Since the Coronavirus crisis began, western politicians looked to China for nearly all of their response policies, including the reactionary decision to impose a Medieval-style 'Lockdown' - effectively shutting down their economies and societies in order to try and contain the novel coronavirus. After some weeks into this crisis, we are now able to begin the analysis comparing these two  policies and their results - between Lockdown and Non-Lockdown countries and states. The results seem crystal clear already - the Non-Lockdown countries, as well as Non-Lockdown states within the USA, have generally out-performed the Lockdown states by the metric of lower deaths per millions. This should beg the question: why did governments from Lockdown states ignore the real science and opt instead for an experimental medieval-style universal-national quarantine approach. Is it possible that mass-panic and rushed Lockdown polices have actually contributed to more unnecessary deaths and collateral damage that could have otherwise been avoided by adopted a more cool, calm and intelligent science-based approach taken by Non-Lockdown countries like Sweden, Japan, Iceland, Belarus and South Korea? What's more, the Non-Lockdown countries and states have achieved much more favorable results without having to ruin their economies and societies by voluntarily initiating a downward spiral that could end up being hundreds of millions of lives, families, businesses and communities in the process. If this was a government IQ test, then clearly thus was an epic fail for reactionary Pro-Lockdown Governments. UKC News co-hosts Patrick Henningsen and Mike Robinson have some answers as they bring you the early week’s headlines from around the world.

(This is an edited segment from a live news program broadcast on April 17, 2020).