In-House Counsel

The Proposed COVID-19 'Pandemic Amnesty'

Our knowledge of COVID-19 increased over time, and people in good faith changed their opinions as the scientific evidence changed.

By  
on

Hand in blue medical gloves holding a syringe and vaccine vial with Covid 19 Vaccine Booster text, for Coronavirus booster shot.Last week, Emily Oster wrote an article at The Atlantic proposing that we declare “A Pandemic Amnesty.”  Her idea was that some folks had proposed silly things early in the COVID-19 pandemic, when information was short. Rather than blame each other for mistakes, we should declare an amnesty and stop assigning blame.

Oster’s concept is unrealistic, of course; it will never happen. But Oster is making the legitimate point that our knowledge of COVID-19 increased over time, and people in good faith changed their opinions as the scientific evidence changed.

What surprised me was not Oster’s proposal, but the strident reaction from the right. Instapundit, for example, was once a jovial and articulate voice from the right but, with the rise of Donald Trump, has become increasingly shrill and insulting. Instapundit shouted “NO” to Oster’s proposal, linking to articles castigating the left for mistakes that liberals had made during the pandemic.

How short is the memory of those on the right.

Liberals did, in fact, make mistakes during the pandemic. Closing down beaches and other outdoor spaces early in the pandemic was silly and counterproductive.  Schools were probably closed for too long. Liberals made mistakes.

But conservatives conveniently overlook the many hare-brained ideas sponsored by those on the right.

Remember hydroxychloroquine? Conservatives proposed it for everyone with COVID-19; some suggested taking it preventatively. In fact, the drug may cause heart-rhythm problems and should be administered only under a physician’s close supervision.

Sponsored

How about ivermectin? Many on the right saw it as a miracle cure; in fact, it was terribly dangerous.

How about masking? Those on the right saw this as a terrible infringement on liberty, with no beneficial effects. Remember “face diapers”? That was certainly an invitation to intelligent debate.

People drive on the right side of the road, even though they might prefer to drive on the left, and people stop at red lights, rather than race through them, because we accept some minor inconveniences  as the price we pay for living in a civilized society. Everyone could have accepted a masking suggestion — or requirement — for people on public transportation or in crowded indoor spaces as another minor inconvenience that could save lives. Instead, the right rebelled against this terrible infringement on the right to liberty.

And, of course, vaccines. The COVID-19 vaccines save lives. Period.

Every leader in the country, and every thoughtful person on social media, should have encouraged folks to get vaccinated and thus save lives.

Sponsored

But nutcases on the right opposed vaccines, because pharmaceutical companies were causing computer chips to be injected along with the vaccines as part of a vast government conspiracy, or various other inanities.

My goodness.

For those on the right to have forgotten so quickly the dangerous — or deadly — misinformation they spread during the pandemic is striking.

I’m not passing judgment on which side made bigger, or more costly, mistakes during the COVID-19 crisis. But there’s certainly plenty of blame to assign to both sides.

Mark Herrmann spent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and is now deputy general counsel at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law and Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy (affiliate links). You can reach him by email at inhouse@abovethelaw.com.

Topics

, ,