Dear Dave Smith (Wherever You Are)

I am writing to urge you to speak out against the ongoing destructive impacts of lockdowns. At the outset of this year, when no one knew anything about Covid-19, there was wisdom in rolling out various preemptive strategies. We initially complied with these restrictions, trusting that our government had the best interests of its citizens in mind. Many months later, now that we know this virus is non-fatal to over 99% of the population, and as many of the worst-cast scenarios initially predicted by experts have proved abortive, we have yet to receive a cost analysis from either government or medical experts demonstrating how the “cure” of lockdown measures will be less destructive than Covid itself. 

This is unacceptable.

The reason lockdowns have historically been reserved for the direst of plagues (or for especially ambitious dictatorships) is that they are devastating to human populations. That our government has settled on them as our default go-to is as devastating as it is short-sighted. Dr. Ari Joffe, a specialist in pediatric infectious diseases at the Stollery Children’s Hospital in Edmonton and a Clinical Professor in the Department of Pediatrics at University of Alberta, who initially supported lockdowns, now has this to say about them:

In the cost-benefit analysis I consider the benefits of lockdowns in preventing deaths from COVID-19, and the costs of lockdowns in terms of the effects of the recession, loneliness, and unemployment on population wellbeing and mortality. I did not consider all of the other so-called ‘collateral damage’ of lockdowns mentioned above. It turned out that the costs of lockdowns are at least 10 times higher than the benefits.

This is not some constipated individual with an axe to grind—I urge you to read the entire paper here. Attempting to assuage the real damage to vulnerable people with statements like “If we all just stayed home, we’d be safe” is objectively untrue and cold comfort to people who have lost their jobs, are isolated from family and other social supports, or are suffering with mental illness. 

Where I work there is an individual who, several months ago, was employed full-time as a machinist making a very decent living. When they were forced to close several months ago (again, due directly to Covid-related restrictions), my coworker was laid off and is now working for minimum wage. Here is a skilled worker, with a family to support, now hovering near the poverty line. This story could be repeated dozens of times over. Real people—not the faceless masses of media polls—are suffering not from a virus, but from the myriad of virus-propelled restrictions. Responding to such crises with tired maxims like “People’s lives are more important than the economy” demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of the link between vocation and well-being. Speaking as one with experience in such matters, when you lack the means to provide for your family, morale plummets incredibly fast.  

I am writing to you because your duty is to advocate for the citizens you represent. This, not saving face by towing the party line, is what we elected you to do. You cannot pass off this responsibility to someone else. You mentioned last week that you wanted to hear feedback on how we can move forward. Well here is you feedback: there will be no moving forward if we don’t end restrictions now. Though you may have the means to endure another prolonged lockdown, many of us do not.

Thank you for you time,

Benjamin Inglis