×
Stop the worldwide lockdowns
Sophie J.
started this petition to
World leaders
This petition and article intend to gain more control of our freedom and not to be controlled by a governmental or political decision that jeopardizes our freedom of movement or public (mental) health. Please note I am not implying we should all deny the efforts of a lockdown. This petition is designed to get signatures from people voting against an enforced lockdown and who want to flatten the curve in their own way. For example, by willing to pledge not to use the health system in case they get infected by COVID-19 and/or always wearing masks in public. Our freedom is our first human right, we should all be considered in making big decisions like non-voluntarily lockdowns. I hope this petition creates a wave of people standing in solidarity to help others without paying the price of being in lockdown.
Let’s shed some light on why we do have lockdowns right now, which is - I think - based on four different reasons:
1. We need to flatten the curve. If we don't flatten the curve, we over-saturate our hospitals.
This might be the most valid and justifiable reason to stay at home. However, we are forced into a position where we cannot make our own choices. What if I pledge not to use our health system in case of infection, thus not contributing to oversaturating the hospitals? What if I believe in natural selection and want to let nature decide whether I die or not? At this moment, I am not allowed to make these decisions myself without being forced to be in quarantine. It was determined for me that I should stay at home no matter if I intend to use a hospital or not. If millions or even billions of people (including the elderly) pledge the same, are our hospitals still at risk? Do we have facts about the number of people wanting to go to a hospital vs. hospital beds? Do we know what percentage of the critical cases overcome this illness because of hospitals? Did we ask the doctors if they agree with flattening the curve? Some doctors [1] even protested the lockdowns already saying it is more damaging than curing as many people are now afraid to go to hospitals and the effects on the economy will be enormous. Another theory in regards to protecting the hospitals is that a lot of people who do not need urgent care right now will refrain from seeking care, and when lockdowns are finally lifted all these people will start going to hospitals again, making them overwhelmed again. This statement [2] explains why flattening the curve might actually be worse: ‘’If the level of the epidemic does overwhelm the health system and extreme measures have only modest effectiveness, then flattening the curve may make things worse: Instead of being overwhelmed during a short, acute phase, the health system will remain overwhelmed for a more protracted period.’’
2. We need to protect the vulnerable. They are at significant risk of dying from COVID-19, and our society can't afford to let all these people get infected.
Ok, so I might be healthy and not at risk, what about all those older adults or with weak immune systems? Excellent point, but again this comes down to personal decisions. Have we asked the elderly if they want to be saved? What if these people pledge as well, that enough is enough and admittance into a hospital is not what they desire? Are they the selfish ones if they expect a whole society to shut down just to save them? Did we ask them if all of this is worth it for them to be saved? Or are we all acting out of fear to lose a loved one? If vulnerable people are scared of getting infected, they can make the decision themselves to self-quarantine. The government and the public need to help them with personal houses/spaces if they do make that decision or decide as a family to quarantine in their house only, not lock down a whole society that is so vital for our public health. Is it worth it to maybe save a small percentage of people who were most likely going to die soon anyway, while putting the majority of people into other sorts of risks caused by lockdowns? These moral questions should be answered by democratically asking the people in a society by, for example, a referendum, not decide something for them because it is supposed to be in their best interest.
3. There would be too many deaths if we let it spread uncontrollably. If most of our world’s population gets infected and many of those will die, we lose too many people.
The estimation of WHO currently predicts the mortality rate to be 3.4% [3]; however this number is not accurate, because many infected people never got tested and many people who died had underlying health issues thus making COVID-19 not the only cause of death but they died due to comorbidity [4]. There has been no proof that a lockdown will cause fewer deaths over time; nor does it show that total lockdowns are more effective than just social distancing [5]. According to a study conducted by Prof. Ben-Israel, the infection rate in each country declines after the 6th week, regardless of lockdowns or not [6]. Ben-Israel: "This is how it is all over the world. Both in countries where they have taken closure steps like Italy and in countries that have not had closures like Taiwan or Singapore. In such and such countries there is an increase until the fourth to sixth week, and immediately thereafter moderation until during the eighth week it disappears." An explanation for this could be that the elderly and weak die first, causing a peak in the graphs. After this peak, the deaths are on a decline. Besides that, we do not know how many extra people die now of other causes because they are afraid of going to hospitals during lockdowns.
