Why the Italian COVID-19 deaths are so high?

What happened in Italy is truly tragic but at the same time, in some cases, nothing short of a Charlie Chaplin comedy.  Watch this in your head.  Charlie develops signs of COVID-19: dry cough and shortness of breath.  He goes to the local hospital where he is promptly admitted.  He is attended by several doctors and other caregivers.  The same workers are also looking after other seriously ill patients in the hospital—these workers become a conduit of COVID-19 from Charlie to the other patients. Three days later, Charlie walks back home safe and sound while six hospital patients are already dead, and the staff is scrambling to put ventilators on others.

COVID-19 related thoughts

A lockdown is not a good strategy to contain the pandemic.  Sooner or later, all of us have to get exposed to the virus.  Look at the data.  The virus has been especially bad for older people and for those who were already sick.  We need to isolate those vulnerable people, and NOT to put the whole country in a quarantine.
Protect the most vulnerable through isolation, and give rest of the society a gradual exposure to the virus. Here is what we needed to do in the first place. Keep it open for everybody between 20 and 30.  People below 20 and above 30 are asked to shelter in place.  Watch the results and two weeks later, open it up for people between 20 and 40.  Third stage: open it up for all between 20 and 50.  Next step: all between 20 and 60, and so on.
Asking ALL the people to shelter in place is not only bad for the economy, it is paving way for a plethora of mental health issues.  Stop this nonsense of complete lockdowns.

5 years later

February 6, 2015

Being days away from death

It was quite a show: he came out on a wheelchair, and had a mask on his face--it was a scene straight out of a movie.  It was heartbreaking for me; a man giving in to death, slowly; a man who I had once seen being very strong.  I went to get the car. Sabir too had parked the car in that lane, but after getting his parked car Sabir went the wrong way. I wanted to go the way the arrows pointed out for me to go, further down and then make a U turn.  When Sabir’s and my car crossed Sabir did not look happy that I was going the other way, but I kept driving; made a U turn into the other lane that had the one way traffic going up.  By the time I reached the passengers Sabir had not showed up; I wondered if someone had caught him going the wrong way and reprimanded him.  Will he realize after this that he faces all these problems because of his minimal education?  Chacha got in the car; we had pillows for him, he had asked for them.  He lay down with pillows under his head.  I asked him if I should put seat belt on him in case I brake hard and he rolls out.  He asked me not to brake hard.  Going home when Abba talked about buying dollars, Chacha suddenly got very excited.  All his life he had done that, he liked being around money and having something to do with it; that was a real pleasure for him: making money, accumulating wealth, and spending as little as possible. I wondered if he should keep doing this till the very end.  Why not die doing what you really want to do?  We reached Chacha’s house and sat there for some time before heading back home.

The CAA: Communal disharmony favors BJP

In a widely shared India-TV program, Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad assured an apparently hostile group of Muslim opponents that the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) had nothing to do with them (Muslims) or any other current citizen of India. The program garnered support of CAA from Indian masses.  But did we see an honest debate, or was the program scripted?  For one, the bunch of people sitting across from the Law Minister were all Muslims--some were against the CAA and some favored the amendment.  The ones opposing the bill were caricature images of Muslim men: dressed in sherwani, sporting a dyed beard, a karakul on head, and stubborn in their views without much thought about the logic behind them.  By showcasing these opponents, the TV show cemented the general perception that only Muslims are opposed to the new legislation. And the only time the actual argument why the CAA must be challenged was brought up, the Law Minister laughed it out.  Why did he deride the argument?  Because that was the crux of the matter.
The amendment instead of showing India’s benevolent support to any person persecuted on the basis of their beliefs, goes on in naming the religious groups India will be welcoming--and Muslims are not in that list.  The insidious message is not lost on anyone what such a law enacted by a government supported by Hindu nationalists really means.  The message is loud and clear: the BJP’s India does not like the Muslims. 
But the CAA has achieved what it was meant to achieve: it further divided India on communal basis.  And through orchestrated TV debates, the general perception about the bill has deepened: to oppose the CAA is Muslim, communist, unpatriotic; to support the amendment is Hindu, nationalistic, patriotic. The bill has solidified Modi’s support among the Hindus who are now seen as the true guardians of the new India--one big step in a further transformation of a secular democracy into a majoritarian rule.

[Photo: courtesy of India-TV]