Some Virus Thoughts

I'm not an epidemiologist or virologist and never have played one on television. So I might be all wet on these thoughts. But it sure seems to me we have been going all wrong on this CoVid thing. Toss in that I have no idea who to believe on CoVid stories and "facts," although the "facts" always seem to be changing, some no longer "facts" at all. If the virus is coming back now, "with a vengeance" read one newspaper headline, maybe we should rethink how we are dealing with it. I'm not minimizing the severity of the disease, not at all. Anyone who does is being myopic. But, at the same time, there is such a thing as an overreaction. I think in many ways, that's what we have done, overreacted and often in very harmful ways. It still perplexes me that it seems almost everyone believes and follows what the politicians/governments are saying about the virus. At the least, politicians are the least trustworthy group in American. That's what the polls/surveys indicate again and again. They also have much to gain from their actions, even if they are wrong-headed. That is, playing politics with the virus can be rewarding, especially with nonthinking voters. So why do most people so blindly trust what our government officials say? Bureaucrats, too, have much to gain and little to lose. Most of them certainly don't have to worry about losing their jobs. In fact, the more useless paperwork they create, the more their jobs become "essential" and permanent. Are they ever held accountable? Given the unknown nature of the virus back in March, I'll concede a month or so of the initial responses. But once we found out that the most vulnerable were senior citizens and others with premorbidity conditions, why did states (like Michigan and New York) continue to move infected people into old folks' homes? If we discovered that kids, that is those under 20 years old, were not any more affected by the virus than the regular season flu, why were schools still shut down, with remote-learning? The media, too, have become complicit in the hysteria. A week or so ago, the headline read, "School-Age CoVid Hosptial Cases Surge in State." Hmmm. That sounds pretty serious. Reading the article, though, led to the discovery that there were "18" such cases in the entire state. Wait a minute? In a state with about 1.7 million school-age kids (according to the Michigan Dept of Ed Web Site), "18" is a "surge?" Isn't that about .0001 of a percent? (Where's my calculator?) A reasonable reader might well take such a story as hyperbole, an exaggeration not to be taken seriously. Yet we've been bombarded with such stories. Every day there are new lists of CoVid cases and Covid-related deaths. And they fan the flames of fear. The politicians, especially the Democrats, and their lapdog media, eager to curry favor or sell newspapers or show their sanctimonious intellectual superiority over the rest of us, have created a climate of fear. Who can blame people for being afraid of dying? "Do you want to die?" Well, actually, I can blame them. Had these fearful people thought about things instead of blindly following the least-trustworthy politicians and the opportunistic media, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess. One of my e-mail regulars reminded me of something I wrote in a blog some months back. In light of the virus, I wondered what was going on in New Hampshire. After all, the state motto, it's even on the license plates, is "Live Free or Die." Are the citizens of New Hampshire caving in to the restrictions on our liberties and freedoms as easily as people in other states? Or has "Live Free or Die" been canceled as coming from old white men? The economist in me keeps thinking of "cost-benefit analysis." I know it was, a while ago, de rigueur to apply business practices to government operations. "Zero defects," "best practices," etc. were some catch-phrases. (For the record, I'm not at all convinced government or schools can always be based on business practices; they are different animals. But that's a topic for another show.) Why haven't the politicians applied "cost-benefit analysis" to the Covid response? Not everyone was "going to die" from Corona. As noted, young kids were not. Personally, I was never "going to die," not in the physical condition I am in. (Besides, even if I was in jeopardy, it's a matter of personal choice, not a dictatorial government mandate.) Yet, the harmful effects of the lockdown have affected far more people, in the worst of ways, than the China virus (Oops! That makes me a racist.) ever has. Note, again, school-age kids. The odds of them dying from CoVid are not much different from the regular/seasonal flu. We don't shut down schools every year during flu season, do we? Why not? Don't we care if our kids die? No, that's not it at all. The minuscule odds of kids dying from the regular/seasonal flu don't outweigh the detriments of closing schools, having virtual classes, etc. If we are going to "follow the science," as our politicians, bureaucrats, media, and other doo-gooders (and I do mean "doo") constantly remind us, why don't we follow it with kids? No one in any right mind can argue the remote learning is remotely (ha ha ha) close to traditional face-to-face/in-person classes. That's especially so for the younger kids. Child psychiatrists and psychologists have demonstrated children are being harmed in many ways other than educationally. These include psychologically, socially, and even physically. (Perhaps more detail will come in a future blog. But don't take my word for it. As Casey Stengel used to say, "You could look it up.") Why isn't that "science" being followed? In adults, substance (drugs and alcohol) abuse has skyrocketed. Suicides and spousal abuse have risen dramatically. I haven't checked, but I'd suspect so has violent crime (outside of the "peaceful protests," of course). How many people's lives have been worsened or even ruined by the loss of businesses, jobs, and income? I know, I know. "At least they aren't dead." No, the "science" shows the overwhelming majority of these people would not be "dead." And no, this isn't being selfish or greedy, not at all. Perhaps it's selfish and greedy to put one's own health (with really minimal dangers?) before the ruination of others' lives and livelihoods? I guess it's easy to pontificate so sanctimoniously about "saving lives" when one hasn't lost a business, job, or income. Again, maybe I'm all wet on this. Maybe I am wrong. I do know I don't trust the information we are being given. I also refuse to live my life in fear of the virus. I'd like to take the Michigan governor's orders and tell her where to stick them, but I can't go into a restaurant to eat; they are closed. I can't teach my classes in-person; my bosses have closed the college. I can't have a big gathering at my house; I don't have any friends. Perhaps the biggest casualty of Corona 2020 is thinking. People either have forgotten how or refuse to think for themselves. Perhaps that was inevitable as the US moves closer to a country where the government (and its left-leaning politicians) promises to take care of citizens from cradle to grave--at the expense of liberty.