In South Korea, where extensive testing has been conducted (and therefore creating a more realistic outcome), the mortality rate is only 0.6% [7] making COVID-19 far less deadly than previous estimations. The same is true for the mortality rate on the Princess Diamond cruise ship (the only example where 100% of the ‘population’ was tested without being exposed to others), where the mortality rate is only 1% even with the majority of the passengers being elderly [8]. Also, South Korea has seen infection rates falling despite not having a lockdown [9], as well as Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, where the lack of lockdowns shows no significant difference in the number of deaths and infections than in their neighboring countries [10].
In addition to that, Hong Kong has no lockdown at all, but 99% of the population is wearing masks, making the number of infections only about a 1000 with just four deaths [11], despite being so close to China.
We do not know if more people would die if we lift lockdowns now or if the same amount of people would die when we are in quarantine for months, we only estimate that fewer people would get infected at the same time. Most likely, a lockdown imposes a much more significant threat to society over time.
4. We need to stand in solidarity and protect everybody together. Every human life is essential and we need to care for others.
Right, so this comes down to social pressure. We forget about what enormous risks lockdowns impose on less fortunate people and countries, and they simply can not afford to stop working and be locked-down. Where is the care for those people? Does it come down to saving our elderly/weak out of solidarity while whole communities are at risk due to hunger, riots, and not to forget mental health? Because if everybody is doing it, we should all think and act the same way? Besides that, statistics show the risk that a person dies from COVID-19 is almost equal to them dying from other causes [12].
The amount of Coronavirus fatalities make the statistics peak now in a short period, but they might as well contribute to the 60 million people that die per year on average anyway.
Doesn’t living in a democratic society mean we should all get a say in such drastic measurements that affect all of us? We do not take into consideration people who believe in survival of the fittest, follow a religion that prevents them from seeking care (or simply ‘playing God’), those that believe in conspiracy theories or people just not trusting the current measurements. Lockdowns should only be enforced by law if we can prove they protect everybody .
WHY SHOULD WE NOT ACCEPT LOCKDOWNS?
I think the four reasons stated above pretty much sum up why most people agree that most of the world should currently be in lockdown. I do agree we need to save our hospitals and medical staff, which is why I pledge to not use the healthcare system in case I get infected with COVID-19 and to not expose our doctors to this virus. Additionally, there are more reasons to not have an enforced lockdown:
1. It is against human rights to take our freedom.
According to Article 3 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights [13]; ‘’Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.’’
Liberty and security are different for each person, which is why we should be entitled to making our own decisions regarding lockdowns. Also according to Article 13 of the same declaration;
‘’(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country. ’’
A nationwide lockdown prevents our freedom of movement which is against our human rights. No one should be able to take your freedom from you. For some people, security can not be found in a lockdown, and in fact creates the opposite effect.
2. We need to save our economy
Our economy is already in crisis and millions of jobs have been lost [14]. People have lost irreplaceable incomes and can’t feed their families anymore [15]. Tourism, hospitality and many other sectors are vital for many people all over the world, we cannot afford to lock down whole countries for months. Income taxes are not being paid, which means public sectors like education, safety and health are not receiving enough funding. Governments are now using our current tax money to pay for unemployment and heightened security, which many people did not even choose for and is preventable by merely making a lockdown a personal choice. Tax money now should be pumped into the healthcare system as much as possible.
3. We need to take care of the less fortunate
In wealthy countries, a lockdown has far less economic impact than in developing nations. Residents of high-income countries can work from home in many industries and are protected by their government for unemployment. But in many low-income countries, people live on a day to day basis and simply cannot survive without work [16]. Their families are not even being able to eat without earning money daily, let alone pay for hospital bills. Regardless of them getting the virus or not, they will not be able to get health care, simply because they cannot afford it, thus also not contributing to oversaturating the hospitals. Why put millions of people at risk with preventative measurements that have not even proven to save lives in the long run? It will not take long for these countries to completely get devastated by the results of a lockdown, causing far more deaths and destruction than COVID-19 will most likely ever bring.
