Loading...

An alternative scenario to that of a lock down (March 2021)

Published March 2021

An alternative scenario to that of a lock down

This is a real 'head scratcher' and requires a good cup of coffee followed by your honest opinion.

This article is about an alternative perspective on the lock down in South Africa and another scenario which could have had equal or better results, in less time and at less cost.

Here we go…

 

(This post was prepared on the 5th of March.)

 

Today, we have:

  • Coronavirus Cases: 116,371,108
  • Deaths: 2,583,987
  • Recovered: 91,999,256

The above was taken from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ at 5pm.

 

What is the percentage of Covid-19 cases that show no symptoms and/or don’t get tested? This is a tricky question and requires a little bit of thought. Here is some inspiration to help the answer:

a.
One study suggests that 59 percent of infected people can be traced back to asymptomatic and presymptomatic cases. Above taken from: https://www.healthline.com/.../most-covid-19-cases-come...

b.
Researchers say anywhere from 25 percent to 80 percent of people with Covid-19 are unaware they have the virus. Above taken from: https://www.healthline.com/.../50-percent-of-people-with...

c.
A test of actual infected people showed 86.1 percent of the patients did not report any specific symptoms on the day of the test. Above taken from: https://www.news-medical.net/.../86-percent-of-the-UKs...

 

Conclusion to the question.

There are many articles reporting on the percentage of people ill and showing no symptoms, and just as many articles about those infected and not showing symptoms either. Data differs. Accept, there is no data to confirm how many infected there have actually been all time. This real time and accurate data could only be collected if we tested everyone world-wide, at the same time, periodically. This has not and never will be done.

Let’s continue…

 

Creating an average of the three examples above (a,b&c), we get 65%.

For the purpose of this article post, and based on the above, and accepting the likelihood that when people have shown symptoms at least the majority have gone to be tested, we can say at least 50% of infected people with symptoms have gone to be tested.

With the above in mind, and reverse engineering a little, taking the infected cases on record of 116,371,108 (World-wide on the 5th of March), we can reasonably say that between 50% and 65 % (the two averages so far) of cases have either not been reported and/or not been tested.

The average of these two averages works out to a master average of 57,5%

 

Conclusion so far…
It is safe for me to say at least 6 6913 387,1 extra people world-wide have been ill and / or not been tested using the master average.

 

Still following?
I hope so.

 

Onto the next important point.

Using the same thought process, and applied to South Africa’s reported confirmed cases of 1,513,393 (as of 5pm on the 5th of March), at least 870200 extra people have been ill and / or not been tested.

It is reasonable to work out from that that about 2 383 590’ish people have actually been infected in South Africa, but only 57,5% have shown symptoms and or been tested.

Now, this is where your opinion must really come in…

 

What would have happened if we let Covid just do its thing? I mean totally cover the full South African population, not stopping it at all and no lock down?

 

Let’s reverse engineer again…

We have 58 million people. 57,5% would still get it and/or not know and/or report it. That is 33 350 000 million people. How many would die? The recovery rate in South Africa is 94.6%. Taken from (5th of March): https://www.coronatracker.com/country/south-africa/

There would be an estimated 54 868 000 survivors and an estimated 3 132 000 deaths.

Today (5th of March), we have 50462 deaths.

 

Questions…

Has the lock down prevented hundreds of thousands of people from dying from Covid-19? This is such a good question, but here is the bigger question, which starts with its own point…

Lock down slows the rate of transmission. No argument there. But does it prevent a person from getting it once lock down is over? Well of course not. Don’t be silly. Assuming lock down is not going to be permanent… eventually everyone will be infected at some point. It might take another 6 or 12 months, but it will happen, and most people won’t even know they had it, never mind get tested.

Therefore, the total infection rate is less important than the total death rate when it comes to assessing this disaster, because, the infection rate is almost guaranteed over time, but can we reduce the percentage of deaths?

 

“But wait, the vaccine!” Yes, there is a vaccine!
Questions on that point….

 

Does a vaccine prevent you from getting the virus or passing it on? The answer is no.

Does the vaccine prevent you from dying if you have taken it, but still get infected and still have comorbidities? The answer is no. If you have comorbidities, vaccine or not, you are still at a higher risk of death.

I accept that if you do not have comorbidities, and if you take the vaccine, the chances of you getting really sick are reduced, but your chances of death were always and still are very low.

Is the vaccine then really a peace of mind drug? Can we actually save the lives of those with comorbidities with a vaccine or was access to good health care more important?

 

Onto my final huge question!
Ready for it?

 

If heard immunity was the primary defence, what could have achieved heard immunity first? The vaccine or letting the virus just do its thing? After all, once you have had the virus or the vaccine you have a similar physical defence in your immune system. Is this not fact?

 

Therefore, a proposed alternative type of response to Covid-19 lock down…

If we had let the virus do its thing, kept those at high risk due to comorbidities and those with symptoms at home, if we had enough hospital and medical support for the really bad cases: could we have achieved heard immunity sooner, for free, and without shutting down the country and with no additional loss of life?

Could this alternative type of response perhaps have actually saved more lives and livelihoods in the end because we achieved heard immunity faster? Could this have all been over months ago?

 

While you form opinions on the above, please ask yourself: was what we did the best we could do?

Climate change added with population density and poor health care ensure natural disasters will be more frequent and severe. Bad planning ensures social and economic decline.

What do we do with the next pandemic? Keep locking down the planet?
There must be a better way to do things in the future.

Jean-Pierre Murray-Kline - An alternative scenario to that of a lock down

 

#lockdown
#coronavirus

Published March 2021

Read more articles

Disclaimer:

  • While I attempt to ensure information is accurate and up-to-date at time of publication, I will not accept liability should information be used, and found to be incorrect. If you do see an error, please let me know.
  • The links, images, videos and/ or text from this article are not necessarily under my direct management, ownership or care. Should you be the owner or manager of any content herein, and wish for the content to be removed, please let me know and it will be done.