My blog

People and governments are approaching the pandemic irrationally, they are not drawing conclusions and not learning from mistakes.

When the virus suddenly hit Europe in March, we knew nothing. We reacted with disregard or fear, and the only weapon of our rulers was lockdown.

Today, after seven months of the epidemic, we are not better informed, more resourceful, more empathetic and caring for the elderly, more understanding, or simply wiser.
People present three diametrically different approaches to the pandemic.

In the first, I have the impression that the largest group are those who have the virus "somewhere". Unfortunately, a significant part of them is very irrational in this. A few weeks ago, a friend of my friend infected a dozen or so participants of a Saturday house party, although she warned that she would not kiss each other in greeting because she had a cold and was not feeling well.

I don't think we should lock everyone at home, but I think many of us could do with a reminder of a few basic rules that were in place before COVID left Wuhan: if you're sick, stay home, wash your hands, avoid crowds, send jam to your sick aunt, and visit her when she's better.

The second group includes those who fear the virus. Unfortunately, a significant portion of them are irrationally afraid. My neighbor, for whom I did shopping at the beginning of the pandemic, kept his groceries outside his house for two days, and told his wife to disinfect the hot pizza from my garden oven, which I served him over the fence.

If you are under 50, you are 61 times less likely to die after receiving news of a positive COVID test result than if you were in a car accident. If you are under 60, it is 25 times less likely, if you are under 70, it is 12 times less likely, if you are under 80, it is 7 times less likely, and if you are over 80, it is 4 times less likely.

How do I know this - I calculated it. For those who are not afraid of numbers, here are the calculations. (Statistics show that 1 in 10 people die in car accidents. This means that the probability of dying if you are involved in a car accident is 10%. In the case of deaths related to COVID, I did not have Polish data because the Polish government does not publish them, so I took American data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, website www.cdc.gov. Of the 8.5 million Americans who have been diagnosed with COVID, about 64% are under the age of 50. This gives a number of 5.44 million infected people under the age of 50. Of the approximately 224,000 people who died in America from COVID, about 4% were under the age of 50, or about 8,960 people. Dividing 8,960 by 5.44 million gives a probability of death for a person under the age of 50 who tests positive for COVID - it is 0.16%, which is 61 times lower than 10%. In practice, this number is even smaller, because the data shows that among the deceased who were under 50 years old at the time of death and were infected with COVID, over 90% had comorbidities and they could probably have been the cause of their death, so they should be excluded from the statistics, which would reduce the probability.)
So if you are under 50, there is no reason to be afraid. You cannot ignore the virus, you have to take safety measures - the same as with flu and other diseases, but you can live normally, that is, as before. In practice, this may be difficult, because we are dealing with various unreasonable restrictions - but more on that in a moment.

And finally, the third group. I call them "flat-earthers". It is quite large. Among them are those who believe that COVID does not exist, and those who think it is an ordinary flu, but also those who are convinced that it is a conspiracy of militias from Rwanda, Putin's revenge, a secret plan of the Chinese or a gift from the inhabitants of a neighboring planet. As in the case of anti-vaxxers, it is not worth even trying to dissuade them from their arguments, and all that results is ridicule.
Unfortunately, the rationality of our governments' actions is even worse.

There is no information system in Poland regarding COVID. We do not know where we are or where we are going. The only statistical information provided by the Polish government is on Twitter! Since the beginning of the epidemic, the Ministry of Health has provided a daily list of COVID-related deaths, providing age, gender, information on comorbidities, and the city or province where the deceased lived. Since mid-October, when the number of deaths increased, this information has no longer been provided and cannot be found anywhere. There are no statistics on the condition of patients diagnosed with COVID, the percentage of people who go to hospital, the percentage of people who go to the ICU, the percentage of people who go on a ventilator, etc. There is no information on the number of available ventilators (the Ministry of Health started publishing this information on Twitter only on October 22, but whether it is reliable is another matter). It is beyond me that the sixth largest country in the European Union is not able to build a system of current, complete, publicly available and reliable information on the pandemic.

