I'm not sure myself, but would appreciate your thoughts.
The first word goes to Ivor Cummins, an outspoken critic of the lockdown strategy, based on the theory that it harms both the economy AND public health. Covid19, he claims, is just another seasonal virus that will cause no excess deaths if left to run its course. Here he is youtu.be/E0Z2rfsUbBs
Convinced? I wasn't, but thought his theory merits consideration. So, what do other studies say about excess deaths? This one covers the first wave, by country (Europe, Australia and NZ):
shows the southern hemisphere to have fared better, possibly seasonal factors, also the former Eastern Bloc countries, possibly cultural factors.
What happened between May and 4 October is covered here:
https//ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid
which shows the beginnings of an uptick in some countries including England & Wales, Germany and Poland, with only Spain showing persistently higher than about 5 percent increase in expected mortality.
Of further interest is what happened in Australia (large urban populations, opposite seasons) which had no excess deaths in the first wave, and despite a sharp increase in Covid cases and mortality at the beginning of July again saw no excess deaths https//abs.gov.au/statistics/healt...
Covid case and death counts for Australia continued to rise rapidly, peaked, then declined again through July-September, the winter months, and remained stable thereafter:
Of course, the waters are muddied by the fact that each country has maintained social restrictions and protection measures for Covid that have never been deployed in managing seasonal flu, and flu has been subject to seasonal vaccination programmes. But Australia, so far, is conforming to the seasonal virus model espoused by Ivor Cummins. By the end of March 2021 we should see whether the pattern is repeated in Europe and North America. If it is, and the pandemic tails off, expect political leaders to heap praise upon themselves for a job well done. Only an early vaccine would rob them of their glory.
Written by
bennevisplace
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
I am not convinced by Cummings or the "Great Barrington Declaration"
Both are more interested in money than peoples lives.
An economy can be revived, you cannot bring loved ones back from the dead.
ALL the doctors that I have seen and heard talk about Covid-19 explain the differences to seasonal flu.
The UK death rates are way higher than any flu since 1918.
There are huge numbers of people reporting "Long Covid" a kind of post viral fatigue, heart problems, lung problems, brain damage etc, that continue for months after the initial infection, even when that first infection appeared to be mild.
As with so many things in life "Follow the Money"
Those arguing "To just let it run and let people die" all have a vested interest.
e.g. The Barrington meeting was funded by David Koch, a well known right wing climate denier.
Those countries that have protected their people - e.g. Taiwan, New Zealand etc, have also had the least impact on their economies.
Thanks for this OBCS, strong views from you and others.
For me this issue arose recently in an email exchange with an old friend, a very smart person, who takes Cummins' proposition seriously.
I agree that Covid19 is different from seasonal flu, symptomatically less predictable and potentially more severe. There are similarities though: in the way it is spread, that it can induce serious lung complications for the elderly and vulnerable, and that it kills large numbers of people: globally flu kills 250-500,000 each year according to WHO. There are several subtypes of the influenza virus, more or less virulent, while so far Covid19 has evolved two variants, one thought to be more infectious but not more virulent. The virus of the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic differed from our seasonal flus and Covid 19, being an A/H1N1 influenza virus thought to be a bird flu like the one behind the 2009 pandemic. Fortunately H1N1 has not become an annual event, but other forms of influenza have, as have some coronaviruses including ones responsible for the common cold.
Ivor Cummins' proposition is that the world gets through seasonal flu without lockdown measures which harm the economy, and if we treat Covid just the same we will continue to see a death toll of 250-500,000 a year globally, concentrated in winter months , i.e. no excess deaths. His evidence consists of mortality rates for several countries during the pandemic compared with previous years.
My take on this is: case not proven, evidence questionable. If, as at least some of the data suggest, there are no excess deaths compared with previous years, without the special measures introduced to try to control what was widely regarded as a potentially devastating pandemic, the death toll might have been much higher. Even in Sweden, one of the few countries following a policy aimed at minimising economic disruption "au Cummins", the virus was not given free reign; many people practised social distancing including working from home, and steps were taken to protect the elderly and vulnerable. The level of herd immunity has turned out to be much lower than predicted: 6-8 percent nationally in September.