4. The importance of mental health should not be underestimated
Many people will experience anxiety, depression, despair and domestic violence because of lockdowns [17]. Many children will have a lack of education this year, suicides will rise [18] and overall health will decline in general. People stay at home and experience more stress, meaning after being in quarantine for months they will be more vulnerable to catching diseases, including COVID-19, causing another rise in infections. We do not know if the number of deaths is decreased by lockdowns yet, which is why we shouldn’t force everybody to quarantine.
5. There is no proof that lockdowns save people from dying [19]
Whereas lockdowns seem to show a flattening of the curve effect now, we do not know what it does to the amount of dead in the long run, especially to those who are less fortunate. We have no perspective on how long a lockdown should take before we can loosen up and we have no proof another peak will hit a country when lockdowns are finally lifted. Humanity has always evolved around pandemics and viruses, why is it different now? Studies have shown that the death rate has not decreased because of lockdowns and in fact, seem to create the opposite effect [20]: “As at 15 April, without lockdowns, Japan (1.2 coronavirus deaths per million people/146 total deaths), South Korea (4.3/225), Singapore (1.8/10), and Taiwan (0.3/6) have far lower death rates than Spain (397.6/18,579), Italy (358.2/21,645), France (256.3/17,167), and UK (193.5/12,868) with lockdown.”
The same is true for the different states of the United States; analysis of data shows no difference in infection rate or death rate in states with or without lockdowns [21]. States with just social distancing rules even show a lower death rate than states with a full lockdown.
We simply do not know the long term beneficial effects of lockdowns yet to impose such draconian measures as enforced lockdowns.
6. We should respect the laws of nature
An ethical reason, which you may or may not agree with, but viruses and pandemics have always been part of life and a way to control the population. What makes humans so unique we want to control everything? Earth has been begging for a change for many years and we have neglected it. There is finally a way to cave in our overpopulation just a little bit, and all we want to do is eliminate it. We are apparently capable of massive change; why not use that power to fight climate change, for example? What happened to natural selection and survival of the fittest like with any other (animal) population in the world? People who strongly believe in these matters are halted in their behavior with growing peer pressure caused by nationwide lockdowns. People should always be capable of making their own decisions concerning their freedom based on personal beliefs. If we agree with ‘how nature has intended it’, we should not be forced to quarantine to save a small percentage of people. Besides that, COVID-19 is selective, meaning if you are in good health, you are most likely to survive the virus. It could be a reason for many people to change their bad habits of smoking, eating junk food and generally not taking care of their health.
7. There is too much unknown about how to beat Coronavirus
We have our responsibility to take care of each other in a way we deem necessary. This could mean wearing masks when going outside, avoiding all contact with others, or keeping our elderly safe inside a house and helping everybody on a personal level. Not force whole nations to lock down and let fear take over. We do not know why and how COVID-19 developed or how we can cure it. There is no perspective a vaccine will be available soon, do we have to stay in lockdowns for years until it will finally become available? There are numerous conspiracy theories out there which I will not mention here, but right now we are letting us get controlled by the government if we all believe the fear they are spreading with unknown or false information. The media is pumping out numbers and information that can not be fact-checked at this moment. Governments have the obligation to inform, but people have the right to choose.
Besides that, governments have been proven to be wrong about earlier pandemics, according to this article by Ramesh Thakur [22]: “Catastrophism in previous epidemics proved false. In 1999, European Union scientists suggested up to 500,000 people could die from the UK mad cow disease. By October 2013, 177 deaths were recorded from the disease. In 2005, the UN’s coordinator David Nabarro warned between 5 to 150 million people could die from avian flu. The World Health Organization’s official estimates were 2–7.4 million. Only 455 people died of bird flu from 2003–2019. With the 2009 swine flu, instead of the feared 1.3% fatality rate, the actual rate was 0.02%, comparable to the US 2007–09 seasonal flus. In the UK, against the “reasonable worst-case scenario” of 65,000 deaths, there were only 457. And the government spent £1.2bn on flu remedies that were not needed. The WHO came under severe criticism for having served the interests of “Big Pharma” in selling unnecessary vaccines.’’
We just don’t know enough about this Coronavirus yet to take such drastic measures like lockdowns.
