Berenson’s Booklet, Part 2

The second part of Alex Berenson’s booklet on COVID came out. Berenson used to write successful spy thrillers, so the booklet reads like a nail-biter. This part is about lockdowns and whether they are effective in a pandemic.

Within the past 3 years, CDC and WHO both published detailed guides of what to do in a possible flu-like pandemic. Some of the scenarios they planned for are less and some more serious than Covid-19. It’s their job to prepare for this kind of thing, so the manuals are pretty specific.

At no point, however, did they suggest complete lockdowns, even for more serious viruses. To the contrary, WHO insisted that “workplace closure should be a last step only considered in extraordinarily severe epidemics and pandemics” like the Spanish flu.

Both manuals made it clear that there were no real measures that would put a dramatic stop to this virus spreading. Yes, recommend hand-washing because what can it hurt?

But there was a fascinating struggle going on outside of public view. A small group of people invented the concept of a widespread lockdown in response to a pandemic. Who were they and what happened?

Read the booklet to find out. Here is one more quote on why so many scientists rejected the ideas they had defended for years: “Faced with a risk of hundreds of thousands or millions of deaths, the public health experts who for decades had counseled patience and caution flinched. They found they could not live with acknowledging how little control they or any of us had over the spread of an easily transmissible respiratory virus. They had to do something – even if they had been warning for decades that what they were about to do would not work and might have terrible secondary consequences.”

I have no doubt that we will all go down in history as the idiot generation that was so coddled and spoiled that it freaked out needlessly and hurt itself in the process.

8 thoughts on “Berenson’s Booklet, Part 2”

  1. Which is the worst pandemic? The virus itself or the economic and psychological effects on us resulting from the officials’ and health professionals’ overkill responses to it?


    1. “Which is the worst pandemic?”

      For myself, at first I thought the economic disruptions from interrupted supply chains would be worse than the health effects but now I think the worst effects will be from the austerity that will be the result as governments pull the plugs on their traditional obligations of educating children (a complex system whose primary purpose isn’t necessarily even education per se). In Europe there will also be disruptions in healthcare and government services as the pandemia will be used to bring Greta Thunberg’s vision of the EU as a bunch of peasants who can’t travel further than they can walk or bike in a day a bit closer to fruition…


  2. Have you received my email re Frank from “Wed, Aug 5, 12:53 AM”?
    You probably receive many emails, so wanted to check whether you noticed.


  3. The problem I have with explanations of lockdown hysteria in terms of contemporary western culture, is that lockdowns have been happening all over the world. So I feel it needs some more nuanced explanation – e.g. that there is a global medical bureaucracy that propagated this notion, or that despite the rise of nonwestern powers, western trends are still followed in this sphere, or in terms of some social and political universal that isn’t tied specifically to the west.


    1. Seems more like herding instincts or peer pressure. Nobody wants to stand out from the crowd. You can’t be blamed if everyone is doing it. It also gives lots of people opportunities to pursue their own personal agendas in the name of Covid.


      1. I’m not quite sure if you intend this as an explanation why almost all the world’s governments have instituted lockdowns – which is what I was asking about – but it’s interesting to read it that way. It makes sense: governments prefer to err on the side of caution, in case their country does worse than others, and also the emergency deployment of state power allows many other agendas to be pursued.


  4. In a way the “quarantines” were a bit of a farce.
    Even at its height one was still allowed to venture outside to purchase essentials and take care of basic necessities (doctor appointments, coin laundry, and the such).
    It was actually more of a “semi-quarantine”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.