It's difficult to listen to this episode because it really needs another voice. A voice that reminds us that, at least in my part of the world, lockdowns were not about keeping people alive. They were about spacing out infections so that health care services were not overwhelmed.<br><br>Yes, it has been, and continues to be, psychologically damaging for people to be isolated. However, it's also physiologically damaging when you know you've spread COVID to another person - and that person gets very sick or dies.<br><br>I love your podcast, Lex, and I appreciate your point of view but I hope you'll open yourself up to a different point of view and try to understand it.  I would like to appreciate the point of view that wants to do away with lockdowns, the people who think masks are damaging, but I find the arguments lacking a full accounting -- and understanding - of dissenting points of view.,(reply>), @morbark T. Bite This has nothing to do with what I said. I'm sympathetic to the argument that lockdowns have done more harm that good. What I'm saying is if we're going to have that discussion let's stick to the actual reasons lockdowns were proposed and not some strawman argument.  I'm a fan of Lex and he's much better than that which is why I listen.,(reply>), @Sunny La That's patently not true and it has nothing to do with what I said. Sweden ranks around 60th in terms of death per million population from COVID. A simple search will confirm that.<br><br>I'm sure once you satisfy yourself that you're wrong, your opinion will change. Ha ha.. .just kidding.,(reply>), @Alex Jones In a word, 'yes'.  It became apparent fairly quickly that hospitalizations rose about two weeks after spikes in cases. As cases rose, restrictions and other lockdown measure were put in place and ramped up as cases rose and then were relaxed as cases fell.<br><br>This was not done perfectly. As Dr. Bhattacharya points out the real group that was protected was the 'laptop class' however the lockdown was, and continue to be, instituted not to get cases to zero but to spread out the pace of infections so that hospitals don't wind up triaging patients as happened in places like New York, Brazil, and India.<br><br>I'm sympathetic to the argument that lockdowns have done more harm than good. For me, if we're going to have that discussion let's have a full accounting as to why lockdowns were presented and respond to that not some strawman that lockdowns were unnecessary because COVID is not significantly more deadly than the flu.,(reply>), "Yes, it has been, and continues to be, psychologically damaging for people to be isolated. However, it's also physiologically damaging when you know you've spread COVID to another person - and that person gets very sick or dies."...<br><br>It is damaging when these psychologically abusive policies lead to more people getting very sick and dying... <br>Fear and anxiety release the stress hormone cortisol, which suppresses the body's immune system. Lockdowns, incessant fearmongering and the constant reminder of a threat by mask wearing, could effectively have made people more likely to acquire a long-term or severe infection.,(reply>), Out of curiosity, what part of the world are you in?  And, does that mean that the lockdowns where you are were instituted in waves as they anticipated high hospitalization rates and then removed cyclically when less needed rather than blanket ongoing?