"Suffer the little children (to go to school)”: how the same evidence base drove diametrically opposite views of what was best to do for children and their health/education in the 2020-2023 COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden and the UK
David Goldsmith
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v11i11.4652
2023-01-01
Medical Research Archives
Abstract:The Covid-19 pandemic (2020-23) was a global outbreak of a novel coronavirus (nCoV), an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS- CoV-2) virus. The pandemic disease is usually described as COVID-19. 1 The first cases of nCoV were first detected in China in December 2019, with the virus spreading rapidly over months to most other countries across the world. This led WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020, and to characterise the outbreak as a pandemic on 11 March 2020. 2 In May 2023, more than three years into the pandemic, the WHO Emergency Committee on COVID-19 recommended to the Director-General that given the disease was by now well- established and ongoing, it no longer fitted the definition of a PHEIC. This did not mean that the pandemic itself was declared over, but the global emergency it had caused was. Debate and speculation about the causation pathway for the entry of this nCoV pathogen into humans in 2019, though intense and contested, are not germane to the present discussion. What is germane is the huge death toll, and, just as important, the long-term impacts on society and health it has left in its wake. For a more detailed review see 3 . As a result of the pandemic infections, and also of the many different mitigation strategies employed to “protect” people from the ravages of infection, there were diverse consequences for all affected populations: from deaths, hospitalisations, chronic illness, the economy, employment, education, services, work habits, transport systems across to acute severe strain imposed on healthcare systems faced simultaneously with “business as usual” healthcare demands (often suppressed with later adverse consequences) and by a poorly understood and barely characterised viral infection ‘tsunami’ requiring both “surge” facilities and advanced ITU capabilities which were often unavailable, or inadequate to the tasks at hand. 4 Various mitigations were put in place in different parts of the world, and these typically involved restrictions (sometimes voluntary, sometimes legally enforced) being placed on freedom of movement, behaviour (mask wearing, hand washing), education, employment, social activities and travel 5-8 . Later, specific pharmaceutical interventions 9 and of course vaccination 10 were brought to bear.