8. Continuous lockdowns could create civil disturbances
Many people in locked-down countries are at risk of increased (domestic) violence, riots, gun abuse and robberies. Fear takes over common sense and if people are fighting with each other already over toilet paper, what are they capable of if they can’t afford food anymore? The USA has seen the most significant increase in the purchase of guns for years [23]; racism against Chinese people is growing [24] and whole countries have shut borders to foreigners. Coronavirus brings out the worst in us when led by fear. The longer a lockdown takes, the more likely people will reach out to alternative matters to create safety for themselves and their families. We need to get trust back into our system and not force people to quit their jobs by staying at home. Whole communities rely on tourism and hospitality or work on the street, they have no safety net while being locked down.
CONCLUSION
Lockdowns seem to slow down the infection rate according to various statistics now, but we are just not at a point yet to determine if lockdowns work in the long run. Infection rates might spike up again after a lockdown is lifted, causing the same amount of deaths as it would in the first place. Or lockdowns might not even contribute to flattening the curve at all as flattening occurs naturally anyway. But meanwhile, many more people will be drastically affected by being locked down for months or maybe even years, probably causing more deaths eventually. If the argument is that we need to protect everybody, we need to seriously consider how we can protect the other 96% that most likely will not die from COVID-19 (if we take a 4% mortality rate estimation), but are profoundly affected now just because of lockdowns.
SO, YOU WANNA SIGN?
If you agree that a lockdown should be a personal choice, I urge you to please sign this petition. If you want to help to flatten the curve for hospitals, I urge you to please pledge that you will not use the health system when infected, and start wearing (reusable) masks in public. Lockdown is not the only way to help each other.
WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM LOCKDOWNS?
Lockdowns so far have taught us a great deal about society and life on Earth. We should take these teachings to create a better future and start new. We are all in this together and we stand firm in numbers. We are all consumers and we all have the right to change and speak out, let’s create something positive out of this experience and not forget what lockdowns and Corona have taught us
1. Nature is restoring
The Himalaya can be seen for the first time in 20 years from India, air pollution has cleared up worldwide and CO2 levels have plummeted [25]’; we cannot deny that nature is restoring thanks to our lives on pause. Let’s continue this trend and keep working from home more, keep consuming less and stop using fossil fuels on a daily basis. We do not need new clothes every month, and we don’t need multiple cars in our garage. We don’t need items of wealth and single-use food packaging. Let’s make factories stop producing 24/7, stop oil companies from destroying our earth by choosing renewable energy. Let's give wild animals more space and do not let agriculture take over their precious habitats. We thrive in numbers, so let’s use these numbers to keep restoring nature. We have now proven we are capable of a massive change, let's change for nature now!
2. Stop believing everything the media tells you
We are being bombarded with false numbers and fake news regarding COVID-19. We have no proof to publish real percentages, as the situation is changing daily and we simply do not know enough about this pandemic to make statements. Let’s not get controlled by fear, let’s not let the governments decide what is best for us and believe everything we read. Ask around, how many people do you actually know who died from COVID-19? How many people have passed away in your life from cancer, heart disease, alcohol/drugs, car accidents? Let’s not make Coronavirus scarier than it is.
3. Be healthy and conscious always
Coronavirus attacks the ones with weak immune systems, and you are actually in control of that mostly. Stop drinking, smoking, overconsuming sugar and junk food, exercise more and eat healthily. You are not as vulnerable as you think. Stop buying sodas in plastic bottles, eat less meat and in general take more care of your health. Corona is giving us a message, listen to it!
4. People want to help each other
A great sense of community has risen from COVID-19, helping others and donating money to the less fortunate. Let’s continue this trend and take care of each other always!
