SINCE the Covid-19 pandemic broke, the reactions of world leaders have ranged from the rarely sublime to the abundantly ludicrous, and scientists and medical professionals who have tried to instil some sanity into the collective response of societies are owed a huge debt of gratitude as the saviours.

Among the rare ones is most notably New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who was unambiguous in her response to the novel coronavirus threat and placed the lives of her country’s citizens above all else. The Covid-19 stats for that area bear testimony to how her approach worked.

I have long maintained that ‘populist’ leaders such as Trump, Bolsanaro, Johnson and many of their counterparts in different parts of the world, including some closer to home, pose a threat to individual liberty, democracies, media freedoms and even world peace. Add public health to the list.

In line with President Trump’s often publicly stated desire, when the US state of Georgia ordered a reopening of businesses, one restaurant owner, who said he valued the health of his staff and his clientele way too much to comply, described the state’s move as a win of “dollars over science”.

This was a direct reference to the ‘economy first’ school of thought guiding Trump and others of his ilk who, occasionally, refer to the poor who have lost jobs and are struggling to pay their bills, even feed their families, but in effect are mostly propelled by big business interests.

Also read: Signs missed and steps slowed in Trump's response to coronavirus

If you need evidence, look at the main beneficiaries of the special funding Trump has announced to tackle the virus threat and its aftermath. Less than 20 per cent of the new money is headed towards the neediest at the bottom of the pyramid, the largest proportion of the population.

We need to contrast our testing figures with those of the worst-hit countries in Europe.

In the face of overwhelming scientific advice and a consensus among healthcare professionals that lockdowns and testing are the only means of stopping the spread of infections and the subsequent massive loss of lives, the messaging of these leaders continues to be mixed.

Half-heartedly, they talked of the need for a lockdown but at different points in their public pronouncements undermined that argument by questioning its efficacy, driven by the hidden, and often overt, concerns of their benefactors/allies in the industrial-commercial sectors.

That is why, to start with, all leaders from Trump, Johnson to others belonging to their ilk termed the Covid-19 as yet another ‘flu’ which did not warrant shutting down anything. When the statistical evidence started to mount against this they reluctantly acted. But even then they continue to oscillate.

To add insult to injury, Trump continues to advance ludicrous theories about how to battle the virus in his desperation to end the lockdown hitting the economy. His latest suggestion has horrified doctors and has invited derision globally.

He said that since bleach-based detergents cleansed surfaces of the virus, perhaps injecting those or somehow cleaning the lungs with them will kill the virus inside the human body too. Realising he’d made a fool of himself, some 24 hours later he dubbed his statement as sarcasm.

In Pakistan, we predictably took comfort in prayer during a fundraising telethon led by the country’s fundraiser-in-chief Prime Minister Imran Khan. All participants turned teary-eyed when religious leader Tariq Jameel started the prayer.

His voice cracking with emotion, sometimes sobbing, he blamed this catastrophe, the ‘azaab’ on the ‘be-hayaee’ (shamelessness) of our women, their dances and ever skimpier clothes. Of course, he went unchallenged by the cream of our TV anchors.

Since the cause (be-hayaee) is now known, we are content with lockdown, smart lockdown, trace, track and quarantine strategies and also happily declaring that our infection rate is lower than anticipated when we are carrying out less than 500 per million tests in terms of the population.

Agreed, we are the Third World, with resource-strapped policy options, but even then we need to contrast our testing figures with those of the worst-hit countries in Europe, namely Spain and Italy which have so far conducted 20,000 per million and 27,000 per million tests respectively.

The fruits of European integration over the past five decades or so have enabled these nations to improve the provision of healthcare facilities and in turn extending life expectancy of their populations substantially. Their over-65 population figure has nearly doubled over this period.

This has cut both ways as the overwhelming proportion of Covid-19 deaths has belonged to this category: up to 93 per cent in Italy (with a far more significant share of 50pc of the over-80s). As against nearly 20pc of the population in the mentioned countries being over 65, our figure for the same is a mere 4pc.

But, with inadequate health facilities and infrequent medical check-ups, can we be sure the state of health of our elderly ie over 65 is as good/bad as of those, say, 10 years older in Europe? Are our over-65s potentially as vulnerable, for example, as the over-70s in Spain and Italy?

Our mixed messaging has created utter chaos in the major urban conurbations where very little social distancing, let alone lockdowns, is in evidence. After the government agreed with religious leaders to keep mosques open during Ramazan, one observer said it was a cop-out, not a lockdown.

Even 4pc of 200m is a staggering number: 8m of our elderly at extraordinary risk. Our limited testing and the poor health infrastructure may already be shielding the real story of the infections and deaths attributable to the virus going unreported. Here is praying the stats are mirroring the ground reality.

The writer is a former editor of Dawn.

abbas.nasir@hotmail.com

Published in Dawn, April 26th, 2020