Many commentators and pundits, as well as some public health experts, are admonishing those who are clamoring for an end to the lockdown restrictions. Those who want a return to normalcy, are being stigmatized as irresponsible, with some public health officials going so far as to claim that those flouting the requirements imposed by the quarantine, will be responsible for unnecessary deaths. The New York Times Timothy Eagan, in a typical display of anti-Trump/Republican hyperbole, went so far as to call the GOP, the “party of death.”
Whether you believe the lockdown is unduly restrictive or necessary to stop the spread of the pandemic, it is certainly not unreasonable to question the assumptions on which many of the mortality rates are based. Since the scope of the policy responses imposed to stop the spread of the virus are based entirely on the various models or projections that have been made, it is imperative that a healthy scepticism about the reliability and validity of the models be maintained. It’s time to stop trusting these computer simulated projections as gospel, their conclusions about death rates need to come under scrutiny.
The estimates that have been offered, have vareied widely. At the early stages of the breakout, the Imperial College in the U.K., published a report where they predicted 2 million deaths in the U.S. by June. This particular projection was wildly inaccurate, but nonetheless important, as a some of the draconian quarantine measures were based on this particular model. That doomsday report, was in large part, responsible for the current state of paranoia and hysteria. Other estimates are somewhere in between these extremes, but also, are continually updated or revised.
Those progressives, who castigate the rednecks in flyover country for not heeding the experts with superiour knowledge, frequently cite the WHO as an authoritative source. Remember however, this is the same organization, that claimed repeatedly back in January, that the virus could not be transmitted between humans.
Are these the experts to whom we must defer and pay homage? Thanks, but I’ll take ignorance any day.
The more salient issue, is that it is more prudent to weigh the decision to reopen against the most accurate projections of of the viruses lethality available. That estimate, needs to take into consideration, the experience of physicians on the ground and not rely entirely on projections that are published or disseminated by academics or that are far too abstract to provide meaningful lethality rate estimates.
It is increasingly becoming clear to many people, that the current lockdown restriction mandates can no longer be justified, based on some of the spurious figures and estimates that have proven to be not only manifestly false, but were also, based on a faulty methodology to arrive at assumptions that were of questionable validity.