References
Let’s shed some light on why we do have lockdowns right now, which is - I think - based on four different reasons:
1. We need to flatten the curve. If we don't flatten the curve, we over-saturate our hospitals.
This might be the most valid and justifiable reason to stay at home. However, we are forced into a position where we cannot make our own choices. What if I pledge not to use our health system in case of infection, thus not contributing to oversaturating the hospitals? What if I believe in natural selection and want to let nature decide whether I die or not? At this moment, I am not allowed to make these decisions myself without being forced to be in quarantine. It was determined for me that I should stay at home no matter if I intend to use a hospital or not. If millions or even billions of people (including the elderly) pledge the same, are our hospitals still at risk? Do we have facts about the number of people wanting to go to a hospital vs. hospital beds? Do we know what percentage of the critical cases overcome this illness because of hospitals? Did we ask the doctors if they agree with flattening the curve? Some doctors [1] even protested the lockdowns already saying it is more damaging than curing as many people are now afraid to go to hospitals and the effects on the economy will be enormous. Another theory in regards to protecting the hospitals is that a lot of people who do not need urgent care right now will refrain from seeking care, and when lockdowns are finally lifted all these people will start going to hospitals again, making them overwhelmed again. This statement [2] explains why flattening the curve might actually be worse: ‘’If the level of the epidemic does overwhelm the health system and extreme measures have only modest effectiveness, then flattening the curve may make things worse: Instead of being overwhelmed during a short, acute phase, the health system will remain overwhelmed for a more protracted period.’’
2. We need to protect the vulnerable. They are at significant risk of dying from COVID-19, and our society can't afford to let all these people get infected.
Ok, so I might be healthy and not at risk, what about all those older adults or with weak immune systems? Excellent point, but again this comes down to personal decisions. Have we asked the elderly if they want to be saved? What if these people pledge as well, that enough is enough and admittance into a hospital is not what they desire? Are they the selfish ones if they expect a whole society to shut down just to save them? Did we ask them if all of this is worth it for them to be saved? Or are we all acting out of fear to lose a loved one? If vulnerable people are scared of getting infected, they can make the decision themselves to self-quarantine. The government and the public need to help them with personal houses/spaces if they do make that decision or decide as a family to quarantine in their house only, not lock down a whole society that is so vital for our public health. Is it worth it to maybe save a small percentage of people who were most likely going to die soon anyway, while putting the majority of people into other sorts of risks caused by lockdowns? These moral questions should be answered by democratically asking the people in a society by, for example, a referendum, not decide something for them because it is supposed to be in their best interest.
3. There would be too many deaths if we let it spread uncontrollably. If most of our world’s population gets infected and many of those will die, we lose too many people.
The estimation of WHO currently predicts the mortality rate to be 3.4% [3]; however this number is not accurate, because many infected people never got tested and many people who died had underlying health issues thus making COVID-19 not the only cause of death but they died due to comorbidity [4]. There has been no proof that a lockdown will cause fewer deaths over time; nor does it show that total lockdowns are more effective than just social distancing [5]. According to a study conducted by Prof. Ben-Israel, the infection rate in each country declines after the 6th week, regardless of lockdowns or not [6]. Ben-Israel: "This is how it is all over the world. Both in countries where they have taken closure steps like Italy and in countries that have not had closures like Taiwan or Singapore. In such and such countries there is an increase until the fourth to sixth week, and immediately thereafter moderation until during the eighth week it disappears." An explanation for this could be that the elderly and weak die first, causing a peak in the graphs. After this peak, the deaths are on a decline. Besides that, we do not know how many extra people die now of other causes because they are afraid of going to hospitals during lockdowns.
In South Korea, where extensive testing has been conducted (and therefore creating a more realistic outcome), the mortality rate is only 0.6% [7] making COVID-19 far less deadly than previous estimations. The same is true for the mortality rate on the Princess Diamond cruise ship (the only example where 100% of the ‘population’ was tested without being exposed to others), where the mortality rate is only 1% even with the majority of the passengers being elderly [8]. Also, South Korea has seen infection rates falling despite not having a lockdown [9], as well as Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, where the lack of lockdowns shows no significant difference in the number of deaths and infections than in their neighboring countries [10].
In addition to that, Hong Kong has no lockdown at all, but 99% of the population is wearing masks, making the number of infections only about a 1000 with just four deaths [11], despite being so close to China.
We do not know if more people would die if we lift lockdowns now or if the same amount of people would die when we are in quarantine for months, we only estimate that fewer people would get infected at the same time. Most likely, a lockdown imposes a much more significant threat to society over time.
4. We need to stand in solidarity and protect everybody together. Every human life is essential and we need to care for others.
