Skip to main content

Critical Thinking and SARS-CoV-2 (i.e. Covid-19) - Was it Worth it?

+
JMJ

After my discussion with Smith I have been pondering a question: 
 
Were all the measures taken to contain the pandemic worth it?

Key factors that come to mind are economic, geopolitical and moral.  This will not be an in depth study, just the documenting a 'stream of consciousness' exercise.

Economics

This factor seems to divide into two questions:What was the economic cost of the response to the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic and what would it have been if the civil leaders had taken the "do nothing" option?

The COVID-19 recession is an economic recession happening across the world economy in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.Global stock markets experienced their worst crash since 1987, and in the first three months of 2020 the G20 economies fell 3.4% year-on-year. Between April and June 2020, the International Labour Organization estimated that an equivalent of 400 million full-time jobs were lost across the world, and income earned by workers globally fell 10 percent in the first nine months of 2020, equivalent to a loss of over US$3.5 trillion. (Source: Wikipedia)

So, as it was there was a recession linked with the Pandemic.  Would it have been worse or better?

So if you did nothing and 20% of the population was off sick over 2 years and given the limited number of general and ICU hospital beds, the healthcare system would collapse and there would be a significant impact economically.  I would guess the pandemic would last about the same time as the 1918 pandemic (2y) and the recovery would take probably 2 years - so 4 years of impact.

 Canada's economy dipped ... but I'm not certain how much.

I'm not an economist, but took a course at University - so take my estimates for what they are ...

But, here's some quick references that I scanned (read quickly):

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0863-y

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/are-we-overreacting-to-the-coronavirus-lets-do-the-math-2020-04-19

https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/economic-cost-coronavirus-recession-covid-deaths

 So economically, it appears that the 'do nothing' option would cause more short and medium term pain that the restrictions and investment in vaccines etc.

I'm not devoted to this conclusion ... I'd be happy to have reputable counter arguments.

Geopolitical

 This is one that I think bears mentioning.  The primary geo-political competition is between the USA, China and Russia.  

China and Russia moved quickly on restrictions and / or vaccinations. 

The Chinese experience shows the advantage of their system. No worrying about the next election, just make decisions and give orders.

If the US took a 'do nothing' approach, they would be at an economic disadvantage for (I believe) at least 5 years compared with China and to a lesser extent Russia. The timeframe is based on how long it took the 1918 Pandemic to proceed through its lifecycle (2 years), the advances that the other economies would make while the US was 'paused' and the time it would take to catch-up to the front-runners.

That would not be a desirable state of affairs.

Moral

This one gives me trouble as I have difficulty believing that just because a disease impacts the elderly and infirm, that someone can whisper the words 'common-good' and their survival is counted as naught. I think that leaders have a duty towards all the people under their leadership.

Does the damage done to the un-infected and young balance out the efforts to protect the old.

That is a fallacy because it ignores that fact that the disease affects all segments of the population without discrimination.  Pathogens are typically equal opportunity employers of human bodies to reproduce.  

The side effect is that they kill some of their hosts. 

Looking at the stats in Canada - we see the impacts a broader spectrum of people.

Cases in Canada

Hospitalizations

ICU Admissions

Deaths

 The key element here is that we don't know who is going to go to the hospital, ICU and die. If you could determine that - maybe you could make a case for sheltering those individuals.  But that is impossible. There are too many factors that determine who lives and who dies etc.  In other words, only God knows.

So, if a pathogen is allowed to run free, it overwhelms the healthcare systems - as started to happen in Manitoba when they had to transport covid patients out of the province. Some of whom died ...

This really comes down to what is common-good and what is the obligations of the civil leaders in this situation?

Taking the common-good (which it turns out is a hard to define term) - if you allow COVID-19 to run amok without intervention through the population, is it more or less damaging than the case with interventions?  

Basically, if the healthcare system is overwhelmed, people die. Society as a whole is likewise impacted. Society is a network not an island and if the pathogen were allowed to move unfettered through society it will cause a damage to the common-good as well.

The civil leaders have an obligation to create the circumstances in which people can live out their lives to attain their final end.  This include the protection of those lives.

If they did nothing, then they would commit a sin of omission and dereliction of duty since they are not just in a position of authority to help the young and strong, but also the old and weak.

 Conclusion

At a tactical moral level, I think it was justified.  Also, looking strategically, I think that the Geo-political and Economic factors are also in favour of the interventions.

The exact methods used is a detail that needs to be examined. For example - closing churches but leaving bars open is obviously not licit.

But that is a topic for later ... if I have time or inclination.


P^3


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Church Militant TV and the SSPX - Again

+ JMJ The old narrative used to be that the SSPX was 'schismatic' and 'excommunicated'. Now the excommunication has been lifted for a number of years and the only ones who think it still has effect are the 'resistors'. That leaves the other opponents of the SSPX with the label 'schismatic'. Make it clear, the conservative Catholics have issues with the SSPX probably because they violate some of their assumptions about the Faith and this crisis of the Church. Church Militant TV is one of these the exists along the Catholic thought spectrum. They like the Traditional Mass but must ensure that they don't get tarred with the same 'schismatic' brush that the liberals use against the SSPX.  So what do they do, they use the same brush against the SSPX. The funny thing is that even when the Church does speak, they don't want to listen and persist in calling the SSPX 'schismatic'. Here's a transcript of the latest s...

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too th...

The Position of the SSPX on Canonizations by the Saint Factory

+ JMJ I have sometimes been criticized for including 'St' as a title for Pope John Paul II et al. I've given my reasons here  in a discussion with Alex Long. The question is one of prudence in discussions with ntCatholics and in some cases with tCatholics. In discussions with:  ntCatholics, I will use the title in order to continue the discussion and help them arrive at a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. tCatholics, I will use the title in order to broaden their perspective on the doctrine of dogmatic facts. This broader perspective is, in my opinion, essential maintaining a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. So from a doctrinal position, I have written the article Dogmatic Fact of Fancy  and includes a reference on canonizations. Now, I know the position of the SSPX is that the canonizations are doubtful (see references below) and I also know of at least one non-SSPX theologian who agrees with the level of doubt du...