> Either the lockdown policy before March 2022 was correct or the
> sudden "back to normal" after March 2022 was correct.
> The virus was still there and does not care about presidential edicts
> and speeches.
It is tempting to conclude from this that you are saying immunization, through vaccines and post infection, played no role and that the situation before and after the lockdown was essentially the same in terms of risk of poor health outcomes if exposed to covid?
> Given the the world still exists,
Yes, the world where there were vaccines and lockdown. Not the alternative version where these things didn't happen.
> I think the pre-2022 policies were a
> gross overreach and the cancellations of the likes of Malone are an
> eternal shame for the U.S. that is comparable to what happened in
> the Soviet Union.
Two questions:
1) what precisely are you referring to when you say "comparable to what happened in the soviet union"?
2) In the face of an outbreak of a contagious disease, would you be comfortable with government not implementing any restrictions that might slow or stop the spread of disease?
Would your answer to question #2 change if the disease in question was Marburg or Ebola? If yes, why?