Right, so this comes down to social pressure. We forget about what enormous risks lockdowns impose on less fortunate people and countries, and they simply can not afford to stop working and be locked-down. Where is the care for those people? Does it come down to saving our elderly/weak out of solidarity while whole communities are at risk due to hunger, riots, and not to forget mental health? Because if everybody is doing it, we should all think and act the same way? Besides that, statistics show the risk that a person dies from COVID-19 is almost equal to them dying from other causes [12].
The amount of Coronavirus fatalities make the statistics peak now in a short period, but they might as well contribute to the 60 million people that die per year on average anyway.
Doesn’t living in a democratic society mean we should all get a say in such drastic measurements that affect all of us? We do not take into consideration people who believe in survival of the fittest, follow a religion that prevents them from seeking care (or simply ‘playing God’), those that believe in conspiracy theories or people just not trusting the current measurements. Lockdowns should only be enforced by law if we can prove they protect everybody .
WHY SHOULD WE NOT ACCEPT LOCKDOWNS?
I think the four reasons stated above pretty much sum up why most people agree that most of the world should currently be in lockdown. I do agree we need to save our hospitals and medical staff, which is why I pledge to not use the healthcare system in case I get infected with COVID-19 and to not expose our doctors to this virus. Additionally, there are more reasons to not have an enforced lockdown:
1. It is against human rights to take our freedom.
According to Article 3 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights [13]; ‘’Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.’’
Liberty and security are different for each person, which is why we should be entitled to making our own decisions regarding lockdowns. Also according to Article 13 of the same declaration;
‘’(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country. ’’
A nationwide lockdown prevents our freedom of movement which is against our human rights. No one should be able to take your freedom from you. For some people, security can not be found in a lockdown, and in fact creates the opposite effect.
2. We need to save our economy
Our economy is already in crisis and millions of jobs have been lost [14]. People have lost irreplaceable incomes and can’t feed their families anymore [15]. Tourism, hospitality and many other sectors are vital for many people all over the world, we cannot afford to lock down whole countries for months. Income taxes are not being paid, which means public sectors like education, safety and health are not receiving enough funding. Governments are now using our current tax money to pay for unemployment and heightened security, which many people did not even choose for and is preventable by merely making a lockdown a personal choice. Tax money now should be pumped into the healthcare system as much as possible.
3. We need to take care of the less fortunate
In wealthy countries, a lockdown has far less economic impact than in developing nations. Residents of high-income countries can work from home in many industries and are protected by their government for unemployment. But in many low-income countries, people live on a day to day basis and simply cannot survive without work [16]. Their families are not even being able to eat without earning money daily, let alone pay for hospital bills. Regardless of them getting the virus or not, they will not be able to get health care, simply because they cannot afford it, thus also not contributing to oversaturating the hospitals. Why put millions of people at risk with preventative measurements that have not even proven to save lives in the long run? It will not take long for these countries to completely get devastated by the results of a lockdown, causing far more deaths and destruction than COVID-19 will most likely ever bring.
4. The importance of mental health should not be underestimated
Many people will experience anxiety, depression, despair and domestic violence because of lockdowns [17]. Many children will have a lack of education this year, suicides will rise [18] and overall health will decline in general. People stay at home and experience more stress, meaning after being in quarantine for months they will be more vulnerable to catching diseases, including COVID-19, causing another rise in infections. We do not know if the number of deaths is decreased by lockdowns yet, which is why we shouldn’t force everybody to quarantine.
5. There is no proof that lockdowns save people from dying [19]
Whereas lockdowns seem to show a flattening of the curve effect now, we do not know what it does to the amount of dead in the long run, especially to those who are less fortunate. We have no perspective on how long a lockdown should take before we can loosen up and we have no proof another peak will hit a country when lockdowns are finally lifted. Humanity has always evolved around pandemics and viruses, why is it different now? Studies have shown that the death rate has not decreased because of lockdowns and in fact, seem to create the opposite effect [20]: “As at 15 April, without lockdowns, Japan (1.2 coronavirus deaths per million people/146 total deaths), South Korea (4.3/225), Singapore (1.8/10), and Taiwan (0.3/6) have far lower death rates than Spain (397.6/18,579), Italy (358.2/21,645), France (256.3/17,167), and UK (193.5/12,868) with lockdown.”
