Cerrar Menú Blogs
Las opiniones de los blogueros son de su estricta responsabilidad y no representan la opinión de este portal.
Profile image

Ingresa o regístrate acá para seguir este blog.

Seguir este blog

@wwaycorrigan
‘For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.’ Most of us have heard that statement before, Isaac Newton’s third law of motion as it is. It has, of course, significance in our daily lives. That is to say, every decision we take has additional consequences, with these often being quite removed from the focus of the original action.

Pico y cédula, Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá, Colombia.

Stay-at-home orders: Are they now doing more harm than good? (Image from Facebook.)

In the aftermath of the rather panicked, dithering response (eh, thanks China and WHO for properly forewarning us, not) from many countries to our current pandemic, it is now quite clear that those making the decisions did so, ultimately, with just one goal in mind: ‘Stop coronavirus at all costs.’ Scant consideration appears to have been given to the knock-on effects of the extraordinary measures introduced.

Once the mantra flipped from ‘it’s just like the common flu’ to ‘this is a dangerous and deadly pandemic’ (the flu is deadly as well, of course), all efforts were put into defeating it — for the most part at least.

The early projections of a shocking global death toll — in the millions — convinced governments of the unquestionable necessity of widespread lockdowns and stay-at-home orders.

‘As long as a majority believes that coronavirus must be stopped «at all costs» we will persist with measures that are deadlier than the very «agent of destruction» they’re meant to defeat.’

Dissenting voices as to the efficacy of such measures and their unintended consequences were, indeed continue to be, largely discarded. Leaders were looking at those mortality projections if a light approach was taken and no doubt saw in them figures that would also kill their careers.

Be that as it may, while modelling and projections are helpful at the start, they are at root theoretical. They don’t reflect the reality on the ground and they tend to treat society as a homogeneous unit. You can’t beat real data and we now have a fair amount about coronavirus.

All lives matter
These data, as Dr Scott Atlas — Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University and a member of the institution’s Working Group on Health Care Policy — and a number of other equally qualified experts point out, show how shockingly (the word some commentators like to use hysterically in reference to the coronavirus death toll and cases) wrong those projections were.

Moreover, again highlighted by Dr Atlas, the lockdown measures, so data suggest, are responsible for a far greater loss of ‘life years’ than Covid-19. That is to say, government-imposed restrictions are leading/will lead to more deaths than those linked to the virus. The damage has already been done.

As Atlas explains in the Hoover Institution’s Uncommon Knowledge interview, the numbers show a significant loss of said life years due to unemployment and a general lack of economic activity, together with delayed or foregone healthcare. That’s just a synopsis of the issues at play, in the interview he goes into much greater detail.

I touched on this in previous posts, more from the perspective of what I imagined to be the unintended consequences of lockdown measures. Atlas’s analysis spells it out more alarmingly.

Of course, talking about lives that will be lost in the future due to our actions today versus lives being lost right now, the latter will always dominate our attention. It must be said there are other preventable-for-a-time deaths occurring simultaneously to those linked to Covid-19, but it’s the newness of coronavirus that ensures it dominates the discourse.

It’s similar to the outpouring of emotion and willingness to help when people die due to a natural disaster or plane crash compared to a general lack of interest in the millions who die each year from a slow burner such as starvation.

What’s more, it is understandable and somewhat forgivable that politicians, when shown worse-case scenarios relayed to a frightened public via sensationalised media reporting, want to show that they’re doing all they can to ensure no untimely deaths happen on their watch. (Advisers and the media have a lot to answer for here.)

‘The coronavirus-containment strategies that many countries have adopted are the complete opposite of utilitarianism.’

The thing is, as already highlighted, this is tunnel vision in the extreme. However, as long as the vast majority of the public believes that coronavirus must be stopped «at all costs» we will persist with measures that are indeed deadlier than the very «agent of destruction» they’re meant to defeat.

The coronavirus-containment strategies that many countries have adopted are pretty much the opposite of utilitarianism. We’re inflicting greater harm on a greater number. It’s one reason why the eminent historian Niall Ferguson sarcastically suggested that future historians will view Covid-19 as a mental illness rather than a virus-transmitted infection.

