Politicsweb's coronavirus denialism

I wrote here of South African media's response to the coronavirus pandemic. Here I state Politicsweb is pushing a dangerous denialism of the pandemic.

Politicsweb, like other South African media, ignored the coronavirus pandemic until the last minute. While the world shuts down and is in a state of war with an unseen enemy, which doesn’t care about political ideology, it’s predictably using the virus to promote its far-right agenda and pushing a dangerous denialism of the coronavirus. (Disclosure: PW published my unsolicited articles until 2018.)

Editor James Myburgh (PhD political science, Oxon) seldom writes articles or editorials but in the past two weeks wrote two (here and here) questioning aspects of the world’s and South Africa’s strategy to fight the virus especially lockdowns. PW columnists, regulars and occasionals – Jeremy Gordin, Andrew Donaldson, John Kane-Berman, IRR CEO Frans Cronje and far-right denialist, conspiracy theorist and eccentric Ivo Vegter – too are sceptical. But surprisingly two weeks ago, pot-stirrer columnist David Bullard wrote the only sober and sensible one about the pandemic asking for common sense and dropping politicking.

Last year Helen Zille said he's one of the only two worthwhile political analysts in the country. This is not unusual in that he returns the favour and both are associated with the right-wing “think-tank” IRR. 

Beyond his expertise he wrote analyses – BizNews’ editor Alex Hogg[1], who reposted his coronavirus articles (here and here), and Gordin fulsomely describe his analytical abilities as almost supernatural, and that includes outside his speciality in esoteric (for lay people) epidemiology – that questioned the epidemiology of the virus and models used to help predict its spread in South Africa.

The questions he raises are fair including for lay people, but the problem is he’s questioning the science of Covid-19 which he cannot understand – not even researchers, health authorities and governments do yet – and draws premature conclusions, not based on research but media articles, about an evolving matter – the mechanism of the virus and how it's transmitted globally and within communities. He discusses facts not yet in evidence or available and changes known facts suit his agenda.

But even before he posted the articles, his inexpert opinions were already discredited. The first advocated herd immunity. Harvard epidemiologist William Hanage wrote Boris Johnson’s strategy, which he and British government later abandoned, was “satire”. To be effective, millions in a population must be infected and recover – there’s no vaccine – which given Covid-19’s preliminary infections rate (R0) is 2 to 3 and fatality is 3 to 4% and duration from onset of symptoms to death of 18 days is madness.

Imperial College’s projections of 500 000 deaths in the UK and 1.2 million in US “shocked” Johnson and Donald Trump that the UK at least immediately changed their careless, flip-flopping and negligent handling of the epidemic. But despite that shock Trump and US continues to struggle from his and Republican denialism and confusion about the best course. He continues to dismiss and contradict expert medical advice and instead relies on media, Fox News in particular, and friends' and associates' advice.

In Myburgh’s second article he said (he posed it as a suggestion but like his herd immunity piece was adamant) models for SA based on US and UK data, which are based on China’s and Italy data, is “wrong”. Instead, Australia’s and New Zealand’s are relevant because their numbers are similar to South Africa’s, at least not in the tens of thousands like the others.

His questions are acceptable in the context of discussion and trying to understand the situation. But his and PW’s agenda, with outdated facts and those changing daily to boot, is upfront which appears in his conclusions: to discredit the lockdown in South Africa. This is despite authorities asking media and public to be responsible and taking firm action against those who spread fake news. 

He and the PW cohort – Gordin, Cronje et al who also lack expertise – state the lockdown is unnecessary and harming the economy but they don’t offer alternatives to a strategy that is proven to help stop the spread and is used by governments around the world including denialist right and far-right like US, Brazil and Hungary.

Half the world’s population is in full or partial lockdown, the latter stringent social (physical) distancing and isolation. Where it’s not in place like South Korea and Taiwan, they controlled the epidemic from its outbreak by testing, tracing and quarantining. Germany, Netherlands and Sweden don’t have lockdowns but strict social distancing, and except for Sweden which is not at their level, are testing and tracing. This is how they apparently kept their numbers low but scientists are not sure either. Japan doesn’t have a lockdown, but like Sweden, their lack of strategy has been criticised as reckless and playing Russian roulette.

He says SA should use the Australia and New Zealand epidemiological models. Neither country initially had lockdowns but they do now. Both had social distancing but people ignored that. Bondi Beach was packed a couple of weeks ago and is now a “coronavirus hotspot”. The government is cautiously optimistic the lockdown is having an effect and hopefully the curve is flattening. However, it has warned against complacency and relaxing social distancing rules to early.

New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern criticised the “idiots” who ignored the stringent lockdown, which lasts four weeks. She said there were indications it was slowing infections. They have 1 000 cases and Australia 5 687 and 34 deaths. 

So his preferred countries' measures are as, if not more stringent that South Africa's which is a rebuttal of his ad hoc, poorly thought out argument.

Remarkable for Myburgh, the purported excellent analyst on any subject, he forgets or ignores that the virus' pathology and transmission – how, when, where – is poorly understood and different in each country; 8 strains have been identified. And Australia’s and New Zealand’s social and health circumstances are vastly different to South Africa’s.

