It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The world's toughest lockdown has resulted in the world's highest COVID-19 death toll
Once hailed as a COVID-19 “success story,” Peru is now the COVID-19 case study that lockdown advocates no longer want to discuss. Lima is on pace to surpass Belgium (another strict lockdown country) sometime next week as having the world’s highest COVID-19 deaths per million. So why is no one talking about it?
Pandemic panic promoters have been quick to criticize neighboring Brazil for its leadership’s more relaxed policies towards the virus, but they’ve been noticeably absent in discussing Peru. That’s because Peru implemented arguably the earliest (for their region) and strictest lockdowns in the entire world, along with several attempted suppression measures with the hopes to contain the virus, and none of it worked.
For months on end, Peruvians were largely forbidden from leaving their homes. The country began its lockdown like many others, by cutting itself off from the rest of the world, closing its borders to outsiders, and shutting down the nation’s economy and society. Similar to policies seen in U.S. lockdown states and Europe, only “essential” businesses were allowed to be open. Peru then took the shutdown a step further. The military has enforced a nationwide mandatory 10pm-4am curfew (some cities have lengthened the curfew to 8pm-5am), most “essential” stores are only open for a handful of hours a day (most grocery stores close at 3pm), and citizens face extreme penalties and legal consequences for failing to abide by the rigid restrictions.
originally posted by: micpsi
Your general inference about the ineffectiveness of extreme lockdown shown by Peru in reducing the Covid-19 mortality is illogical. It ignores vital factors prevalent in Peru such as poor diet, poverty/unemployment, large families, 3rd world health system, etc. Lockdown does not guarantee low infection rates and/or mortality. It just minimises it against a backdrop of social factors that work in the opposite direction. In the case of Peru, these factors have combined effectively to weaken the effectiveness of lockdown - more so than for many other countries. It certainly does not demonstrate that extreme lockdown does not work. No one ever claimed that that was all that was needed to eliminate the virus. One cannot generalise from a 3rd-world country to what works (or does not work) for 1st-world countries. All one can say is that extreme lockdown did not work for Peru. The reasons for this have to do with Peru, not with the measures themselves.
Here’s the thing: there’s no evidence of lockdowns working. If strict lockdowns actually saved lives, I would be all for them, even if they had large economic costs. But the scientific and medical case for strict lockdowns is paper-thin.