Was the impact really necessary? No, but no one could know that until after it had started. Hindsight is 20/20 but in the moment things aren't so clear.
I believe most (all?) Governors acted with the best intentions. Some chose to lock down hard and long and others took a more relaxed approach. It's easy to see that NY with its continuing restrictions (mask mandates even beyond the CDC recommendations otherwise) has had a higher death rate than FL with its light touch to restrictions. FL came through this in better shape but maybe we were just very lucky.
What concerns me is the tendency to act in "an abundance of caution" rather than taking evidence-based, measured steps. There was little or no concern for the economy, for individual freedoms, for mental health, or for anything other than squashing the curve. Some of the measures were necessary and probably kept the death toll from being twice as high. By downplaying or ignoring the economic and societal costs however, some unnecessary damage was done. We'll recover but it is a shame that the recovery is necessary.
Hopefully, there will not be a next time but realistically, there probably will be. With any luck we will learn from the past year and be better prepared to handle all the impacts.
__________________
Why do people insist on making claims without looking them up first, do they really think no one will check? Proof by emphatic assertion rarely works.
Confirmation bias is real; I can find any number of articles that say so.
Victor, NY - Randallstown, MD - Yakima, WA - Stevensville, MD - Village of Hillsborough
|