The restrictive measures applied in the red zone hurt. These last resort choices give results to limit contact and therefore curb contagion. But the price to pay is high.
First of all, there is a price to pay for businesses, restaurants for example, which are forced to close their doors. Some wonder if they will ever be able to reopen. Their frustration is heightened by the fact that they had taken precautions, at their own expense, to operate in accordance with sanitary rules.
Citizens also pay a price. Humans are social by nature. Being deprived of all the places to meet can become a source of anguish and frustration. In addition, some lose their jobs and others are deprived of their favorite activities, sports for example.
No wonder thinkers from all sectors are looking to develop alternatives to containment. How to manage a pandemic without so abruptly stopping the course of normal activities?
There are voices in the business world to seek new options. The economic cost of containment will be too high.
American scientists signed the Barrington Declaration. They suggest a management of the pandemic based on the management by each individual of his own risk. In other words, we would let the virus circulate. If you feel in danger, stay home! The others will continue to live as normally as possible.
This statement makes a lot of noise. It has been generating interest among those who have been looking for an alternative view for months. Far from offering a comprehensive policy, this little one-page statement sets out fine principles without giving operational details. For example, where would the staff who care for vulnerable people live if the virus is circulating blithely? In aquariums?
Elucubate vs govern
Basically, this alternative vision has above all the merit of being intellectually interesting. It fuels the discussion. Perhaps we can get closer in the months to come with instant tests that would better detect the disease and medical treatment that would cure it.
For now, the alternative vision is simply fueling the discussions: we talk. But for those who govern, things cannot be limited to chatter. He who governs bears responsibility for the consequences on his shoulders.
If hospitals are overflowing, if exhausted health workers flee facilities, if the number of deaths increases due to the recklessness of the government, a culprit will be identified. François Legault hates confinement in all its forms. But he was pushed to resort to it anyway.
For the commentators, it is infinitely tempting to make mileage on an alternative vision and to make dream of the abandonment of the restrictive measures. Let me tell you one thing: if they were sitting in the Prime Minister’s chair, they too would apply the precautionary principle.
This is called the weight of responsibility.