Great Barrington Declaration: No COVID Blockade Required

The blockade of society and the cold stop of the global economy in the face of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represent a major mistake, claimed by prestigious scientists in the epidemiological world.The· Great Barrington DeclarationWhat was announced last week by scientists who insisted that most of us should return to the pre-COVID lifestyle caused a lot of attention and controversy.

This declaration is led by some of the big hitters in the scientific community, including: Dr. Martin Kurdorf, Harvard University Epidemiologist, Dr. Snetragupta, Oxford University Epidemiologist, and Jay Battacharia, MD, PhDA public health policy expert who is a professor at Stanford University, focusing on infectious diseases.

One of the arguments raised by the three and about 35 co-signers is that treatment is worse than illness in society as a whole.

“From both the left and right, and from all over the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people,” the declaration states. “Current blockade policies have devastating effects on short-term and long-term public health. The consequences (to name a few) are lower childhood immunization rates and cardiovascular disease. This includes worsening outcomes, reduced cancer screening, and worsening mental health, which will increase excessive mortality over the next few years and place the greatest burden on young members of the working class and society. It is a serious injustice to keep students from going to school. “

The co-signers represent many scientific disciplines such as public health, biostatistics, finance and psychiatry.They are included Dr. Michael Levitt, (Won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2013), Jonas Ludvigsson, MD, Dr. Angus Dalgrace, Dr. David Katz,and Dr. Mike Hume..

The Declaration states that the increased knowledge of COVID-19 includes the fact that older and weaker people show “thousand times” higher mortality rates than younger people. “Certainly, for children, COVID-19 is less at risk than many other harms, including the flu,” the declaration states.

As expected, the opposition to the declaration quickly became fierce. Some members of the scientific community over-believe the rapid arrival of herd immunity and do not explain the so-called “long-distance transporters” who may have suffered from the effects of the disease for years. Claims.

A group of professionals who also wield impressive qualifications response It challenges many of the premises of the declaration. For example Dr. Rupert Beer,of Francis Crick Institute, Said that herd immunity depends on the broad distribution of the undeveloped COVID-19 vaccine. Beer also suggested in his response that “the Declaration prioritizes only one aspect of the wise strategy of protecting vulnerable people and can safely build” herd immunity “for the rest. I am writing. ” This is wishful thinking. It is impossible to completely identify vulnerable individuals, nor is it possible to completely isolate them. In addition, immunity to coronavirus has been shown to weaken over time and allow reinfection. Therefore, without vaccines, establishing “herd immunity” rarely provides permanent protection for vulnerable individuals. “

Nevertheless, the basic premise of the Declaration that the blockade is more harmful than good resonates with many.

Dr. Annie Jambier“It’s not science, it’s public opinion and politics that seems to be leading what’s happening at COVID,” said a professor of pediatric and clinical ethics at the University of Montreal, one of the signatories of the Declaration. It was.

The declaration states: To lower the herd immunity threshold, everyone needs to implement simple hygiene measures such as washing hands and staying at home in case of illness. Schools and universities should be open for face-to-face teaching. Extracurricular activities such as sports need to be resumed. Low-risk young adults need to work normally, not from home. Restaurants and other businesses need to open. Art, music, sports and other cultural activities need to be resumed. People at greater risk can participate if they so desire, but society as a whole enjoys the protection given to vulnerable people by those who have built herd immunity. “