[Schwarzfahrer]

Interessanter Artikel über Aussagen von Rishi Sunak (ehemaliger Schatzkanzler von England, jetzt Anwärter auf die Nachfolge von Boris Johnson.

... the scientific advice was, initially, to reject or at least delay lockdown.

This all changed when Neil Ferguson and his team at Imperial College published their famous ‘Report 9’, which argued that Covid casualties could hit 500,000 if no action was taken – but the figure could be below 20,000 if Britain locked down. That, of course, turned out to be a vast exaggeration of lockdown’s ability to curb Covid deaths. Imperial stressed it did ‘not consider the wider social and economic costs of suppression, which will be high’. But surely someone involved in making the policy would figure it out.

This was the crux: no one really did. A cost-benefit calculation – a basic requirement for pretty much every public health intervention – was never made. ‘I wasn’t allowed to talk about the trade-off,’ says Sunak. Ministers were briefed by No. 10 on how to handle questions about the side-effects of lockdown. ‘The script was not to ever acknowledge them. The script was: oh, there’s no trade-off, because doing this for our health is good for the economy.’...

Ich schätze, in D lief es nicht viel anders.

Die Aussagen über das Fehlen jeglicher Kosten-Nutzen-Überlegung (besser gesagt Schaden-Nutzen-Analyse) bzgl. der Maßnahmen finde ich besonders interessant, wo aktuell in Grossbritannien die Übersterblichkeit rasant zunimmt – aber nicht wegen Corona.
Wann wohl jemand in Deutschland so ähnliches aus den deutschen Entscheider-runden öffentlich macht, oder sich um die ähnlich steigende, nicht Corona-Bedingte Übersterblichkeit kümmert?