My prediction in fact appeared before the policy was fully decided upon. Ultimately I'm just some asshole from the internet. Anyone who paid attention to (real-world) sociology 101 could predict the same thing.
Result: Lockdowns cost around 100 life-years for every life-year they save. That said there was widespread auto-quarantine, so lockdowns did absolutely nothing against the background of non-State behaviour.
Vaccines are killing something like ten times as many people as they save. Bodies are showing up when nobody has died of a cough, so we know for sure the numbers are massaged in the upward direction, except in China - they are not reliable, and we have to guess. More fear more better, right?
Total failure of containment or of indeed any policy.
Lockdowns did save substantial numbers of 8-14 year olds. All-cause mortality is allegedly up for all groups except them. They have 0% fatality* from the virus; it saved them from lethal school exposure.
Total domination by iatrogenesis.
Prophylactics and policy did absolutely nothing, again in accordance with sociology 101. However, they are banning cures as they show up, because the cures are cheap generics and the prophylactics are expensive due to being under patent. Expensive for you; profitable for those in the position to bribe regulators.
Indeed it is likely the regulators knew in advance, as per the first link, that cov vaccines don't work, so there was no incentive at all to choose an effective one. Why not choose the one which carries the best bribes?
Answer: because blood clotting. Haha, oops! The State isn't on your side. You can tell because you can't fire them. Satan adores Nationalism and Nationalists.
P.S. *Based virus kills the weak.