Sweden is the only country that is affected significantly by coronavirus and yet has resisted imposing a lockdown. While in the rest of the afflicted world, governments have imposed lockdowns, the Swedes have left it to individuals to take the precautions required while going about their normal routines. Politically it is expedient for governments to impose lockdowns lest they be accused of being unresponsive to death and suffering of people. In fact, to astute politicians, the virus has presented an opportunity to aggrandize their stature, no matter how much misery their actions heap on the hapless. And yet, as lockdowns stretch from days to weeks, their negative impact on the economy has started tilting the political balance in favor of their discontinuance. The dilemma of how long to continue a lockdown is epitomized by the topsy-turvy pronouncements by the US president, Donald Trump and other leaders of his ilk.
Are lockdowns effective in controlling the spread of the virus? The two distinctive features of COVID-19 pertinent for effectiveness of a lockdown are its high transmissibility and the absence of symptoms despite infection (asymptomatic infection). The high transmissibility supports lockdown as it is one way of halting the spread of the virus. However, asymptomatic infection (there is evidence that asymptomatic infections could be 4 times symptomatic infections) estimates imply the virus could spread much faster on lifting of lockdowns. The only way to control that possibility is through extensive testing during the lockdown period to identify and quarantine asymptomatic infections. However, governments are not committing to the extensive testing required, both from lack of resources as well as from the desire to under-report the numbers infected. As a result, lockdowns will not deliver the results they could have. They would merely postpone the day of the reckoning. They would not prevent the spread of the virus.
The heaviest price of COVID-19 is being paid by the dispossessed, particularly in the less developed countries. Social distancing is possible for the well to do in these countries. People who live six to a room and need the daily wage to feed in the evening, do not have the luxury of social distancing. By denying a day’s wage the lockdowns are wreaking havoc on the marginalized in these countries. When the dust settles and if correct assessment is permitted to be made, we are likely to find that incalculable suffering was imposed on them by the lockdowns. The damage from the lockdown to the economy would extend their suffering well after the virus is conquered. Do we care?
Lockdown therefore is not the answer to containing the impact of COVID-19. We must aggressively search for possible treatments and vaccine, care for the afflicted, and get on with life with all due precautions, the way the Swedes are doing. The sacrifice a society will have to make at the altar of the virus will rightly be decided by the responsibility with which its people behave.