The government fallacy - or how I learned to... no, not true, I already knew it-

I have been thinking of writing this for a long time. Since I wrote this 2 weeks ago.

I wrote that, partially, in response to an article (you can find it in the post) in which an "expert" from the Dutch Intelligentsia declared that the Italian response to the Covid-19 outbreak was "stupid".

I also wrote that as a partial response to how our governments (plural, meaning all over the world), had been facing the outbreak.

LinkedIn allowed me few lines... it's time to correct that.

When the first news of this outbreak arrived in the "west" I remember I was chatting with some friends. My reaction was: yeah, it's bad, but most probably is affecting mainly old and weak people. I was not completely wrong. But I was still wrong. It actually can affect anyone, and only because young and strong are... well, young and strong, they have an higher probability of surviving. But only if they are treated in an ICU, so even young and strong can die.

Then, when the first cases happened here in Europe I was following what many scientists were saying, and agreeing with them. It's dangerous, we need to take all the precautions possible to avoid the infection to spread without control, but we should be fine since we can do it.

The problem? We didn't do it. First we let it spread undetected for some time, so that to control the outbreak was difficult; then we underestimated the problem (the funny thing? This has happened in every country... I can't believe it) and then, mostly, we put in place late and, sadly, ineffective solutions (mostly).

We? Well... no, not "we"... THEY! THEM! Who?!? The "Government"!

Each and every one of them reacted with:

1. yeah, problematic, but we will do the best here and nothing is gonna happen
2. we are following the best scientific advise and they say we are doing good
3. close down everything? Naaah, too bad for the economy, just be clean
4. well... the outbreak arrived here, so maybe someth...
5. FOR FUCKS SAKE WE HAVE TO CLOSE DOWN EVERYTHING!!! WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE!!! (meaning you, poor and disgraced bastards are gonna die while I will sit in the most comfortable position possible and look!)

or something similar.

Few countries did something different (I think Sweden mostly, and maybe here in the Netherlands, in which the gov is simply suggesting to stay home). And I mean "west countries", with this discourse, obviously.

What angers me the most? Basically everything. Everything is wrong in the above list of reactions.

First and foremost it's underestimating the problem to an extent in which I hardly believe any true "scientist" has actually been involved in the decision making. At least not the right kind of scientist. It's a virus outbreak... maybe ask virologists? And epidemic experts? Because the freaking a**hole Ira Helsloot (and all of the "security experts" that has been counselling governments) has the boldness to judge solutions based on which expertise? He is neither a virologist nor an epidemiologist (I already defined what he is).

And since the same thing happened basically everywhere, I assume a lot of Iras have been really useful to their people in the past month or so.

The second thing that I find unbelievable is that, after Italy was in the deepest shit of the post WWII era, other countries were still downplaying the situation. I'm looking at all of you, UK, NL, FR, ES and such. Each and every one of which now have serious outbreaks that are gonna cause(or have already caused) their health care system to collapse and people to die unnecessarily.

"But, what should they have been doing instead, you smartass?" you are probably saying.

Well... I don't know... maybe be reasonable? Follow actual experts? Not economy experts... real experts... do something like what happened in South Korea? In which after the SARS (or MERS, I don't recall now, it's written in the article, go read it) outbreak a "Epidemic Team" has been created, and the government quickly started to implement their suggestions? Or like in Veneto in Italy, in which something similar has been done? Or like the freaking Governor of Ohio, who ahead of everyone else in the US decided for the stricter measures, a hugely unpopular choice, following the advise of his Dpt of Health Director... incidentally a doctor.

And of course, the above are examples that are clearly effective now, you can say... but really? I don't know, I am no expert, but I thought that the ideas behind them are quite easy to understand for any infectious outbreak.

This is an infection that spreads from human to human. So, what should you do? As a first guess, what's the most effective way to stop the spread? Limit human interaction, I would say, right?

So why were we so late in deciding for some strict rules? Complete lock-down, I understand, can be scary. And maybe not effective. But maybe the "social distancing" that has become so popular. Why not do it from day 1? Instead of downplaying the risk?