As Ferguson et al. have pointed out on umpteen occasions, there are smarter ways to tackle this pandemic. From a Colombian perspective, I don’t buy it that the country can’t implement them.

Yet the many who appear to believe that coronavirus is the worst thing in the world, ever, tend to view those of us who suggest otherwise as, at best, heartless, selfish individuals, at worst some sort of neo-Nazis. (I’m curious to see the reaction of such types when we’re faced with a virus that kills indiscriminately and in huge numbers. I take it mass suicides will be the suggestion.)

Time to broaden that range of vision, folks. Think about the fallout from the actions you blindly endorse and wipe that blood from your own hands before you start pointing accusatory fingers.
_______________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way’s Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz «The Bogotá Pub Quiz».

(Visited 349 times, 1 visits today)
PERFIL
Profile image

La vida en Colombia desde la perspectiva de un periodista y locutor Irlandés, quien ha estado viviendo en el país desde 2011. El blog explora temas sociales y cultura, interacción con los nativos, viajes, actualidades y mucho más. Escucha su podcast acá: https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-colombia-cast.

Más posts de este Blog

  • Mundo

    Forget the novel coronavirus, a novel First World war is a-brewing

    *Click here to listen to an audio version of this blog entry. @wwaycorrigan 'Your grandparents and great-grandparents had to(...)

  • Bogotá

    Bogotá's lax lockdown

    @wwaycorrigan There's been a lot of frustration expressed on social media about the world's longest coronavirus-induced lockdown. [caption id="attachment_4430"(...)

  • Colombia

    Coronavirus conspiracies

    @wwaycorrigan Very few things in life are simple black and white affairs, not even Black Lives Matter. And certainly(...)

  • Colombia

    Colombia, not up to the Covid test

    @wwaycorrigan In a classic episode of The Simpsons — in its heyday — a temporarily housebound Bart suspects that(...)

Ver más

Lo más leído en Blogs

1

Dios nos habla por medio de nuestros sueños. Esta es una(...)

2

Soñar con amigos y familiares que fallecieron causa mucha inquietud a(...)

3

Lo políticamente correcto coartó nuestro derecho a pensar y a opinar(...)

2 Comentarios
Ingresa aquí para que puedas comentar este post
  1. If only El Tiempo would allow dissenting voices, beyond your blog. The lack of debate is astounding, considering what is at stake. Claudia Lopez saying up to 25% of the infected will die is criminal and should not go unchallenged, and the way the over 70s have been treated is an outrage

Reglamento de comentarios

ETCE no se responsabiliza por el uso y tratamiento que los usuarios le den a la información publicada en este espacio de recomendaciones, pero aclara que busca ser la sombrilla de un espacio donde el equilibrio y la tolerancia sean el eje. En ese camino, disponemos de total libertad para eliminar los contenidos que:

  1. Promuevan mensajes tipo spam.
  2. El odio ante una persona o comunidad por su condición social, racial, sexual, religiosa o de situación de discapacidad.
  3. Muestren o impulsen comportamientos o lenguajes sexualmente explícitos, violentos o dañinos.
  4. Vulneren o atenten contra los derechos de los menores de edad.

Además, tenga en cuenta que:

  • - El usuario registrado solo podrá hacer un voto y veto por comentario.
Aceptar
¿Encontraste un error?

Para EL TIEMPO las observaciones sobre su contenido son importantes. Permítenos conocerlas para, si es el caso, tomar los correctivos necesarios, o darle trámite ante las instancias pertinentes dentro de EL TIEMPO Casa Editorial.


Debes escribir el comentario
¡Gracias! Tu comentario ha sido guardado
Tu calificación ha sido registrada
Tu participación ya fue registrada
Haz tu reporte
Cerrar
Debes escribir tu reporte
Tu reporte ha sido enviado con éxito
Debes ser usuario registrado para poder reportar este comentario. Cerrar