Skip to main content

The Truth About COVID-19: Better Than You Think


As the media turns its attention back to COVID-19, there is a renewed push to shut down the economy. Some states have even begun to scale back reopening plans for their economies; others continue to delay opening. It is essential to look past their catastrophizing and focus on the facts of COVID-19.

One fact to consider: while testing has risen 23%, the rate of positive results has only risen 1.3 percentage points to 6.2%. Even as alarmists point to the rise in cases, they still admit that the boost in testing has played a role in the rise in the total number of known cases. Therefore, the total number of positive cases is not of much use in this case, as it only paints a partial picture. The rate of increase in total positive cases is a more meaningful measure, and it has barely increased. Even more important is who is getting infected. The data show that recent cases are primarily younger people. But that’s a good thing; these are precisely the people that are key to building herd immunity, which is the only long-term solution for fighting COVID-19 and is inevitable anyway.

While the news readers reporting “surges” of people testing positive for coronavirus renew calls for lockdowns, they neglect to tell the whole truth, which is that the numbers surrounding COVID-19 inspire optimism. According to the COVID Tracking Project, the average weekly deaths from COVID-19 has been in steady decline nationally since April. Oklahoma has followed this trend. The primary justification for lockdowns has been to prevent deaths from COVID-19, but if deaths are falling, then that rationale largely evaporates.

There is also reason to believe that total death numbers are overstated. States have been caught claiming COVID-19 for deaths that were blatantly not COVID-19 related. In May, the Washington State Department of Health confirmed a report that revealed they were recording non-COVID deaths, such as those due to gunshots, as COVID-19 deaths. Part of the reason for this was negligence on the part of the Washington State Department of Health, but part of it is how hospitals over report COVID-19 on death certificates. This over-reporting is to be expected when hospitals are given a 20% premium for COVID-19 Medicare patients from the CARES Act. This extra money incentivizes hospitals to record COVID-19 among the causes of death even when it was unlikely it contributed at all. In their June 24th update of COVID-19 data, the CDC made the following statement on comorbidities, “For 7% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.5 additional conditions or causes per death.” 

Despite these encouraging numbers, Tulsa mayor GT Bynum is considering issuing an executive order mandating mask wearing and restricting indoor gatherings. Other cities and states have already implemented a mandatory policy of wearing masks in public. Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden has also gone on the record, stating he would use executive powers to mandate wearing masks in public. Some states have even begun to roll back their plans for reopening the economy, forcing bars to close once again. This is a step in the wrong direction. New York Governor Cuomo recently threatened to shut down New York City again. The City has pushed back, issuing this statement, “These businesses are allowed to be open per the Governor’s guidelines and we don’t believe imprisoning people or taking away their livelihood is the answer.” Cuomo is also delaying the fourth phase of New York’s reopening, keeping malls and movie theaters closed. It is already clear that the lockdowns were not as effective as claimed. States that did not issue lockdown orders suffered less job loss and fewer deaths per million than those that did.  

The American people must not let themselves be alarmed into a second economic shutdown. Even as the media pundits and political class push for more restrictions and shutdowns, the numbers do not support such measures. We have made substantial strides in recovering from the recent debacle of shutdowns; don't let that progress be erased because of the fear of a few "very smart" people.


Spencer Cadavero is a Research Associate at 1889 institute and can be reached at scadavero@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

About Those Roads in Texas

A s Sooner fans head south for the OU-Texas game next week, they will encounter a phenomenon most of us are familiar with: as you cruise across the Red River suddenly the road gets noticeably smoother. The painted lane stripes get a little brighter and the roadside “Welcome to Texas” visitors’ center gleams in the sunlight, a modern and well-maintained reminder of how much more money the Lonestar State spends on public infrastructure than little old Oklahoma. Or does it? Why are the roads so much, well… better in Texas? Turns out, it isn’t the amount of money spent, at least not when compared to the overall size of the state’s economy and personal income of its inhabitants. Research conducted by 1889 Institute’s Byron Schlomach reveals that Oklahoma actually spends significantly more on roads than Texas as a percentage of both state GDP and personal income . And that was data from 2016, before Oklahoma’s tax and spending increases of recent years. The gap is likely gr...
Read more

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

School Choice: I Have Erred

I should point out, before the reader gets into this piece, that these are my personal thoughts. Right around last Labor Day, I suddenly had a thought. I quickly made a calculation and realized that, as of the day after Labor Day, I’ve worked full-time in public policy for 25 years – a quarter of a century. While there really is nothing fundamentally more special about a 25 th anniversary than a 24 th or 26 th one, it is a widely-recognized demarcation point. Therefore, it seems worthwhile to take time and write down reflections on my career. My work has touched on several policy areas, but I’ve been thinking a lot about public education lately. That’s the area I practically swam in when I started my career, so here are my thoughts. On the day after Labor Day in 1994 I started work for a member of the Texas House of Representatives. He was the member who always carried a voucher bill, an issue for which I was thrilled to work. By that time, my wife had homeschooled our dau...
Read more

The Problem of Diffuse Costs and Concentrated Benefits

Do you ever find yourself observing a seemingly illogical government program , spending decision, or other strange practice and ask “how is it that no one has fixed that?” If you are like me, you encounter this phenomenon regularly. This often takes the form of a curious headline (Save Federal Funding for the Cowboy Poets!) that most people see and can’t believe is real. I would like to suggest that this phenomenon often results from the problem of diffuse costs and concentrated benefits. To understand this concept, consider a hypothetical law that assessed a $1 tax on everyone in the United States with the proceeds to be given to one individual for unrestricted use as he sees fit. The people harmed by such a law—the individual taxpayers—will not be very motivated to spend the time and effort to convince Congress to change the law. They might resent the dollar taken from them for a silly cause they don’t support, but the lost dollar isn’t worth the trouble of doing something about i...
Read more