The same is true for the different states of the United States; analysis of data shows no difference in infection rate or death rate in states with or without lockdowns [21]. States with just social distancing rules even show a lower death rate than states with a full lockdown.
We simply do not know the long term beneficial effects of lockdowns yet to impose such draconian measures as enforced lockdowns.
6. We should respect the laws of nature
An ethical reason, which you may or may not agree with, but viruses and pandemics have always been part of life and a way to control the population. What makes humans so unique we want to control everything? Earth has been begging for a change for many years and we have neglected it. There is finally a way to cave in our overpopulation just a little bit, and all we want to do is eliminate it. We are apparently capable of massive change; why not use that power to fight climate change, for example? What happened to natural selection and survival of the fittest like with any other (animal) population in the world? People who strongly believe in these matters are halted in their behavior with growing peer pressure caused by nationwide lockdowns. People should always be capable of making their own decisions concerning their freedom based on personal beliefs. If we agree with ‘how nature has intended it’, we should not be forced to quarantine to save a small percentage of people. Besides that, COVID-19 is selective, meaning if you are in good health, you are most likely to survive the virus. It could be a reason for many people to change their bad habits of smoking, eating junk food and generally not taking care of their health.
7. There is too much unknown about how to beat Coronavirus
We have our responsibility to take care of each other in a way we deem necessary. This could mean wearing masks when going outside, avoiding all contact with others, or keeping our elderly safe inside a house and helping everybody on a personal level. Not force whole nations to lock down and let fear take over. We do not know why and how COVID-19 developed or how we can cure it. There is no perspective a vaccine will be available soon, do we have to stay in lockdowns for years until it will finally become available? There are numerous conspiracy theories out there which I will not mention here, but right now we are letting us get controlled by the government if we all believe the fear they are spreading with unknown or false information. The media is pumping out numbers and information that can not be fact-checked at this moment. Governments have the obligation to inform, but people have the right to choose.
Besides that, governments have been proven to be wrong about earlier pandemics, according to this article by Ramesh Thakur [22]: “Catastrophism in previous epidemics proved false. In 1999, European Union scientists suggested up to 500,000 people could die from the UK mad cow disease. By October 2013, 177 deaths were recorded from the disease. In 2005, the UN’s coordinator David Nabarro warned between 5 to 150 million people could die from avian flu. The World Health Organization’s official estimates were 2–7.4 million. Only 455 people died of bird flu from 2003–2019. With the 2009 swine flu, instead of the feared 1.3% fatality rate, the actual rate was 0.02%, comparable to the US 2007–09 seasonal flus. In the UK, against the “reasonable worst-case scenario” of 65,000 deaths, there were only 457. And the government spent £1.2bn on flu remedies that were not needed. The WHO came under severe criticism for having served the interests of “Big Pharma” in selling unnecessary vaccines.’’
We just don’t know enough about this Coronavirus yet to take such drastic measures like lockdowns.
8. Continuous lockdowns could create civil disturbances
Many people in locked-down countries are at risk of increased (domestic) violence, riots, gun abuse and robberies. Fear takes over common sense and if people are fighting with each other already over toilet paper, what are they capable of if they can’t afford food anymore? The USA has seen the most significant increase in the purchase of guns for years [23]; racism against Chinese people is growing [24] and whole countries have shut borders to foreigners. Coronavirus brings out the worst in us when led by fear. The longer a lockdown takes, the more likely people will reach out to alternative matters to create safety for themselves and their families. We need to get trust back into our system and not force people to quit their jobs by staying at home. Whole communities rely on tourism and hospitality or work on the street, they have no safety net while being locked down.
CONCLUSION
Lockdowns seem to slow down the infection rate according to various statistics now, but we are just not at a point yet to determine if lockdowns work in the long run. Infection rates might spike up again after a lockdown is lifted, causing the same amount of deaths as it would in the first place. Or lockdowns might not even contribute to flattening the curve at all as flattening occurs naturally anyway. But meanwhile, many more people will be drastically affected by being locked down for months or maybe even years, probably causing more deaths eventually. If the argument is that we need to protect everybody, we need to seriously consider how we can protect the other 96% that most likely will not die from COVID-19 (if we take a 4% mortality rate estimation), but are profoundly affected now just because of lockdowns.
