Devemos deixar a covid propagar-se pelas populações jovens e saudáveis?
Duas petições de cientistas confrontam-se.
A Economist fez uma interessante comparação entre duas petições de cientistas, uma defendendo o fim dos lockdowns (Great Barrington Declaration) e outra contestando a primeira (John Snow Memorandum).
Não tenho escondido a minha preferência por um dos lados do debate (o primeiro). Mas ninguém tem certezas num tema fundamental para todos nós, pelo que deviamos promover um debate sério sobre os fundamentos científicos na base desta questão, que infelizmente foi demasiado politizada.
A Economist contrastou a Tese com a Antítese, como deve ser feito num debate deste tipo..
Só me irrita um pouco o “tique” muito na moda de um dos lados falar em consenso científico (ouvir o podcast linkado abaixo), o que equivale à própria negação do debate – e até da própria ciência. Longe vão os tempos de Feynman, em que esta postura era inconcebível.
Should covid be left to spread among the young and healthy?
Two petitions by scientists clash on the matter.
The Economist made an interesting article putting side by side the arguments of two very recent petitions by scientists on Covid, one asking for the end of lockdowns (the Great Barrington Declaration) the other defending the need for them (the John Snow Memorandum).
I have made no secret that I tend to opt for one of the sides, the first that questions lockdowns. But there are no certainties yet in this critical question for all of us. Unfortunately it has been too much politicized. Therefore we should promote a serious debate on the scientifc fundamentals behind this.
The Economist laid down the Thesis and the Antithesis as should be done in these debates.
It is just a bit irritating to hear of the sides using the “consensus” argument (listem to the podcast linked below) which disproves the debate – and the scientific method itself. The times of the great Feynman when this would be unacceptable, are long gone.
Podcast com as declarações dos cientistas promotores das duas petições.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta (Univ. Oxford) contra os lockdowns e Deepti Gurdasani (Christian Medical College, Vellore, India) pelos lockdowns.
Podcast confronting Dr. Sunetra Gupta (Univ. of Oxford) for the first and Dr. Deepti Gurdasani (Christian Medical College, Vellore, India) for the second:
The Economist’s synthesis:
The Great Barrington plan, then, is a high-risk, high-reward proposition. The John Snow one, by contrast, would minimise covid deaths in the short term, but lives lost in the long-term, because of lockdowns and other disruptions, might end up being more numerous. Over time, as governments fix the test and trace systems that are needed to replace the broader restrictions, the motivation for the Great Barrington course of action will become less potent.
With luck, this whole debate will be rendered irrelevant by the invention of a vaccine or the development of suitable drugs to treat covid. The results of several efficacy trials of vaccines, and tests on promising pharmaceuticals, are expected in the coming weeks. If covid-19 is less deadly and some herd immunity comes from a vaccine, the paths charted by the two petitions will, eventually, come together.