Trending
Surely it is apparent that the COVID-19 emergency is not a case of a little boy crying wolf. At this writing, the coronavirus had killed more than 90,000 people worldwide. About 15,000 of them were in the United States.
It is fair to ask whether we have overreacted to COVID-19, however. Did we really have to take the actions we have, wrecking many families' finances and damaging the economy as a whole?
Predictions of how many people would die in the outbreak are fodder for that discussion. On March 26, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington predicted COVID-19 would claim 81,000 American lives this spring and summer.
By Friday, the IHME's projection had been revised down to 60,415. Expect it to go even lower, if we Americans continue to follow recommendations for social distancing, etc.
It's important to know that the IHME has expressed projections in ranges, not single numbers, however. For example, the March 26 prediction of 81,000 stipulated the actual death toll could be between 38,000 and 162,000.
Still, assume that the most recent estimate of 60,415 deaths proves accurate. Did we have to throw ourselves into chaos to deal with a disaster of that magnitude? After all, drug overdoses killed more than 67,000 during the most recent 12 months reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As many as 63,000 Americans will have been claimed by the regular annual influenza outbreak this year. Did we shut much of the nation down to deal with those mass killers?
No. But a shutdown would have had no effect on drug abuse. As far as the regular flu goes, we have vaccines for it, enabling most of us to go about our daily lives.
COVID-19 has a higher mortality rate than most strains of the flu. Had most of us not taken the steps we did, there's no doubt the coronavirus death toll would be much higher -- closer to the IHME's 162,000 upper range than to what the actual number may be.
What now? Once COVID-19 fatalities begin to trail off, can we all get back to normal? Uncle Sam may be able to print money, but he can't continue sending us checks forever. At some point, the nation needs to go back to work, even if the coronavirus comes back with a vengeance next fall.
For "normalcy" to return, we need two things:
First, a vaccine. Estimates of 18 months to produce one just aren't acceptable. That needs to be accelerated drastically.
Second, we need effective treatments for COVID-19 patients. There are some promising candidates, but nothing is definite. That, too, needs to end quickly.
How? Congress needs to pour money into both projects. How about starting with $1 trillion to incentivize companies to begin production of vaccines based on current best guesses? Firms that bet on the wrong formulas could be reimbursed for their expenses.
It would take only one correct guess for us to have a vaccine ready within a few months. That would save countless lives -- and, possibly, prevent a depression.
A trillion dollars is too much? Really? Even as we're in the process of spending $2 trillion because we didn't have a vaccine?
We're waging defensive war against COVID-19. We have no choice but to go on the offensive.
Myer can be reached at: mmyer@theintelligencer.net.