By Kurt Marasco
April 28, 2020
Are You Afraid of the Dark?
Lately, I’ve been wondering, “Are the politicians representing Fernandina Beach and Nassau County afraid of the dark? Are we all afraid of the dark?” What is it about darkness that people fear? The answer is clear that fear emanates from uncertainty and lack of control that exists under the umbrella of darkness. Is this fear rational? It could be to a small extent; maybe you are in a dangerous area and are afraid that you might not see someone who might mug you. Largely, however, such fear is clearly irrational. We develop fear over what we believe could happen despite an extremely low possibility of anything bad occurring. Even the risk of being mugged can be mitigated by carefully choosing the safest path to your destination.
Yes, just like a potential nighttime mugger, Covid-19 brings real risks that we must address. But the response to the Covid-19 virus has created a mass “Afraid of the Dark” psychosis that has hurt more people than the virus ever will.
Everything we do in life involves risk. We choose to drive in a car, cross a busy street, swim in the ocean, etc. All of these behaviors could lead to injury or death, but we partake every day without worrying that we’ll be killed. We invest in the stock market to grow our financial resources despite that the stock market sometimes has substantial downturns. Normally we understand that some risk is acceptable to live a functional and happy life. Yet, in the case of Covid-19, we somehow believe that it will kill everything in its path. Our minds have been twisted by the fear based media to believe this is true. Its NOT!
Most politicians have relied on the projections provided by the University of Washington. Retrospectively, none of those projections have been proven accurate. In fact real events have demonstrated these projections to be very far from reality. Even the worst hit places in NY will never need the projected number of required ventilators that these studies have asserted and politicians demanded. More recent antibody tests in Southern California indicate that far more people have had the virus than postulated and have been asymptomatic; these individuals LIVED and didn’t even know they were infected.
The University of Washington’s response was to call the testing inaccurate despite three independent studies showing the same result. This demonstrates the arrogance that abounds in our society as seemingly nobody can admit that their work was wrong. Reputation and pride trumps public health and the economic welfare of our nation.
The danger posed by Covid-19 should not be ignored. We need to take steps to help those at greatest risk. It is actually those at most risk, such as the elderly in nursing homes, that we have failed to protect. Instead of focusing resources to reduce their risk, our largest actions have been targeted at the entire population, many of whom are at very low risk. We’ve totally ignored the basic principle of risk management, which is to address and mitigate the greatest risk.
All risk can only be eliminated by stopping every particle in the universe from moving. The only things that we’ve stopped from moving are the economy, our relationships, and our ability to enjoy all that surrounds us.
If you are not afraid of the dark, please let your voice be heard!
Excellent!
Good to see some balance to the Afraid of the Dark crowd.
Thank you so much for expressing so precisely and eloquently common sense in this “pandemic.”
Regarding your comment: “Most politicians have relied on the projections provided by the University of Washington. Retrospectively, none of those projections have been proven accurate.” Governor Cuomo (NY) addressed this discrepancy. He explained the projections were not wrong. The numbers are lower because actions (like stay at home orders) were enacted. These interventions halted the more rapid progression and higher infection rates of the disease.
Not the case in the studies that I referenced. Stay-at-home orders did not prevent the individuals in the study from getting covid-19. In fact many of these people had covid-19, but we’re asymptomatic. Additionally, the theory is that the virus passed through the studied areas before any stay-at-home orders went into effect and potentially prior to our knowledge of the virus.
Stay-at-home orders can potentially reduce the transfer of disease. Looking at our own community, there is no evidence to indicate that these orders had any impact. They may have, but to say either way is speculation. Comparing our population to New York City completely ignores the dramatically different demographics that exists here.
I am 74 years old and have been afraid of dark places since I was young.
Was in Vietnam in 68 and was deathly afraid. Even now, don’t like going in dark areas. We keep nightlights on in our house also.
You hit the nail on the head, so to speak. We can’t be afraid to live our lives because if we are, we are not free.
What I might say to Kurt is that New York agreed with him.
Yes, New York clearly failed to focus its remediation efforts on those at greatest risk.
Just saw another horrible story of a large number of deaths in a Holyoke, MA long term care facility. Again, we failed to protect those at greatest risk because the focus was diluted by minimally impactful efforts elsewhere.
Listen to Open Up Society Noew, by Dr. Dan Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi
Lots of good thoughts in that article.
Freedom is not free; as we tell our teenagers when they get their drivers licenses, the more freedom you have, the more responsibility comes with it. I am big on freedom, but I think our elected officials have done a great job, so far, in enacting measures to protect people. My complaint is that some officials waited too long, and now some officials are stopping those measures too early. I am seeing too many people not wearing masks in stores and not practicing 6-ft. social distancing. Nobody has the right to give me a deadly virus. Look at all the virus infection hotspots that have occurred after people gathered for weddings, funerals, or elections (such as in Wisconsin). It is just too early to give up our protections. Is it freedom that some people want, or do they just have short attention spans?
“now some officials are stopping those measures too early”
What determines the right time? What are your criterion?