[ad_1]
Dr. Vasile Astărăstoae, former president of the Romanian College of Physicians and former rector of the Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy at the ini, criticizes the drastic measures taken in the coronavirus pandemic. Based on the definition given to health by the World Health Organization, the doctor states that to prevent the spread of a virus that only gives 2% of critical cases, the authorities have sacrificed other aspects of the health of the people.
Explanation medic Vasile Astărăstoae:
At the end of the fifth decade of the 20th century, the WHO (yes, even the WHO!) Defined health as “a state of total physical, mental and social well-being, and not just the absence of disease or illness.” This definition is still valid today. In other words, health is the result of the optimal adaptation of the organism (of the individual) to its daily life environment. Assessment of “health” status is not equal to the absence of disease. In this approach, health is conditioned by individual factors (genetic dowry, behavior, sanogenic behavior), exogenous (environment, family, micro-collective), social, professional, spiritual-religious. Any medical student knows these things.
At the same time, a new specialty was consolidated: public health. The WHO claims that public health is “the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promoting health through the organized efforts of society” (they did not include “life without death” in the definition, but it is not too late). In other words, public health aims to study the state of health of the population (correlated with the factors that influence it) to reduce discomfort, illness, incapacity for work (disability and disability), premature death of the population . This implies the organized effort of the entire community to achieve laws, preventive programs, health, social and educational institutions and services (with the participation of the entire population). In other words, develop solidarity and social cohesion. From these desideratums, public health evolved / became into tyrannical behavior, trying to theorize a medical dictatorship due to the tendency to limit the rights of the individual in favor of the rights of the community. Public health regulations deprive the individual of a series of rights: the right to free movement, the right to autonomy, the right to respect for privacy, the right to freedom (quarantine, compulsory hospitalization). Public health achieves all the fundamental ethical principles: autonomy (compulsory versus voluntary), duty to do good (is it good for the patient or the community?), Not to harm (the measures produce health or reduce the health gradient).
Covid-19 functioned as a decisive document, highlighting the slide in public health with negative consequences not yet evaluated on the health of the population. The specialists turned into “experts” did not see the forest because of the trees. At first such an attitude was justified. I didn’t know anything about the Covid-19 epidemic / pandemic. Morbidity, prevalence, contagion, severity, etc. they did not know each other. Only the structure of the SARS Cov-2 virus was known. Even now, more than 5 months after the first case reported by China, we do not know much about the actual prevalence, morbidity and mortality, pathophysiology, and pathology, and treatment is performed according to the symptoms of the disease. But we know two things: the severity of Covid-19 is much less than what was estimated / promoted and we also know that given the small percentage of infected / immunized population, at least 2-3 waves of Sars Cov-2 await us within 2 years . Statistical data confirms these claims. As of May 3, 2020, the situation was as follows: coronavirus cases – 3484631, closed cases – 1369081, mild cases – 2,064,689 (98%), severe or critical cases – 50,861 (2%), 244,791 deaths.
For 2% of serious or critical cases, has economic, social, cultural and religious life been blocked? For 2% of severe or critical cases, was there globalized panic and collective psychosis? Is social isolation required for 2% of serious or critical cases? Were civil rights limited to 2% of serious or critical cases? For 2% of serious or critical cases, are they fined indiscriminately and are criminal cases filed? The answer is yes. Because this is what the “experts” (officials) in public health, in emergency situations or amateur politicians (in the field) recommended and imposed. In addition, they recommend extending these measures (some absurd and without a scientific basis) throughout the existence of the virus in nature. That is (exaggerate) to infinity. Everyone must understand that Sars Cov.-2 will be part of the human environment and is already a new cause of mortality. Just like the flu. Fortunately, it currently represents only 6.6% of overall mortality. For this reason, measurements must be proportional to the severity of the hazard.
It is necessary to study the impact of the measures on the health status of the population: the higher the frequency of mental disorders related to social isolation, the worsening of diseases that did not benefit from hospital care (while the beds were empty), As the mortality generated by other diseases increases, the evaluation of the consequences of unemployment (technical or not) and the economic recession on the well-being of the individual, the impact on the quality of education. Because we say it like this: health is “a state of total physical, mental and social well-being, and not just the lack of disease or weakness”.
Instead of conclusions, an ancient aphorism attributed to Seneca “Errare umanum est, perseverare autem diabolicum”. Especially for experts and decision makers.
P.S1. There is a fundamentalist sect: the “witnesses to the greedy apocalypse” who try to convince us that the tough measures were what protected us. He argues with the “apocalypse” in Western Europe and the United States. Forget to specify that there is a genetic difference (individual and population) between countries. Forget about saying that the variant circulating in Eastern Europe is less pathogenic. In this context, Romania’s results are not so good. In Eastern Europe, the measures ranged from very lax (Belarus, Czech Republic, Slovakia) to very severe (Romania, Slovenia). Results expressed in deaths (per million inhabitants) until May 3, 2020: Slovenia – 45, Romania – 40, Hungary – 35, Moldova – 31, Czech Republic – 22, Serbia – 22, Poland – 18, Belarus – 10, Bulgaria – 10, Russia – 8, Ukraine – 6, Slovakia – 4.
P.S.2 An expert definition: a person who knows more and more about less and less so that in the end he knows everything about nothing. “
[ad_2]