The second one is even easier. What should you do when you find somebody infected? Most probably quarantine them, then test all of their contacts to find if the virus has spread more. And keep them (all of them) under control (and quarantine) for the duration of the incubation of the virus. Again, not a genius is needed for this. And yet not everywhere this has been implemented. And when it has been, usually it was too little and too late.

Next step? Well... found who the hell is infected! How do you do it without testing everyone? Easy, 2 steps: you test everybody that has been in contact with the infected ones you already have and follow above step. And... and... and I don't believe that still is needed to be said: you freaking test who is entering your freaking country. Of course, you can't test everyone... but maybe test the ones that arrive from "dangerous" countries? Like... in a place where everybody is already following procedures to access your country... like the freaking airport? In the Netherlands this is not yet been implemented, as an example.

Last, but probably actually first: you inform the population on how to counter the infection: cleanliness, social distancing, no gatherings and such.

Well... the 4 above steps where implemented only partially, or too late, or not at all. And this is the fault of each and every government. Mainly the ones that had the example of Italy at hand.

Italy? Italy is a mess... in Italy the outbreak was discovered late, then the authorities most probably panicked because the solutions were effective, but extremely costly in human lives. But again, we were the first affected in Europe, we actually managed to stop the spread, but late, too late.

But everybody else? With the example of Italy in their face? UN-BELIEVABLE AND UN-ACCEPTABLE. All the deaths are on their hands. And they should pay, at least politically wise.

Now let's talk about herd immunity, that more or less was hot on the tongues of so many Prime Ministers at one point in the past 2 weeks. WHO THE HELL HAVE THEY LISTEN TO REGARDING HERD IMMUNITY? Mickey Mouse???

Herd immunity is used, now, to explain, in yet another way because we are dummies, how and why vaccines are extremely useful in eradicating dangerous epidemics. So, the key factor here is "vaccines". You need to have already a vaccine to create herd immunity. Or better, there is another way. To create herd immunity, you have to simply sit and wait that everybody too weak dies. And yes, who will survive will be immune... the herd with be a lot less thicker, though, you dumbass. By the look of it 10% or more. Because yes, the mortality rate is around 3%, but when everybody is sick, there is no one left to help the sick. Everybody will start to die! So basically you are sending all of the weak to die. And there are a lot of weak. So, you should be facing crime against humanity charges for saying something like that as the Prime Minister of a country.

And last... the ECONOMY!!! WE MUST SAVE THE ECONOMY, else people will die everywhere due to lack of economy!!!

You bastards. Really you bastards. The economy is the people. First thing! The People. Without people, you don't have economy. If people die, the economy stops for longer than if people lives. You assholes. Also, I don't know if you noticed, but dead people don't buy. Once the outbreak hit you, you have 2 options: stop everything (or more generally slow everything down) now, for few months, and then recover with 99% of your population. Or do nothing, let the infection spread, have the economy come to a stop when the population will be 50% sick, then 20 % dead and you lost 20% of your economic force. WHO IS THE ECONOMIST WHO DOES NOT SEE THIS? WHO?

Also, today, in the 2000s, in the west world... really? You are telling us that the economy will stop and people, millions of people, will die of it? You sure? Or maybe those millions of people will simply have to stop to fucking CONSUME day in day out for maybe a year or 2, behave economically (for their own finances sake) for a year or 2? I should expand on this... but really? It's that what you are telling us?

"We are not closing everything, else you will die in the future, if the ECONOMY is bad!!"

And we should believe that? In the meanwhile people are dying already.

The flu, the common flu, this year has killed 123thousand people (today is the 2nd of April). The Coronavirus has already killed 47thousand. Already 47 thousand people that were mostly old and weak already, but that could have survived some more years. And, given the wrong approach you have implemented basically everywhere that number is gonna increase. I desperately hope it will stop before 100k... but truth is that is will reach way more than that.

Thanks to you, bastards.

Oh, and also to you that don't follow the basic rules to stop the spread, of course... let's not forget those ones.