Experts are still coming forward questioning the lock-down response of governments to coronavirus. Following last week’s 12 experts, here are 10 more who suggest the evidence does not warrant the action being taken. The full article is available here:
If you believe evidence should be the basis of government action details of what you can do together with a suggested email to your elected representatives are at the bottom of this article.
Here is a summary of what the 10 recent experts say:
Dr Karin Mölling is a German virologist whose research focused on retroviruses, particularly human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
“That is the main fear: the disease is presented as a terrible disease. The disease per se is like the flu in a normal winter. It is even weaker in the first week…
“There is no evidence to show that the 2019 coronavirus is more lethal than respiratory adenoviruses, influenza viruses, coronaviruses from previous years, or rhinoviruses responsible for the common cold.”
Dr Pablo Goldschmidt is an Argentine-French virologist specializing in tropical diseases, and Professor of Molecular Pharmacology at the Université Pierre et Marie Curie in Paris.
“The coronavirus identified in China in 2019 caused nothing less than a strong cold or flu, with no difference so far with cold or flu as we know.”
“We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.”
Dr Michael Levitt is Professor of biochemistry at Stanford University. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS), a member of the National Academy of Sciences and received the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for the development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems.
“To put things in proportion, the number of deaths of coronavirus in Italy is 10% of the number of deaths of influenza in the country between 2016-2017.”
Dr Richard Schabas is the former Chief Medical Officer of Ontario, Medical Officer of Hastings and Prince Edward Public Health and Chief of Staff at York Central Hospital.
“…the Hubei outbreak – by far the largest, and a kind of worst-case scenario – appears to be winding down. How bad was it? Well, the number of deaths was comparable to an average influenza season. “That’s not nothing, but it’s not catastrophic, either, and it isn’t likely to overwhelm a competent health-care system. Not even close.
“Quarantine belongs back in the Middle Ages. Save your masks for robbing banks. Stay calm and carry on. Let’s not make our attempted cures worse than the disease.”
WHAT YOU CAN DO
If you believe the government should take an evidence based approach to COVID-19 here are some things you can do:
Share the contents of this email with others so they can also take action
Share the links on social media.
Email your elected representatives suggesting regulations are re-assessed in the light of the evidence. For New Zealand these are:
Prime Minister: Jacinda Arden email@example.com
MP: https://www.parliament.nz/en/get-involved/have-your-say/contact-an-mp/ (see files at the bottom of the page)
Chief Medical Officer: Dr Andrew Simpson firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: More experts are questioning the coronavirus panic
I am writing to urge the government to re-consider its response to COVID-19. An evidence based approach suggests that current measures are excessive in the light of the risk posed by the virus. For example to date in the United States COVID-19 fatalities are just 5% of the annual 40,000 deaths during the flu season. I suggest evidence, not panic, should be the basis of government action.
Last week 12 experts questioned the coronavirus panic. Here is the response of 10 more whose evidence places the threat of COVID-19 alongside that of the common flu. In the light of the EVIDENCE, I ask the government to quickly reassess the current measures it has in place. Could Sweden be a model for a more appropriate response?