However, it has been noted that the deceased patient had no contact with domestic birds. The investigation is ongoing, with Mexican authorities working to identify the source of infection, and the WHO assessing the potential danger of the new virus.
Many people, upon reading this news, are wondering: will we now face strict lockdowns again due to this avian flu? Since the winter and spring of 2020, news about someone contracting a new type of respiratory illness or flu is perceived very differently. The prospect of quarantines and lockdowns is often more frightening than the disease itself.
It’s possible to ignore the global debate on whether the strict quarantine of winter-spring 2020 was justified. One might also dismiss questions about whether the WHO could have reacted more professionally to situations like the one on the cruise ship “Diamond Princess,” from which the coronavirus began spreading to many countries. Back then, reports surfaced about inadequate separation of the sick from the healthy on the ship, and that passengers without clinical symptoms were sent home without quarantine, among other issues — all of which had serious consequences. One might avoid discussing why the WHO did not take the lead in combating “vaccine nationalism.” It’s possible to find a plausible explanation for why many supposedly prosperous and developed countries lacked the healthcare resilience needed for a pandemic, and why the WHO did not rush to issue recommendations for pandemic preparedness before the coronavirus. One might even disregard the leaked statistics showing that in Sweden, where strict quarantine was not implemented, excess mortality during the pandemic was lower than in neighboring countries with quarantines, or question the accuracy of these figures. Finally, one could argue that COVID-19 turned out to be “the perfect virus for a pandemic,” causing rapid collapses of public healthcare systems, making quarantines unavoidable, and that Sweden’s experience, with its highly developed healthcare, low population density, small family units, and a cultural habit of maintaining social distance even without COVID-19, is not applicable elsewhere.
However, the strict quarantine of 2020 showed that quarantine is not just about “some minor inconveniences” that can be tolerated. It is a very painful measure that should not be taken “just in case.”
There is a saying: COVID-19 affected everyone, but for some, it was like being hit by a tank, while for others, it was like a child’s bicycle. Perhaps my family belongs to the category for whom the coronavirus was like a bicycle. In our immediate circle, no one fell seriously ill with COVID-19. The media industry, where I work, was not frozen by quarantine measures. The transition to remote work was relatively painless. Pensions and salaries were paid on time. Home delivery of anything from groceries and restaurant meals to books and craft supplies worked smoothly. We didn’t have to wait a week “on standby” to receive supermarket goods. And in Azerbaijan, there were no absurd requirements like not leaving home more than 100 meters or shopping only at the nearest supermarket, regardless of the selection. But even a child’s bicycle leaves very painful consequences: nearly two months indoors, without socializing, unable even to take a walk in the park — parks and boulevards were closed — unable to make vacation plans, and uncertain about how long we would be “locked down” and what else the WHO might demand to close tomorrow. One might dismiss these issues, thinking that during a pandemic, we can live without “entertainment.” Undoubtedly. But large shopping centers, tourism, the restaurant business, excursions, and other “entertainments” also mean jobs. This is a huge sector of small businesses that suddenly found themselves “without oxygen.” The same goes for the fitness industry, spas, hairdressers, numerous beauty salons… One might snark that in a pandemic, giving up fake nails is necessary, but what about the specialists who cannot give up the need to earn money for their services? Yes, in Azerbaijan, the state provided financial support to those hit hard by the quarantine, but financial aid is not the same as a well-established business.
These measures themselves do not kill, but prolonged stress can. This can be confirmed by any doctor.
The question of how much excess mortality is due to the stress of quarantine is rarely voiced. Quarantine is considered a severe but necessary measure without which mortality from COVID-19 would have been much higher.
Yet, perhaps this uncomfortable question should be asked. At least to ensure that quarantine is not imposed “just in case” at the slightest sign of trouble. And to remember that before COVID-19, the WHO raised alarms without sufficient grounds. At the turn of the 2000s and 2010s, we were already scared by avian flu. It was noted that the infamous Spanish flu epidemic was preceded by an avian flu wave. Despite no confirmed cases of human-to-human transmission, there was significant fear-mongering about avian flu. Health authorities measured tourists’ temperatures, stockpiled vaccines, and sanitation services destroyed domestic birds. Thankfully, no epidemic ensued.
A more significant scandal erupted over swine flu. The PACE even conducted an investigation. The WHO declared a swine flu epidemic without sufficient grounds, recommended countries stockpile vaccines and conduct vaccinations, but the epidemic never started. The virus faded. Independent experts found that the WHO’s decision to declare an epidemic and recommend vaccines was pushed by pharmaceutical giants. While these vaccines were safe, unnecessary spending on them meant less funding for other critical healthcare areas, which could be deadly.
The scariest part is the lack of certainty that the WHO will not declare emergencies without proper grounds again.
N. Sheikhzade
Translated from minval.az
