It's not so much what's right or wrong, it's the going back and forth and half measures that costs more lives in the end.
Quick strict lock down (new Zealand, South Korea), quick to re-open.
No lock down (Brazil maybe), economy fine?, bunch of people dead and some maimed.
Soft lock down, some people die now + recession that only gets worse the softer the lock down.
So if you want to optimize saving lives, there has to be cooperation. Protests don't help, only make things worse.
There's only 2 viable strategies to optimize saving lives, act fast and decisively, or don't act at all. Not something our Western freedom is capable of handling very well.
However I don't think not acting ever was a viable option. It would not save more lives in the long run. It would not spare those waiting for a transplant or depending on long term medical care as not acting would have collapsed the health care system. The disease would still severely disrupt the economy, panic would take hold when the deaths keep piling up and people would stay home out of fear anyway. The best simulated mitigation strategies still ended in disaster.
The hard part now is, how to restart the economy without failing and having to undo the current progress again. People need to keep avoiding non essential traffic and keep observing social distancing rules. The biggest test is yet to come, when flu season starts again.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
Essay Pro