Coronavirus: Out of many, one -- What the US federal government and the states should do to fight the coronavirus

‘It makes political and economic sense for the US to suppress the coronavirus. For that, states and the federal government each have their own roles that they need to adjust.

‘The US is now the country with most coronavirus cases in the world. It is likely to keep that title in the history books. Two key reasons are government decentralisation and concerns about the economic impact of aggressive social distancing measures. Here’s what we’re going to cover today, with a lot of data, charts and sources: (a) What’s the situation in the US and its states (b) Why the coronavirus should be a bipartisan issue (c) The economics of controlling the virus (d) Which decisions should be left to the federal government or to states

Read here (Medium, April 2, 2020)

Read here for a list of people who have endorsed or shared his article

Three lessons from this pandemic by Dr Lim Mah Hui & Dr Michael Heng

‘There are three lessons to draw from this crisis.

‘First, the pandemic exposes the flaws of neoliberalism which deifies the free market and vilifies the state... Under this scenario, risks are socialised while profits are privatised. It weakens the capacity and readiness of society to respond to unanticipated nation-wide crisis.

‘Second, had the rich western countries cast off their ideological blinkers and used the opportunities after the GFC to invest in infrastructure, research and development, public goods, reduction of huge inequalities and other form of capital development, the whole world would have been in better conditions to deal with the unfolding situation.

‘Third, the crisis underscores the interdependence resulting from systematic integration over the past several decades. It is a cliché now to say that pathogen respects no border. It took only a few weeks for the virus to travel worldwide. A global solidarity is needed to tackle problem of this nature which unfortunately is not being displayed...

‘The world has to act in a concerted action. We are all in the same boat; a leak in one part will sink the boat no matter where the source.’

Read here (IPS News, April 1, 2020)

Covid-19 in Malaysia: Fours ways to address the problem of transmission

We have reached a plateau, but we must do more to reduce the transmission rate, says Jeyakumar Devaraj:

1. Masks for all those venturing out of their homes
2. More effective quarantining of contacts
3. Earlier testing of symptomatic cases
4. Winning the trust of the migrant worker population

Read here (Aliran, April 1, 2020)

For the record: Two game-changing studies from Imperial College that affected Europe-wide policies

The Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team in London produced two studies that influenced policy in Europe in a big way. In particular, it helped push Britain to switch its strategy from one based on ‘herd immunity’ to that of "suppression".

(1) March 16: ‘Suppression the only viable strategy’

The first study, published March 16, 2020, concluded that ‘epidemic suppression is the only viable strategy at the current time. The social and economic effects of the measures which are needed to achieve this policy goal will be profound. Many countries have adopted such measures already, but even those countries at an earlier stage of their epidemic (such as the UK) will need to do so imminently.’

Read here (Imperial College, March 16, 2020)

(2) March 30: ‘59,000 lives saved in 11 European countries via non-pharmacologial interventions, between 7 to 43 million individuals infected -- as of March 31’

The second study, published March 30, 2020, said that ‘with current interventions remaining in place to at least the end of March, we estimate that interventions across all 11 countries will have averted 59,000 deaths up to 31 March [95% credible interval 21,000-120,000]. Many more deaths will be averted through ensuring that interventions remain in place until transmission drops to low levels.

‘We estimate that, across all 11 countries between 7 and 43 million individuals have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 up to 28th March, representing between 1.88% and 11.43% of the population. The proportion of the population infected to date – the attack rate - is estimated to be highest in Spain followed by Italy and lowest in Germany and Norway, reflecting the relative stages of the epidemics.’

Read here (Imperial College, March 30, 2020)

Coronavirus has not suspended politics – it has revealed the nature of power

‘In recent years, it has sometimes appeared that global politics is simply a choice between rival forms of technocracy. In China, it is a government of engineers backed up by a one-party state. In the west, it is the rule of economists and central bankers, operating within the constraints of a democratic system. This creates the impression that the real choices are technical judgments about how to run vast, complex economic and social systems.

‘But in the last few weeks another reality has pushed through. The ultimate judgments are about how to use coercive power. These aren’t simply technical questions. Some arbitrariness is unavoidable. And the contest in the exercise of that power between democratic adaptability and autocratic ruthlessness will shape all of our futures. We are a long way from the frightening and violent world that Hobbes sought to escape nearly 400 years ago. But our political world is still one Hobbes would recognise.’

Read here (The Guardian, March 27, 2020)

Coronavirus: Why you must act now -- Politicians, community leaders and business leaders: What should you do and when?

This article by Tomas Pueyo, which has received over 40 million views, and translated into over 40 languages as at March 19, begins with the following:

‘With everything that’s happening about the Coronavirus, it might be very hard to make a decision of what to do today. Should you wait for more information? Do something today? What?... Here’s what I’m going to cover in this article, with lots of charts, data and models with plenty of sources: (1) How many cases of coronavirus will there be in your area? (2) What will happen when these cases materialise? (3) What should you do? (4) When?’

Read here (Medium, updated March 19, 2020)

List of prominent people who have endorsed or shared his article. Read here

Malaysian Health Coalition urges the government to act decisively, firmly

The MHC, who are Malaysia’s emergency physicians, critical care specialists, intensivists and public health physicians, have asked to to take three decisive and firm steps:

1. Act decisively in prohibiting mass gatherings. This should be uniformly applied across all government agencies, private businesses, civil societies, religious authorities and communities. This is not a lockdown, which is too extreme and unnecessary. Essential services should continue, and citizens should have basic freedom of movement.
2. Act firmly to educate the public about “social distancing”, which is the best intervention to reduce viral spread. We must provide adequate support for workers (who may lose income), employers (who may lose revenue) and citizens (who may lose services). We must protect the mental and physical health of older adults staying at home; civil society organizations can help fill this gap.
3. Deliver clear, coordinated and confident risk communications to Malaysians, to provide a reliable source of information, advice and recommendations.

Read here (Malaysian Health Coalition, March 16, 2020)

Pandemic rules and the law: Shad Saleem Faruqi

‘Those in positions of authority must also remain cognisant of the rule of law dimension. Power is not inherent. It must be derived from the law and its exercise must remain within the four corners of the enabling legislation.

‘From the rule-of-law point of view, an executive order, policy, directive, instruction or scheme does not amount to ‘law’ (and thereby require obedience) simply because of expediency, workability or reasonableness. It must be anchored in and derived from legislation or subsidiary legislation.‘

Read here (The Star, March 26, 2020)

Economic growth is an unnecessary evil, Jacinda Ardern is right to deprioritise it

‘New guidance on policy suggests all new spending must advance one of five government priorities: improving mental health, reducing child poverty, addressing the inequalities faced by indigenous Maori and Pacific islands people, thriving in a digital age, and transitioning to a low-emission, sustainable economy.

‘Take a look at the biggest problems faced world-wide and you would be hard pushed to find examples that are more grave than the ones set out in Ardern’s provisional proposals. Rising inequality, a mental health crisis and climate change are all significant threats, but as long as other major economies prioritise economic growth over wellbeing New Zealand may become a lone wolf trapped in an increasingly hungry bear pit.’

Read here (The London Economic, May 31, 2019)