News
Featured Image
Children in Africa fetching waterShutterstock

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

February 15, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – An international group of academics from prominent universities detailed the “staggering” effect COVID-19 lockdown measures have had upon lesser and middle-income countries (LMICs). The study found “pronounced declines in employment, income, and food security,” with households unable to meet basic needs. It also warned of an “economic crisis” which would last for “decades” to come.

The paper, entitled “Falling living standards during the COVID-19 crisis: Quantitative evidence from nine developing countries,” was released in Science Advances on February 5. Its team of 26 authors hail from renowned institutions such as the University of California, Princeton, Stanford, and Harvard.

In collating the data, 16 samples were undertaken from nine countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America: Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Ghana, Kenya, Nepal, Philippines, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone.

Each country suffered from significant drops in income, with an average of 70% of households contacted reporting a drop. “If these effects persist, then they risk pushing tens of millions of already vulnerable households into poverty,” the paper warned.

Nor was this a phenomenon isolated to households with lower incomes in the countries surveyed, with the authors noting that the “economic shock caused by the global pandemic spans socioeconomic strata within each country, and similar proportions of households at different rungs of the socioeconomic ladder report employment and income decrease.”

There were over 30,000 respondents involved in the study, which was conducted between April and June 2020. Already by April, a number of households were “unable to meet basic nutritional needs.” Graphs document that in Kenya, between March 22 and May 31, there was a 68% rise in children missing meals due to financial or food insecurity. In Sierra Leone, the number of adults and children having to reduce their portions rose by 86% and 68% respectively, between April 19 and June 28.

While the study acknowledged that seasonal food insecurity did occur in those countries, the figures revealed “greatly exceed the food insecurity normally experienced at this time of year. If anything, COVID-19 fortunately hit during a ‘postharvest’ period in South Asia, when many people have grain stocks to draw down.”

This occurrence was described as “particularly alarming,” due to the “potentially large negative long-run effects of undernutrition on later life outcomes.”

The high levels of food insecurity found in the course of the study were “far higher during the 2020 crisis” than in the “same season in previous years.” Presenting Bangladesh as an example, the authors stated that food insecurity was about twice as high compared to previous years. In presenting this particular statistic, the authors defined food insecurity as “missing a meal or reducing portions for at least 15 days in a month.”

Due to the parameters used in formulating results, focusing on quantity rather than quality of food, the authors noted that the results should be unaffected by normal seasonal changes.

Nor were access to food or a drop in income the only issues addressed. Ready access to health care was an issue noted in six countries. In Sierra Leone, an average of 6% of people had health care delayed, while in Ghana the figure was 11%, with numbers rising to an average of 43% in Colombia.

Education was also identified as an area affected by lockdowns, with schools “in all sample countries … closed during most or all of the study period.”

The study found more frequent occurrence of domestic violence between March 22 and May 31. Violence against women rose by an average of 4%, although in mid-April the rate shot up to around 50% in one week. Violence against children rose by an average of 12% during the same 11-week period.

“In these cases, the leading explanation for the effects we document in 2020 is the COVID-19 crisis rather than seasonal fluctuations. It is notable that in both countries, the COVID crisis occurred during the favorable postharvest period with its relatively low level of food insecurity during normal years.”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Shut down big government NOT small business
  Show Petition Text
22573 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 25000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

Many small businesses are being forced to close temporarily or even permanently under the strain of a second wave of government-imposed COVID shutdowns.

This is totally and thoroughly wrong...especially when big business, government, and large segments of the professional world are totally insulated from the repercussions of the shutdowns.

Something drastic needs to be done now!

SIGN this urgent petition calling for state legislatures to cut the salaries of governors and mayors who are responsible for closing small businesses by enacting draconian COVID shutdown measures.

The bottom line is that the people imposing shutdown measures need to feel the bite of the restrictions they are imposing on other peoples' livelihoods so that they have a personal incentive to re-open their economies and make accommodation for the survival of small businesses.

Local restaurants, cafes, gyms, clothiers, bookshops, florists, and many more, are being forced to shut their doors, some forever.

Americans who have spent their entire lives building their business - and, taken all of the risk - stand to lose everything.

But, the following are all considered essential and never get shut down: lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, courts, big corporations, and the media...

And, to add insult to injury, some politicians who are imposing these shutdowns, like Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo, are actually getting huge pay raises starting in the new year. Cuomo's raise is $25,000 next year alone!

This is utterly scandalous! It is time to say enough is enough!

If small business owners are being CRUSHED by government COVID restrictions, the politicians responsible should also feel the BITE of those restrictions!

This is the only way to make the "political class" understand how devastating their shutdowns truly are to small business owners and their employees.

Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, supply millions of jobs to people across the country, and ironically provide the taxes used to fund the programs so loved by most of the governors and mayors.

Because of the nature of small and medium businesses, their owners and workers are on the frontlines of the COVID crisis.

They need to be rewarded for this bravery, not closed down.

Accommodation needs to be made for small businesses so that they can weather this storm and thrive after it has passed. These are businesses we all love using, and we want them to be there long after COVID is just a bad memory.

When this is all over, do we really want every coffee shop to be a Starbucks or Dunkin' Donuts, or every restaurant to be a McDonald's?

The answer is not only "no," but "Heck, no!"

Therefore, governors and mayors need to be personally incentivized to do everything in their power to see that small and medium businesses can survive and thrive - AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

That's why we're calling on state legislators to cut the salaries of all governors and mayors who are imposing draconian shutdowns where no accommodation is being made for small businesses.

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition today!

**Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com

  Hide Petition Text

As a result of lockdowns, the study found often severe and widespread disruption to the economy of countries which were already of sufficiently low income to be termed LMICs. The measures justified as preventing the spread of COVID-19 “seem likely to generate excess future morbidity, mortality, and other adverse longer-term consequences.”

In fact, the economic disruption looks set to be far worse than “other recent global crises, including the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, the 2008 Great Recession, and the Ebola outbreak of 2014.”

While governments have been swift to impose restrictions upon individuals and the economy, the authors of the study warn that these measures will potentially have a disastrous effect upon society, which is worse than the “crisis” they were originally intended to prevent, and could last for “decades into the future.”

“For LMICs, the economic crisis precipitated by COVID-19 may become as much a public health and societal disaster as the pandemic itself.”

The study is not alone in warning of the dangers of lockdowns, as well as the poor effectiveness which they have on preventing the spread of COVID-19. Earlier this year, a group of experts from Stanford University released its own study, revealing there was “no clear, significant beneficial effect” of lockdowns in preventing COVID, “in any country.”

Comparing countries with strict lockdowns, such as England, France, the U.S., and Italy, to those without such restrictions, Sweden and South Korea, the study even discovered that in 12 out of 16 comparisons, lockdowns resulted in increased daily growth in cases.

The Stanford study also highlighted the harmful effects of lockdowns, pointing to an estimated “5.5 million life years for children” in the U.S. due to school closures.

That was in addition to a December study which warned of “168,000 additional under 5 deaths,” and that “by 2022 COVID-19 could result in an additional 9.3 million wasted and 2.6 million stunted children, 168,000 additional child-deaths [and] 2.1 million maternal anemia cases.”

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.