POVERTY WON’T CURE CORONA. WE MUST GET BACK TO WORK
BACK in 1968 and 1969, the Hong Kong flu hit the world. In the UK, 80,000 people died and the lives of one million were lost worldwide. I was 24 at the time, just starting my career, and while I still vividly remember the Cuban missile crisis and Kennedy’s assassination which were a little earlier, I have no recollection whatsoever of the pandemic. The reason is that there was no serious impact on the economy or our way of life at that time.
Although the death toll was considerably higher than it is today in real terms and as a percentage of the population – which was much smaller at that time – there was no intrusive government action which led to the damage to the economy we see today.
This week’s announcement by Chancellor Rishi Sunak that the furlough scheme will be extended to October at a cost of £80billion is just the latest indication of the extent of that damage. Countless companies up and down the country, the lifeblood of our economy supporting millions of jobs, will be damaged beyond repair by this kind of protracted lockdown.
And yet a recent study by Stanford University suggests the overwhelming majority are not at risk of dying of Covid 19. It estimates the fatality rate for those infected is likely to be 0.1 to 0.2 per cent, in stark contrast to the World Health Organisation estimates which are 20 to 30 times higher and prompted isolation policies worldwide.
In New York City, the current epicentre of the pandemic with more than a third of US deaths, the death rate for people between 18 and 45 years old is 0.01 per cent or 10 per 100,000 of the population, while for people like myself aged 75 or over it is 800 per 100,000 or 0.8 per cent. In New York, 98 per cent of fatal cases involved people with underlying health conditions. If you do not have an underlying condition, your chances of dying, regardless of age, are very small and young adults and children have almost no risk of any serious illness. I am 75 and have had the disease and am back to my usual rigorous exercise routines six weeks later.
Lockdown was enacted on a forecast of 500,000 deaths in the UK, and a prediction that hospitals would not be able to cope because of a lack of intensive care facilities. This is no longer the case today, with intensive care units in hospitals at 40 per cent capacity. So why are we still in lockdown with such a cautious approach being taken to a return to normal life? Why is the Government being guided by scientists who have got it so wrong with Covid-19 and with epidemics in the past like foot and mouth disease, for example, when hundreds of thousands of cattle were needlessly slaughtered.
It is in the interest of these scientists to be over-cautious, since they will never have to take the blame for the economic consequences. My experience of the disease would seem to have led me to different conclusions from those of the Prime Minister, though I never needed hospitalisation as he did. It would tell me his attempt to continue to work as normal led to the exacerbation of his symptoms, his body working hard to keep him going rather than fighting the disease.
I am in the age group which is deemed the most vulnerable, but we are all capable of understanding the risks and taking precautions. As I say, the consequences of lockdown are catastrophic. Firstly, it is causing major disruption to NHS treatment for people with conditions other than Covid. Downturns themselves are also a direct cause of ill health.
People focus on high levels of extra government debt but this will take very little to service, at current interest rates some £1billion to £3billion per annum – a tiny fraction of GDP.
The real and overwhelming tragedy is the devastation it is causing to previously profitable businesses, and even worse to the millions of working people previously in secure and productive jobs. This should be the Government’s overriding priority.
We should look to the Swedish strategy which is so far working, despite the scepticism that greeted it, and there are now a number of studies suggesting that the virus follows much the same curve whatever strategy adopted by government, peaking at around 40 days and dying down after 70.
Unless we are to stay in lockdown forever, restrictions will have to be eased at some point. What do people imagine will happen then? No one believes this virus will be eradicated so unless we are to wait for a vaccine, which could take years, it will begin to spread again in the population.
Our Government should grasp the nettle and take a lead in opening up the economy, moving immediately to the Swedish model then quickly back to normality. This is the only way to save millions of jobs and the deprivation which will otherwise follow.
No country has ever improved the health of its people by making itself poorer. The British people are grown-ups and can be trusted to make sensible decisions about their own health.
The lockdown is an expensive and potentially deadly overreaction which should be brought to an end as soon as possible.