When COVID-19 washed up on American shores, everyone, including children, were believed by the top scientists in the country to be at grave risk. However, once the threat to children was found to be minimal, children instead became suspected of being “super spreaders.”
“Empirical evidence was being ignored, and instead, the officials were following theory. They made up all sorts of contrived reasons,” David Zweig, investigative journalist and author of “An Abundance of Caution: American Schools, the Virus, and a Story of Bad Decisions,” tells Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable.”
Despite the fearmongering surrounding schools reopening and children’s status as “super spreaders,” the fact that cases went down in places like Europe after children went back to school didn’t phase the scientists.
“What that does suggest, of course, is that children were not super spreaders, schools were not driving the pandemic,” Zweig tells Stuckey. “The point is, the evidence was there that this wasn’t dangerous, this wasn’t increasing cases, and it was ignored, and it was dismissed with these contrived reasons.”
While the mainstream media and “the science” was focused on the potential harm faced by the immunocompromised, what they didn’t seem to care about was how social isolation, masks, and digital learning would affect children in the most formative years of their lives.
“There is something disordered in asking kids to sacrifice on behalf of adults,” Stuckey tells Zweig, adding, “There is something inherently unjust about that.”
“What they aren’t understanding, perhaps, is the incredible harm on so many children, millions of kids, and you have to think about what kind of society, as you said, what kind of society does this to children?” Zweig agrees.
“No one was saved by long-term school closures. No one was saved from masking 2-year-olds. No one was saved by barriers on desks and all this other nonsense. This was only harm. No trade-off. No benefit,” he continues.
“Even beyond the horrors of child abuse,” he says, which he notes became more prevalent during COVID, “there were plenty of kids who became anorexic and bulimic, screen time skyrocketed during the pandemic and never kind of went back down, anxiety, depression.”
“I talked with a lot of mental health professionals for children. Their practices were exploding during the pandemic, and it wasn’t because of people dying, let me be very clear about that. It was directly correlated with kids being kept out of school,” he explains.
Politicians like Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-N.Y.) claimed that their hard stance on COVID was only so strict because it was worth it to save even one life — but Zweig knows that couldn’t be further from the truth.
“You’re taking one or more lives to ostensibly try to save that one life. It was extraordinarily foolish,” Zweig says.
“Toxic empathy,” Stuckey chimes in. “It blinds you to reality and morality, and you ignore the victim on the other side of the moral equation.”
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
The post Sacrificing children on the altar of science: How the COVID-19 response hurt our most vulnerable appeared first on TheBlaze.