Epidemiological models are tools to help understand and manage an epidemic. Scientists acknowledge assumptions may not be accurate and they don’t understand the virus. These tools don’t replace realistic, best practice measures, though. (See Coronavirus: Simple statistical predictions for South Africa.)

 The University of East Anglia developed a model using China and Italy data “that estimates the potential number of deaths in other countries, including South Africa. Professor Peter Lloyd-Sherlock warns the tool’s results should be treated with caution. They made assumptions based on the very imperfect knowledge we have of the coronavirus pandemic. Scientists are still unsure of how fast the virus spreads and what percentage of infected people it kills” (Groundup).

Government and health authorities using the worst case – US, China and Italy – are being conservative (in this sense, worst case), not because they want it to happen and want the economy to collapse, which is the subtext of Myburgh, IRR, et al, but because the models give them a “heads up” as University of Witwatersrand Prof. Francois Venter said (ibid).

Charitably, South Africa is doing the right things now but it's already two weeks too late. On March 19, a week before it did, I felt the lockdown ought to have been imposed when then there were 570 cases; a week later there were 1500 (see How SA bungled the epidemic). Only now is it rolling out mass testing, tracing and isolation. Only once tests are performed shall there be a better idea of the spread and rate of infection. This information doesn't exist at the moment so any model is speculative.

But Myburgh, who read about the virus in the media along with the rest of us, and only recently judging by PW's coverage (see part 1 for the media's response to the pandemic), claims to have it covered.

On Thursday health minister Zweli Mkhize worried it's the “calm before the storm”. Like his Australian counterpart, he said although the figure of 1 462 is low there's no time for complacency. They are expecting a deluge of cases.

What's worrying everyone is “South Africans are generally in poorer health than Italian and Chinese [and US, UK, Australian, New Zealand] populations. It is unknown if higher rates of HIV, TB, diabetes, hypertension and poorer nutritional status of many people will result in a higher death rate. And while intensive care units in facilities like Groote Schuur Hospital are first-class, most cities and towns in South Africa cannot offer the kind of care that is being offered in Italy, nor even China probably” (Groundup).

Despite their first-class facilities and healthcare, US, Italy, Spain, UK and others are struggling to cope – New York is like a war zone. If the virus takes hold in SA it will be catastrophic especially in overcrowded and poor townships and informal settlements.

This Myburgh doesn't mention, another pointed omission. He and his IRR co-travellers in their sunshine bubbles think a full lockdown unwise, that we can go about our business and somehow – they don't say – be immune (discredited “herd immunity”?) and that government is deliberately harming the economy, and sotto voce, have it in for the free market and them – classical liberals.

They're advocating sacrificing lives for the economy which Texas' lieutenant governor recently said. (Republican governors took their lead from denialist Trump and delayed lockdowns. Georgia's said only two or three days ago did they learn about asymptomatic infections!)

They, a tiny 5% minority in SA, Trump and US Republicans and Brazil's Jair Bolsonaro, know something the world's population don't. If the worst happens they're insulated (in their bubbles) from blame because they're not government who must make decisions. And in the best case scenario of low infections and deaths, as they're already doing about everything under the sun, will self-righteously accuse their bogeyman ANC government and experts, mainstream media and others that “we told you so - why did you risk the economy for nothing; it's a Chinese issue”.

It's win-win because they have little to nothing at stake, and they don't care what others, except their followers, think.

Footnotes

[1.] Myburgh started at BizNews with Alex Hogg. BN articles are promoted on PW's site. BN is odd, more tabloid than serious business media even by South Africa's low standards. It's a juvenile, bi-polar, ADHD version of PW on the right and Daily Maverick on the left, which at least tries to be serious, if self-righteously. It has a folksy feel. Hogg is more host than editor with frequent homilies, which are neither editorials nor op-eds, and unusual mini-article introductions to articles which tells readers what it thinks. Headlines tell readers articles are a “MUST READ!” as if others can be disregarded. Unlike other editors he and his staff insert themselves into what they're publishing. There's nothing like it in SA except to an extent Iqbal Surve's Independent Media.

At times BN publishes questionable, alt-fact and even fake news articles (it must be said, typical of SA media) like one by this regular of a conspiracy to prevent anti-malarial drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine been used to treat Covid-19. It was quickly archived after it was reported the following day the drugs are dangerous and caused the death of an Arizona man. Trump is promoting them. They have anecdotal but no proven benefits.

Or this one by a Hogg favourite, an unashamed self-promoter, who likes giving the impression he has information others don't and more influential than he is, spuriously comparing Covid-19 deaths to that from car accidents, stroke, etc (Late last year BN posted an article breathlessly stating he claimed to have inside information there would be a raft of corruption prosecutions by December. There were none.) Like Myburgh and Stephens, he opined beyond his competence.

Update

The story is changing every day. Since this post was published Boris Johnson was admitted to hospital after a persistent infection and is in intensive care. Scotland's chief medical officer resigned after she and her family broke lockdown and drove to the family's beach house. New Zealand's health minister was demoted after he broke lockdown after visiting the beach.

See Coronavirus: 100 days that changed the world.