous inclusion of the SV40 promoter/enhancer in the Pfizer vaccine; (2) widespread immune dysregulations, including “immune imprinting” and “tolerance” due to IgG4 class-switching; or (3) the explosion of aggressive cancers, most conspicuous in young healthy people. The problems never end.

In all, the mRNA vaccines may have directly caused 500,000 to 800,000 deaths in the US and 3-5 million worldwide. Additional tens of millions have been harmed. 

Has any prophylactic medical intervention resulted in such carnage? Are AEI, Johns Hopkins, and the broader public policy and medical communities curious about millions of unacknowledged deaths? They might speculate the harms result from other causes. But shouldn’t they at least study, debate, and propose alternative hypotheses? 

The Reckoning

Former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb was conspicuous in his absence from the November 6 event. Just before the pandemic hit, Gottlieb had left the FDA, joined Pfizer’s board of directors, and rejoined AEI, where he’d been a fellow since 2007. 

Perhaps no public health figure save Anthony Fauci was so prolific in pushing aggressive pandemic policies in high-profile settings. Advocating for extended lockdowns, mandatory masking of toddlers, and vaccine passports, Gottlieb wrote some 36 Covid commentaries in the Wall Street Journal and made some 185 television appearances on CNBC and CBS’s Face the Nation. Several years into Covid, we learned that Gottlieb had even secretly collaborated with the Biden White House to bully Big Tech firms into censoring Pfizer vaccine critics.

Like so many architects of the Covid disaster, however, Gottlieb has moved on to new healthcare stories, while accountability awaits.

Author
  • Bret Swanson is a Brownstone Institute Fellow and president of the technology research firm Entropy Economics LLC, a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and writes the Infonomena Substack.

--------------------------
Source

https://brownstone.org/articles/aei-and-johns-hopkins-attempt-a-covid-redo/

Did the Draconian Lockdowns Kill More People than Covid-19?

Did the Draconian Lockdowns Kill More People than Covid-19? Peter C. Gøtzsche      December 2, 2025     Public Health ,  Society ,  Vaccines...