Corona: Points of view & arguments

The Wuhan Coronavirus appears to have unsettled and unhinged many. The real experts don't enter into nonsensical debates but quietly go about researching or looking at data. Yet there are countless others who have been going on and on as newly minted experts. Let's face it: nobody knows. Not even the experts. About the true origin, about the reasons for the rapid spread of infection, the pathogenesis, nature and speed of genetic mutation, the molecular basis for accelerating co-morbid degenerations, risk and spread across demographics, infection methodology, etc etc. These are still areas of considerable darkness that the world is confronted with. The genetic morphology is known but practically nothing else is.

Some have been taking a stand that lockdown works, others that they don't. Some say leave it to herd immunity, some others say it's too costly for society. And the conversations have increasingly become nasty, base, hectoring in tone, and accusative of having taken leave of one's senses. Others claim those who disagree are senseless. Ungentlemanly scarcely begins to describe the animosity being displayed. I am no expert and I freely admit it. Yet I read and this is what I get from them (references below):

1. Lockdown or not:

The numbers say it all, looking at the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. The countries who have shown a hockey stick growth in infections are the ones who have it real nasty in terms of fatalities - the US for mismanaging its readiness; the UK for vascillating over letting the disease take its course over a misguided herd theory; Italy and Spain for waking up late. Between South Korea at one end (prompt action upon noticing a huge risk and very accelerated testing and quarantines) and the US at the other stand all the other countries at varying degrees of infections and death.

2. Herd immunity or not:

While the verdict may not be palatable to some, the UK's reversal is arguably a vindication that the theory had imprecise predictions about infection and death rates and the ability or willingness of society to condone them. At the end of the day, a probable likelihood of herd immunity at some point in the future had to be weighed against the loss of lives today. No democracy can afford to see its citizens falling like flies on a government plea that immunity was near. Sweden, another country that has embraced the idea and still going at it is already evidence of a probably flawed principle: it shares demographics, small population size, and density of population with its neighboring Scandinavian countries - Denmark, Norway, and Finland. But, already, the stats for Sweden are considerably worse than for its neighbors. Do the Swedes have particular predeliction to Corona infections or deaths, more so than the Danes to the south or the Nords to the west? Likely not.

3. Social distancing or not:

The general idea that has become accepted in most countries today is that social distancing is good. Again, while the evidence on this is imprecise, the fact is this virus infects through inhalation or drawing in of infected moisture (and contact with infected surfaces). So the norm to wear face masks, to keep a 3-feet or 6-feet distance. What happens when a nation that is highly populated and with a very high density of population opens up when the disease is yet to be defeated? One rationale propounded here is that herd immunity would rectify. But when? And what happens in the interregnum? Just let people die? The second rationale is that social distance could be maintaned and people, more than any authority, know their risks and will do what is necessary. Really? So why have young millenials and others been crowding in Florida beaches, German pubs, Indian markets, Italian churches, and Pakistani mosques? An argument could be that all of them are maintaining "social distancing". But that's laughably not true when you look at the pictures. And even if they keep away from congregations in churches, mosques, temples, discotheques, restaurants, etc social distance - remember? the 3-feet distance - will keep everyone safe. But is this really true? Again, this was a cautionary precept that was initially trotted out but there is no data that convincingly shows the Coronavirus "mist" exhausts itself in 3 feet. Take a look at the article on the findings of Carl Flugge in 1899 wherein he proved that microbes can be transmitted ballistically through large droplets that emit at high velocity from the mouth and nose. Interestingly, these "Flugge droplets" can be large droplets or aerosol droplets that have vastly different characteristics that are little understood to this day. So, again - would a 3-feet social distance suffice? Are Coronavirus droplets, emitted as sneeze or cough, likely to be large droplets or aerosol clouds that stay indefinitely in the air, say in the office or underground metro? Important to understand before we give our verdicts about lifting lockdown and blithely leave it to the population to maintain social distancing.

4. Fatalities:

Tomas Pueyo, whose highly influential Medium article remains one of the high watermark articles of its genre in recent months, had this to say: "Countries that act fast can reduce the number of deaths by a factor of ten. And that’s just counting the fatality rate. Acting fast also drastically reduces the cases, making this even more of a no-brainer." He notes: "Around 20% of cases require hospitalization, 5% of cases require the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), and around 2.5% require very intensive help, with items such as ventilators or ECMO (extra-corporeal oxygenation). Healthcare systems will be able to handle cases much better when infections are reduced as much as possible, driving the fatalities down, and...over time, reach a point when the rest of the population could be vaccinated." The question, then, is how do you reduce the infections? No easy answers.

References:

1. Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

2. UK: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2237385-why-is-the-uk-approach-to-coronavirus-so-different-to-other-countries/

3. Sweden: https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/for-tackling-covid-19-sweden-is-not-the-model-to-follow-for-even-the-western-countries-let-alone-india

4. Social Distancing and the theory of droplets: https://quillette.com/2020/04/23/covid-19-superspreader-events-in-28-countries-critical-patterns-and-lessons/

5. Infection growth and fatalities: https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

6. A later addition: https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/how-india-fared-in-containing-covid-deaths-analysis/1955598/