Hasty reopening not warranted

Governments around the world are facing a terrible dilemma in the coronavirus pandemic – when and how fast to move away from the lockdowns which have slowed the spread of the disease but hammered their economies.

How do you balance public and economic health? Move too soon and too fast from lockdown and Covid-19 infections and deaths are likely to rise; stay in too long and the economic impacts will take their own toll on lives down the track.

This crucial decision has to take place without the benefit of clear scientific evidence. We don’t yet know – because testing has not been widespread enough to gauge the volume of asymptomatic cases – how deadly the disease is. Death-rate estimates vary widely.

We also can’t actually compare the visible, immediate impact of Covid-19 with the potential impact of future economic and social harms.

So it boils down to countries using the best advice they have and making judgment calls in what amounts to a worldwide experiment.

In New Zealand we’ve had the benefit of the Government applying overseas lessons relatively early with a hard lockdown. The results have been encouraging, with a rapid fall in infection rates and relatively few deaths.

But as the end of the initial four-week level 4 restriction looms next week, there are more voices saying the greater good involves us opening up faster, saving businesses and jobs.

Among them are a group of academics, including public health and economic experts, who yesterday argued the firm lockdown rules are now disproportionate to the threat of the virus, particularly because the health system has not been overwhelmed.

Their ‘‘Plan B’’ is to move to the equivalent of alert level 2 next week, allowing for the reopening of schools and universities, plus a resumption of normal work, domestic travel and leisure activities, while maintaining social isolation for those over 60 or with vulnerable conditions. Whether you back the group’s expertise and arguments or not, it’s important to have the debate.

A group member, epidemiologist Simon Thornley, says there is enough data to say the large majority of deaths occurs in people with other serious conditions, not directly from Covid 19. ‘‘If you catch Covid-19 your likelihood of dying is the same as your average likelihood of dying that year anyway,’’ he says.

That may be as true as it is harsh, but it ignores the deaths of those without severe underlying conditions, and gaps in our knowledge about how rapidly the virus can spread at various levels of restriction. The jury is still out on countries with relaxed approaches, such as Sweden, but it has seen worrying fatality trends.

Without such evidence illuminating the road ahead, it’s safer to proceed with more caution. It’s a path urged by the World Health Organisation.

So far the Government has signalled that if it moves anywhere on the lockdown, it will go to alert level 3. The crucial detail of what that looks like, including which businesses can resume, will be released later this week.

New Zealand has so far done well to avoid the tragic tolls elsewhere. After the lockdown sacrifices, economic and otherwise, the last thing we need is a premature reopening allowing the virus to flourish.

Taking a slower approach means the Government has to keep boosting the health of that other vulnerable patient, the economy, with the right injections. There is no easy way out, but proceeding with haste now would risk being a terrible waste.

Whether you back the group’s expertise and arguments or not, it’s important to have the debate.