As for seasonality, the figures from Australia are suggestive, but in the USA the anticipated nose-dive in case and mortality rates during the summer months did not happen. The authors of this paper frontiersin.org/articles/10...
reiterated that for a virus to become seasonal, the R0 rate must naturally fluctuate from less than 1 in its"off season" to considerably more than 1 in its "high season" and concluded that we haven't yet seen that in the present pandemic. Compared with seasonal influenza, Covid19 has a higher R0, the virus particles can survive longer outside the body, and more of the population is infection-naive. In time, they say, as herd immunity increases either through prolonged pandemic or effective vaccination programmes, Covid could become seasonal.
nature.com/articles/d41586-... predicts that Covid cases will rise this winter, a combination of behavioural and viral factors, and that in the absence of a vaccine the virus could take 5 years to become seasonal.
both sides have arguments. As soon as you bring up deaths-your stuck. Overwhelming the health system is another. On the other hand-young people are 'relatively' ok with the virus. You can always find stories about a young person -here and there -who gets it and dies-but the percentage is quite low. It's still devastating to a family but it is very low.
The economy either works or the government will have to print money. that never really works either.
Covid is not remotely comparable to any seasonal flu or other virus, unless one is talking about the Spanish flu that may have killed 50 million people in 1918. The Spanish flu killed over a half million people in the US and we are about halfway there in deaths with covid. Almost all reputable scientists worldwide concur that we are in a pandemic the likes of which the world has not seen in 100 years. Pretending covid equates to a seasonal flu is a political view , not a science view.
But that does not end the discussions of how to protect society from covid and at whether the harm of lockdowns exceeds the benefit. Its not a simple analysis. Lockdowns come at a steep price and there is merit to the view that extreme lockdowns do more harm than good.
We do know that lockdowns in general slow the spread of the disease and help relieve the strain on our healthcare systems. In some areas where covid infection rates are exploding, the benefits of a lockdown can outweigh the harm. It depends on the infection rate, the type of lockdown, the length of lockdown and if a lockdown is needed because hospital capacity has been exceeded.
So I think its a mistake when people frame these discussions as lockdowns being good or bad. No one wants lockdowns. No one wants more people dying from covid. Whether a lockdown is good/necessary for a certain area or region and how long and extensive the lockdown should be depends on many factors
We need a balanced approach to deciding what measures are needed to protect us from covid while taking into account the damage that lockdowns can do to people who need to work.
I think that's what most governments worldwide are trying to do as best they can, find that balance. I personally do not want to return to any lockdown where I live, but I can see where if the hospitals were overflowing with an exploding covid rate and I was in charge that I would have to consider some sort of lockdown.
So yes, sure, lockdowns are awful. But they can still be necessary. It depends where you are and how the virus is spreading.
I think what is not helpful is when for political reasons we let the debate get framed as being pro lockdown or anti lockdown. I don't know anyone who wants or likes lockdowns.
My guess is what the vast majority of us want is a balanced approach that recognizes that all of us living in bubbles is not solution to covid, nor is pretending its a seasonal flu that will not ravage society if we dont take some extraordinary measures to fight it.
You need to look at the Australian statistics both as a whole and at state levels. At the national level, we lost around 900 people to COVID-19 infections, which is on par with annual influenza deaths, hence no excess deaths this year. That's because this year's influenza season was a non-event, due to the introduction of measures which successfully stopped the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic - TWICE!
About 800 of our COVID-19 deaths occurred in our second most populous state of Victoria, with about 25% of our total population. Incidentally, nearly all of the second wave deaths happened in aged care nursing homes, about 75% of our total deaths nationally.
What we learned in both Australia and New Zealand is that lock downs work to both save the economy and people's lives, but only if you use them to reduce the number of infections to a level where it is possible to track, trace and isolate those who are spreading the virus, so that life can return to normal for the rest of the population.
Good point about anti-Covid measures suppressing flu numbers, something I meant to put into my reply to OBCS. It will be interesting to see if the same happens in the northern hemisphere. In England our new lockdown may result in a "mortality deficit" in early winter!
Just my opinion but i stronly believe in lockdown. In Western Australia we had a number of cases in the early days.
Lockdown came in and the state was split into regions, we werent allowed to travel out of our regions. We could get tested very easily and track and trace was in place. People coming into Western Australia were placed in quarantine.
Our premier put our lives before the economy. Within weeks the virus was eliminated in the community.
We are almost back to usual ,no masks to be seen and restuarants and pubs booming.
Real estate is booming, hotels are full if you want to travel within the state.
Our budget came in ,in the black.
Lockdown works if its done properly.
I wont criticize some countries as i know people get defensive, but i can only say it has been managed in some places in a very haphzard way.