The Ministry of Health provides information on new, diagnosed COVID cases every day. Today's number (24X2020) is 13,628. For the Polish government, this number is the main indicator of the development of the epidemic, which is not reasonable. It is completely irrelevant how many people are diagnosed with COVID on a given day, especially since the real number of people infected is probably much higher. What is much more important is how many people have serious symptoms on a given day, how many were admitted to the ICU, and how many were on a ventilator - and these numbers are not published.

Carrying out tests is pointless. To take a test in Poland (I am leaving out private tests, for a lot of money, which not many can afford) you need to get a referral from a doctor, who will not issue such a referral if he does not see all four symptoms of COVID (temperature higher than 38 degrees, shortness of breath, cough, loss of smell and taste) or one of the symptoms is really serious. This means that they will do a test for you when you know you have it, or you are in a serious condition. Where is the sense and logic in this? Tests would make sense and would be an excellent tool to fight the virus only if they were free, publicly available and their results were known immediately. In a situation where tests are limited by the capacity of laboratories, which is why doctors order them only in obvious or serious cases, it defeats the purpose.

My daughter's friend was quarantined a few weeks ago after a party. A lady from the Sanitary Inspectorate came to her, in a space suit, and immediately after entering, she took off the top part of it, sat down and started telling - and I quote - "how f*cked up it all is". People sent to quarantine can't wait for a call from the Sanitary Inspectorate, you can't get through there at all. The Polish police currently don't have time to chase criminals, because their main job is to supervise people in quarantine. What's the point of such an approach to quarantine?

Starting today, all of Poland has been included in the red zone. Restaurants and gyms have been closed. Children are returning to remote work. We have a repeat lockdown, perhaps to a slightly lesser extent than in March, let's say, for 3/4, but still. The intention of the government is to stop the development of the epidemic. Does it make sense? We are starting to treat the plague with cholera again, using a medicine that cures little and has unbearable side effects. Of course, I realize that the most important task today is to protect the health service from failure and to fight to avoid a situation in which a significant number of patients will not be able to be physically helped. However, will another lockdown solve this problem? Wouldn't it be more reasonable to close the country, but only for people over a certain age, for their sake and for the sake of our health service?

Even though I am over fifty, I would understand and support a ban on people over 50 from entering restaurants, out of concern for their health. At first glance, such a solution may seem strange. Someone would say: let everyone decide for themselves whether they are healthy and whether they dare to go to a restaurant, let's leave the decision to them. However, it is more complicated. The state could just as well tell citizens to decide for themselves when they want to retire, after all they know it best. So why does the state make this decision for them and set the retirement age for citizens? This is for a simple reason. If people decided for themselves, the vast majority would retire well before they were sixty, because they feel strong, because they are still healthy, they can earn some extra money, and a steady, even low income is what it is. And then, after 10 or 15 years, when they really get old, they will be left with a low, insufficient benefit and will turn to the state for help. For these reasons, in my opinion, the only reasonable solution is a lockdown, but only for people over a certain age. This will allow for a normal life and work, as before COVID, for all those below that age limit, for whom the probability of health or life risk from COVID is low, while at the same time protecting the elderly and the health system from failure.

Similarly, schools should not be closed. Remote work should only apply to teachers above a certain age limit, but not to students. It may be difficult, but I am convinced that it is possible to implement.

We have difficult times ahead of us. No one can predict what autumn and winter will look like. I have very serious doubts whether our government's actions will be able to significantly stop the coming tsunami. Are we prepared for this? When accused of having slept through the time to prepare for the second wave of the epidemic, the former Speaker of the Senate of the Republic of Poland replied "what were we supposed to do, build hospitals?" I don't know if he is playing the idiot ineptly or maybe he just can't hide it. Senator, we are not prepared because we do not have a pandemic information system. We are not prepared because we were unable to provide efficient infrastructure and equipment on time, and instead we squandered money on non-functional equipment. We are not prepared because we did not provide an appropriate system for organizing the work of nurses and doctors in a crisis, which, in particular, would clearly specify how this hard, excessive work is paid. We are not prepared because instead of supporting and caring for those working in the health service, we make them understand that they are not involved, earn well, and in general it is their fault. We are not prepared because we do not talk about how to act in a critical war situation, where there is not enough equipment and people for the next dying. This time is coming.