SO, YOU WANNA SIGN?
If you agree that a lockdown should be a personal choice, I urge you to please sign this petition. If you want to help to flatten the curve for hospitals, I urge you to please pledge that you will not use the health system when infected, and start wearing (reusable) masks in public. Lockdown is not the only way to help each other.
WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM LOCKDOWNS?
Lockdowns so far have taught us a great deal about society and life on Earth. We should take these teachings to create a better future and start new. We are all in this together and we stand firm in numbers. We are all consumers and we all have the right to change and speak out, let’s create something positive out of this experience and not forget what lockdowns and Corona have taught us
1. Nature is restoring
The Himalaya can be seen for the first time in 20 years from India, air pollution has cleared up worldwide and CO2 levels have plummeted [25]’; we cannot deny that nature is restoring thanks to our lives on pause. Let’s continue this trend and keep working from home more, keep consuming less and stop using fossil fuels on a daily basis. We do not need new clothes every month, and we don’t need multiple cars in our garage. We don’t need items of wealth and single-use food packaging. Let’s make factories stop producing 24/7, stop oil companies from destroying our earth by choosing renewable energy. Let's give wild animals more space and do not let agriculture take over their precious habitats. We thrive in numbers, so let’s use these numbers to keep restoring nature. We have now proven we are capable of a massive change, let's change for nature now!
2. Stop believing everything the media tells you
We are being bombarded with false numbers and fake news regarding COVID-19. We have no proof to publish real percentages, as the situation is changing daily and we simply do not know enough about this pandemic to make statements. Let’s not get controlled by fear, let’s not let the governments decide what is best for us and believe everything we read. Ask around, how many people do you actually know who died from COVID-19? How many people have passed away in your life from cancer, heart disease, alcohol/drugs, car accidents? Let’s not make Coronavirus scarier than it is.
3. Be healthy and conscious always
Coronavirus attacks the ones with weak immune systems, and you are actually in control of that mostly. Stop drinking, smoking, overconsuming sugar and junk food, exercise more and eat healthily. You are not as vulnerable as you think. Stop buying sodas in plastic bottles, eat less meat and in general take more care of your health. Corona is giving us a message, listen to it!
4. People want to help each other
A great sense of community has risen from COVID-19, helping others and donating money to the less fortunate. Let’s continue this trend and take care of each other always!
References
- https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/hard-lockdowns-negative-effects-innumerable-some-doctors-call-for-relaxed-regulations-20200421
- https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/
- https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/
- https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1
- https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/22/there-is-no-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/
- http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/278658
- https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/health-environment/article/3065187/coronavirus-south-koreas-aggressive-testing-gives
- https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/
- https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/health-environment/article/3074469/coronavirus-south-korea-cuts-infection-rate-without
- https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/flattening-economy-costs-lives-livelihoods-and-freedoms-too
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/test-trace-lessons-hong-kong-avoiding-coronavirus-lockdown
- https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51979654
- https://www.un.org/en/udhrbook/pdf/udhr_booklet_en_web.pdf
- https://blogs.imf.org/2020/04/14/the-great-lockdown-worst-economic-downturn-since-the-great-depression/
- https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/22/africa/coronavirus-famine-un-warning-intl/index.html
- https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/4/18/21212688/coronavirus-lockdowns-developing-world
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/urgent-studies-needed-mental-health-coronavirus-lockdown
- https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8192449/Coronavirus-lockdown-led-increase-suicides-police-chiefs-say.html
- https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51979654
- https://www.realclearpolitics.com/coronavirus/
- https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/22/there-is-no-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/
- https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/flattening-economy-costs-lives-livelihoods-and-freedoms-too
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/us-gun-purchases-coronavirus-record
- https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/us/chinese-coronavirus-racist-attacks.html
- https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/positive-impact-environment-coronavirus-lockdown-a4404751.html
Posted
(Updated )
Report this as inappropriate
There was an error when submitting your files and/or report.