Democrats and liberals in the national media like to portray the economic lockdown protesters as a bunch of anti-science hicks who are eagerly and ignorantly ready to put their families and neighbors at risk of more death caused by the coronavirus.
The truth is almost the exact opposite. It’s the people championing blanket lockdown measures who are revealing themselves to be uninformed about the virus and how we’ve observed it operating.
Lockdown proponents, and yes, they are advocates, not reluctant truth-tellers, are under the impression that there’s a way to completely halt the spread of the virus. They think we can all go on standby until someone cures COVID-19 or at least until testing is universal and we have a national contact tracing system. They strenuously object to any mention of taking steps toward reopening the economy anywhere.
But there is no way to halt the spread of the virus. Indications are that the only way through this, as with most diseases, is a mixture of effective treatment and a developed immunity or resistance to the contagion. The latter requires exposure to the disease.
The people who are protesting the ridiculous, unworkable lockdowns have accepted the fact that there is some risk involved in returning to normal business. When Texas salon owner Shelley Luther reopened her business in violation of a local ordinance, she took all of the health precautions possible. She had customers wait outside the salon for their turns. She required masks inside. She frequently wiped down the surfaces of the facility during working hours.
That didn’t eliminate all risk, and she certainly knew it didn’t. But both she and her customers accepted what limited risk there was. They took reasonable steps to limit potential harm, while accepting that this is life, and some risk is inevitable.
This approach is incompatible with the idea that we can put life on hold indefinitely and wait until there is zero risk of spreading disease or dying. By that time, we’ll all be dead from old age anyway.
There’s a lot we don’t know about the coronavirus, but we do know that the low-hanging fruit in prevention is to isolate the elderly, the immunocompromised, and those who care for them. There are counties and entire states where nursing homes account for nearly the whole infected population and death toll.
We can all avoid taking unnecessary risks, such as packing ourselves into stadiums, but that doesn’t mean a perpetual lockdown. Sure, we all want effective anti-viral treatments, tests that work, and a vaccine. When those arrive, we’ll all be better off. But knowing what we know now, that’s no reason to keep the majority of people locked up inside their homes, with their jobs and businesses indefinitely shuttered.
Risk assessment is part of coronavirus science. Lockdown proponents haven’t figured that out yet.