My sister living overseas couldnt get tested, couldnt get to see a Dr and was basically dealt with by phone, as was my niece aged nine with type one diabetes,who had a temperature of 40c,for a few nights and probably had the virus but wasnt tested.
I know we are lucky here, our borders are opening soon to states that are covid free, but we know if there are any cases introduced, borders will be shut again and maybe lockdown re introduced.
There have been a million deaths worldwide and there will be many more. Its more than a season flu, as cajunjeff says.
Funny how the older generation fought for their country, and endured the horrors of war, yet so many people complain about being forced to stay indoors sitting on the sofa watching netflix.
I listened to about 8 minutes of this and that was more than enough for me given the nature of the assertions made:
1. Mr Cummins' contention that the first lockdown in the UK had no effect in reducing the Covid infection rate seems implausible to me. Where is the evidence for this? I suppose Its possible that seasonality may have had something to do with this, but Coronavirus in the UK increased sharply at a time when one would expect seasonal flu to be starting to decrease.
2. He states that viruses only have one epidemic phase with the next outbreaks being endemic. But this is not true as a blanket statement. The second wave of the Spanish flu of 1918-19 was considerably more severe than the first wave. The second wave had actually ended by mid-January 1919 in the UK. So seasonality did not seem to having much of an effect there.
3. Regarding capacity. Capacity had already been substantially increased by the building of Nightingale hospitals in the Spring. The problems the NHS is facing may be much more to do with lack of staff (partly due to sickness) than capacity. And the NHS has made substantial efforts to increase staffing to cope with COVID
As regards the main question: do lockdowns do more harm than good (in a holistic sense): Quite frankly, I just do not know. How could anyone know at this stage?
It will be interesting to see what the effect is of the latest lockdown in the uk. This time people are urged to carry on working and going to school.
Socialising and shopping for non essential items has been stopped. Its sad that these venues have worked so hard to make things as safe as possible.
Unfortunately people thought it was a great laugh to crowd in the streets in defiance. Then there are those who think all the rules are the governments fault. Not covid. There are other people who just dont understand how the virus is transferred.
If we cant go out to socialise and we cant visit each others homes, or shop, we will remove the temptation for people to do as they please.
We will see what difference this makes to the numbers. It seems that the country isnt fully locked down.
All the science and number crunching is wasted if the public dont follow the advice. When comparing different countries, you have to take into account the attitude of folk and their respect for the government. The selfish attitudes of some that has resulted in our freedoms taken away and many losing their jobs and businesses.
Thanks. I agree with you, blaming the government at every turn (though the government is hardly blameless in this!) is an easy excuse for the kind of selfish behaviour we've seen. Example: a fresher at Man Uni complaining to a TV reporter that the government was wrong to send students to university for the autumn term "if they knew this was going to happen" - "this" being students getting together every night for mass parties and raves, social activity portrayed by another student as the main purpose of going to university. The virus doesn't spread only via selfish behaviour though. In a multi-generation household with schoolchildren, key workers and elderly folk all under the same roof, blocking all transmission pathways would be virtually impossible. Then again, plenty of other countries are in the same boat and have fared much better than us. If, at an early stage, and just for a few crucial months, we had taken more notice of the experience of Far Eastern countries and had adapted our systems and behaviours accordingly, I'm sure we would be in a better place now. We should have the humility to ask why we didn't do that.
I remember when a young woman was spoken to at a south Korean airport. She wore a mask and checked into a test and trace system. Her attitude was so different to many here. She was accepting that this was what she had to do and happy.
She is another reason these countries have done so well along with the ability to test and trace and be prepared. Obviously these places are far ahead with test and trace. Didnt seem any shortage of equipment or facilities.
It was a fiasco from start to finish. We were supposed to be prepared for a pandemic.
No personal protective equipment. Our reliance on other countries to provide everything we need didnt take into account the fact that they may need it for themselves.
We have had to build centres to process the tests. We didnt have the chemicals we needed.
In all these months attempts have been made to address these issues and British companies have been able to contribute.
Lets hope that things improve. We have more knowledge and equipment. Hopefully we have locked away the students and those who want to use their personal freedom.
That freedom has been taken away. Too late!
Of course the government are being adviced by someone who is driving when he might be blind. Anne uk
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
WHO declares the coronavirus outbreak a pandemic
Harmfulness to others
Vit D3 - found to be low - on supplements - and now more active than for a long time
Any harm in taking vitamin supplements?
