Skip to main content

Shut Downs Likely to Result in More COVID-19 Deaths than if Nothing Were Done


More people will die as a result of COVID-19 because we closed the schools than would have if we’d kept the schools open or if we’d brought the kids back to school in summer.

That is part of the message from Knut M. Wittkowski, who headed the Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design at The Rockefeller University in New York, when he was interviewed around April 6. (The Rockefeller University is a private graduate college focusing on biological and medical sciences, providing doctoral and postdoctoral education and with which 36 Nobel laureates have been affiliated.) In effect, the same message was given by experts cited by 1889 Institute in a March 24 statement decrying the plan to turn out public schools for the year.

Dr. Wittkowski explains in detail that “herd immunity” is critical, indeed absolutely essential, to end a respiratory disease pandemic. Herd immunity occurs when at least 80 percent of a population has been exposed to the disease and developed antibodies necessary to become immune. When this occurs, an infected, symptomatic individual is unlikely to infect anybody else. Thus, the remaining 20 percent of the population are protected, without a vaccine and without having contracted the virus.

The quickest way to have developed herd immunity would have been to keep children in school so that their close proximity would cause them to pass the virus around and develop immunity. Instead, we’ve done the opposite, and more people than otherwise are likely to die.

It was known, very early on, that COVID-19 was, by far, hardest on the elderly (as are all respiratory infections, but COVID-19 is unusually nonlethal for the young) and on people with other illnesses. With public service announcements from government giving isolation suggestions for vulnerable sub-populations, they could have (and still possibly could if the right actions are taken, but it may be too late) waited out the development of herd immunity, and they could be emerging from isolation by now. Public service announcements would have (and could) provide advice for how caregivers and family members could care for the vulnerable among us.

As it is, Dr. Wittkowski points out that we are increasingly likely to suffer another bloom of COVID-19 disease this fall, for lack of herd immunity. Consequently, people will die who would otherwise not have died. Respiratory disease inevitably gets passed around among family members, unless they are well educated on how to prevent it, one way being to go outside rather than to isolate together inside a home. In multi-generational households, the government’s shelter in place advice (and orders, in some states) have actually put the most vulnerable at greater risk, not lesser. In some states, non-essential business shut down orders have closed dry-cleaners, where viruses on clothes would have been killed. These foolish policies have prolonged COVID-19’s existence in many instances. 

At the time of this writing, official statistics on deaths due to COVID-19 in the United States indicate that no one under the age of 25 has been killed by it. That is not to say that no one under 25 has fallen ill from the virus or that some have not been gravely ill. But clearly, this pandemic disease is more dangerous the older one gets. The risks COVID-19 present for school-age children is lower than the risks they face from flu. None of this nuance has been taken into account (nuance that has been known for some time) in the liberty-robbing general policies that have been pursued up to now by all levels of government.

As Dr. Wittowski pointed out, Americans, and many in other countries, have been way too docile in allowing their freedoms to be compromised. People should be asking their representatives hard questions, educating themselves regarding what ALL the epidemiological experts are saying. As the good doctor reminds us, if we don’t stand up for our own rights, those rights will be forgotten.

Byron Schlomach is 1889 Institute Director and can be contacted at bschlomach@1889institute.org. 
The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.

Popular posts from this blog

Eat Your Vegetables: City Council Considers A Well-Disguised Sin Tax

The Oklahoma City Council is considering a well-disguised sin tax. They call it a Healthy Neighborhood Zoning Overlay, but the effect is the same. It limits new dollar stores in the specified neighborhood. The ostensible goal is to create a welcoming environment for grocery stores selling fresh meat and produce. But it accomplishes this goal by giving existing dollar stores a monopoly, which will raise prices, and punish residents for shopping at the purveyors of (allegedly nothing but) junk food, instead of subsisting on fresh, organic kale smoothies like good little citizens. Why would the Council intentionally restrict the supply of stores where many of their residents buy basic household goods and food? Several possibilities present themselves, though none are sound.   A fundamental misunderstanding of the laws of supply and demand. Economists call the current state of the neighborhood a contestable market: dollar stores choose low prices because the mere p...
Read more

No License, Sherlock: Licensing for Private Investigators

What does a private investigator do? Surely, we’re all familiar with various movies and shows featuring the exciting adventures of Sherlock Holmes or Magnum PI. However, reality is often disappointing, and the fact is private investigation is usually dull and relatively safe. Private investigators are tasked with conducting surveillance and fact-finding missions for their clients, but they gain no special powers to do so.  My recent paper deals with the licensing of private investigators. Oklahoma’s private investigator licenses are governed by the Council of Law Enforcement Education and Training (CLEET), which follows the advice of a committee made up of people who run private investigative agencies. Improved competition is not likely to be in the best interest of these agencies, so it is questionable whether they should be in a gate-keeping position they could easily turn to their advantage. Private Investigators must undergo a series of trainings and pas...
Read more

Religious Freedom and School Choice in the Nation's High Court

When the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) begins its term next week, one of the many important cases it will consider is that of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , which addresses Montana’s Tax Credit Scholarship program, and gives the high court an opportunity to decide whether Blaine Amendments (which generally prohibit any state money from going to a “sectarian” purpose) violate the establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment, as well as the and equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. At the very least, the justices should rule on whether Blaine Amendments (like Section II-5 of the Oklahoma Constitution) can be used to exclude religious schools from school choice programs which insulate the state from direct subsidy of religious organizations through the “genuine, independent choice of private individuals.”   The question presented to the court is “Whether it violates the religion clauses or the equal protection clause of th...
Read more

On Coronavirus and American Exceptionalism

Most of us have no idea whether to fear the coming coronavirus pandemic or to scoff at what seems to be a panic, complete with toilet paper buying sprees. I find myself mostly in the latter camp, due not to some great scientific knowledge, but as a matter of general disposition. But I’m also a father of young children, so a touch of protective instinct kicks in whenever a big outside force that could harm my family rears its head. With much I don’t know, there is something I do know: If forced to weather a pandemic, I’d rather do so in the United States than any other country on earth. Watching news coverage, I cannot help but notice a subtle message underlying the words of far too many in the political commentariat. Many seem to speak about China’s management of the outbreak with envy . Their analysis is that because we are a big, unruly, open society, we cannot hope to make people to do what is necessary to stem the spread. The old “China for a Day” fantasy of Thomas Fri...
Read more