[ad_1]
Months before the economy finally opened two weeks ago, scientists were advising the government on the damage of the shutdown, the collateral damage that was being done to health, and how irrational regulations could backfire.
The ministerial advisory committee (MAC), a group of world-class scientists, has provided the government with advice on how to handle the Covid-19 epidemic regarding various issues, including the number of people who can safely travel in a taxi. , when to open schools and what treatment options are. Thanks to requests from the news outlet News24, the MAC’s recommendations have been made public.
Mkhize had previously refused to release them, despite the scientists’ wish that it be done. However, he has admitted that the government did not always follow the MAC’s advice, as it also considered points of view from other sectors.
But News 24 sent the government a request for Promotion of Access to Information, giving it 60 days in total to publish the warnings, which it did not do. Earlier this month, News24 filed an appeal.
On Thursday, when Mkhize’s health department released the documents, it argued, rather defensively, that it had followed almost all the advice.
“There are few caveats (less than 5%) that the department did not fully implement,” said the department’s press release.
But a quick read of some of the 45 notices reveals that the government was painstakingly slow at best to listen to its experts, even as the economy was deteriorating sharply. The result: roughly 3 million jobs lost, widespread hunger, and huge fiscal deficits.
The government’s lethargy in following doctors’ advice on lockdown restrictions is made even worse when you consider that so little of the promised R500 billion economic stimulus package has been delivered. For example, a key part of the stimulus is a 200 billion rand loan guarantee scheme. But even though it was designed to help some 700,000 companies, as of early August these loans had only been granted to 10,000 companies. And the Temporary Employment Relief Plan, intended to make up for any shortfall in wages due to Covid-19, was suspended for fear of fraud.
When it comes to science, the ads reveal:
- Already on May 26, the country’s leading scientists advocated for the opening of all schools, nurseries and nurseries. They said, “Most children have no or mild symptoms and … are at low risk of serious illness or death,” while schools provide the benefits of education and, in many cases, a meal. They said there needed to be reasonable protocols to protect children, teachers and adult staff. However, just three months later, on August 24, the schools were reopened.
- Cyclical crashes, the ones that start and stop, are not worth the damage they cause. Businesses still fear that further restrictions may be imposed. They may be encouraged by the fact that the scientists advised the government: “The modest benefit of cyclical lockdowns does not appear to justify the enormous social and economic costs that would be incurred.”
- On May 19, scientists told the government how much damage the single focus was causing in a lockdown to counter Covid-19 in the treatment of other diseases. The warnings recounted how tests for tuberculosis (TB), South Africa’s leading cause of death, had been cut in half in seven weeks. They read: “The disruption of TB services represents just one example of the unintended consequences of an unmeasured approach, such as a total lockdown, to mitigate the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic.”
- Also on May 19, scientists urged the government to act to save lives and livelihoods at the same time, detailing the economic damage caused by the shutdown.
- The warnings said that taxis should not exceed 70% capacity, even as the government allowed taxis to reach 100% capacity when they came under pressure from the industry.
- On July 21, an advisory said that SA had “significantly benefited” from going into lockdown, but despite this, there was widespread community transmission of the virus. He said South Africa had one of the highest rates of infections per million people compared to other countries that had embarked on such a severe lockdown early on. This suggests that the severe SA crash had had a low impact.
- That same ad said that even during the level 5 lockdown, there was already an increase in incremental infections due to the difficulty of “containing the epidemic in crowded low-income spaces.” The blockade, while impoverishing the people, did not stop the spread in the poorest areas.
- By July 21, scientists reported that the lockdown had no added benefit “as there was such widespread transmission” of Covid-19. He said: “There is no evidence that an attempt to implement a major blockade at this level of community transmission is effective. It has not been tried anywhere in the world and there is no evidence that it will be successful. ” However, despite that advice, it took the government nearly four weeks to lift the restrictions. It went on to stage 2 on August 17.
Excerpts from the notices cited above show that while Mkhize is correct that the government listened to the advice often, it did not do so quickly, even as the economic damage increased.
