Opinion: quarantine was a huge mistake

Was quarantine a mistake? The answer to this intrusive question is increasingly positive. This opinion was expressed by historian and journalist Michael Baron in his article for New York Post.

Photo: Shutterstock

Quarantine was certainly a novelty for everyone. As writer Lionel Shriver writes: "We have never reacted to an epidemic by shutting down entire countries before." The 1957-1958 Asian Flu claimed the lives of 70 to 000 Americans, 116 to 000 percent of the country's population. The Hong Kong flu of 0,04-0,07 claimed the lives of about 1968 people, or 1970 percent of the population.

The death toll from the coronavirus in the United States is 186, which is 000 percent of the current population. This epidemic is about the same intensity as those two influenza. However, there were no restrictions then; there was no massive school closure; no closures of office buildings and factories, restaurants and museums.

Why is there a different attitude today? Perhaps we are more confident in the effectiveness of government. If government policy can affect climate change, then it can definitely destroy the virus.

In addition, we are much more risk averse. Children are not allowed to walk to school; gyms have disappeared from playgrounds; college students are protected from microaggression. We have a "safety mindset," as Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lucianoff write in The Loafing of the American Mind, according to which "adults must carefully regulate many aspects of student life."

Thus, news of COVID-19 killing dozens of people and causing overcrowding in hospitals in Bergamo, Italy, prompted a flight to safety and restrictions. Many Americans stopped going to restaurants and shops even before bans were introduced in March and April. The exaggerated projections of some epidemiologists with a professional interest in forecasting pandemics have prompted calls for the government to act.

On the subject: 'Harm more than good': WHO urged countries not to quarantine again

Legitimate fears that hospitals will be overwhelmed appear to explain the decrees of the governors of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Michigan requiring elderly care facilities to accept patients infected with COVID-19. And the original goal of "flattening the curve" grew into "eradicate the virus."

But the apparent success of South Korea and the island nations—Taiwan, Singapore, New Zealand—can never be replicated in the continental, globalized United States.

The governors, imposing permanent restrictions, claimed to be "watching the science." But in only one dimension: a reduction in the immediate number of COVID-19 cases. The quarantine also ended cancer screening, heart attack treatment and substance abuse counseling, the absence of which has resulted in high but difficult to estimate deaths. What Haidt and Lukyanov call "vengeful defense" turned out to be not very protective.

Examples include declining beach visitors, although outdoor spread of the virus is minimal; an increase in the number of closed schools, although few children become infected or transmit infection; closing aisles in supermarkets; and banning church services while blessing the inevitably noisy and crowded demonstrations for political reasons.

On the subject: Cancellation of Quarantine: CDC Changed Self-Isolation Guidelines

As Greg Yip told the Wall Street Journal, the new perception of bans is that "they are too harsh and costly." This confirms the statement made in mid-April by US President Donald Trump that "prolonged isolation, combined with a forced economic depression, will cause huge and widespread damage to public health."

For many, this economic damage was on the scale of the Great Depression. Restaurants and small businesses were closed permanently, even until the last three months of “mostly peaceful” urban unrest. The losses were concentrated on those with low incomes and low incomes, while the quarantine increased the net worth of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

Anti-quarantine blogger (and former New York Times reporter) Alex Berenson makes a compelling case that it delays rather than prevents infection.

There are old lessons here. Sometimes governments can direct, but never completely control. The risk cannot be completely eliminated. Attempts to reduce one risk can increase others. In conditions of uncertainty, people make mistakes. Maybe quarantine is one of them.

Read also on ForumDaily:

Self-isolation money: how the United States motivates people to comply with quarantine

California Parents Can Get Extra Benefit If Their Child Is Studying Online

If everything is difficult with the school: how to provide a child with a good education in quarantine

Cancellation of Quarantine: CDC Changed Self-Isolation Guidelines

WHO predicted when the COVID-19 pandemic will end

'Harm more than good': WHO urged countries not to quarantine again

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Instagram- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis.