Tag: Coronavirus

Have We Been Had? (Addendum)

Richard Barnes

A reader pointed me to a Times of Israel article (linked below) which, to some, appears to refute the favorable results of Sweden’s non-lockdown approach. I am thankful to the reader for the tip because the article helps illustrate some of the points made in earlier posts on quarantine as well as last week’s post. Specifically, the article illustrates the power of what we used to call “peer pressure” and, also, the rush to create amnesia about the projections which convinced most governments to shut down.

In the second of my series of posts on “The Bible and Quarantine” (Part 2) I noted how Sweden’s approach has been opposed by every major country in the West, not to say the world. Even President Trump, not known for jumping on bandwagons, leapt onto this one with a whoop and a holler, denouncing Sweden’s non-lockdown (link below).

“Sweden has been criticized, attacked, mocked, and despised…. Two weeks ago a group of 22 ‘scientists’ attacked the officials of Sweden’s department of health, demanding the Swedish government discard the directives of that department and impose the measures all the other countries have imposed. They implied that the Swedish population had been willfully deluded by ignorant authorities and by an epidemiologist who has been seduced by his sudden fame….”

“A French journalist may have let the cat out of the bag when, while interviewing a Swedish epidemiologist, he said, ‘…it’s almost as if we want Sweden to fail because then we’d know the fools are they and not us.”

So, now when Professor Lockdown himself expresses admiration for Sweden’s approach (Here), well, we must not have that. So The Times of Israel publishes an article titled, “Sweden Admits Virus Response Could Have Been Better, Though Not Quite Sure How.”

Notice the sleight of hand: “could have been better….” So I, as a reader, assume that they, after all, suffered the 80,000 to 90,000 deaths that were projected if no lockdown were imposed. But no, they have suffered “…4,468 deaths linked to COVID-19….”

Most of us want to be liked, even Swedish epidemiologists such as Dr. Tegnell. Assuming the aforementioned newspaper quoted Dr. Tegnell correctly and in context (and I make no claims that it did), he comes across as “reconsidering his unique approach” given the “high death toll.” World pressure can be effective.

But let us take a closer look at that “high death toll.”

Per the article, “Sweden’s rate of 43.24 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants is lower than Spain’s (58.06) and Italy’s (55.39) ….” But, wait: Spain and Italy had full lockdowns. Sweden’s rate is lower, with no lockdown.

“…but [Sweden’s rate] is higher than the reported rates in the United States (32.14) and Brazil (14.29)….”

Per Wikipedia, in Brazil, only two of her 27 states locked down. And her president has been urging citizens to ignore lockdown orders. Measurements in Brazil are questionable, but 14.29 is a very low rate considering that most of her states did not lockdown and lockdowns are being ignored in the rest.

As for the USA, comparisons to overall numbers are misleading, because each of our states handled it differently. For example, South Dakota had no lockdown, for which the governor was loudly denounced. The death rate there is currently 7.34 per 100,000 inhabitants, with no lockdown, which is far lower than the USA’s overall rate.

New York, with a full lockdown has a comparable death rate of 121.40 per 100,000 inhabitants, which is almost triple that of Sweden’s. Michigan, whose population is comparable to that of Sweden, has a death rate of 56.20, which is higher than Sweden’s, despite one of the most draconian lockdowns in the country.

In sum, comparing death rates can be very misleading since one must take into account population densities and other factors, including age of the inhabitants, comorbidities, and more.

More importantly, it would appear the media assumes most of us suffer amnesia and have forgotten that the lockdowns were triggered, not by death rates, but by truly frightening projections, such as 500,000 deaths in Britain and 2.2 Million deaths in the USA. Now that such projections have been shown to be grossly wrong, instead of focusing our analyses on how we decided to shut down the earth’s economies based on almost criminally bad data, we have moved the goal posts and are now focusing on “death rates” between countries. Not to mention the minimal focus on the devastation wreaked on nursing homes and assisted living facilities.

Which brings us to the matter the Swedes themselves admit they could have done better: addressing the failure “…to protect the country’s elderly and nursing home residents.”

That is a major fault in many places in the world. By some estimates, over half of USA deaths “linked to COVID-19” were in nursing homes or assisted living facilities (Here). This is an outrage. But this has nothing to do with the draconian lockdowns imposed on us. New York Governor Cuomo had been ordering nursing homes to accepts COVID patients. Don’t hold your breath for The Times of Israel, to run stories on that.

One more citation from the post on quarantine: “The English models (to which most other countries adhered) anticipated that [in Sweden] there’d be 8 Thousand to 9 Thousand patients requiring intensive care. The actual numbers are a fraction of that: 530. The hospitals are not overwhelmed.” So much for “flattening the curve.” 

The fact is that no leading country in the world would have shut down its entire economy on the basis of 4,468 projected deaths. Instead, they would have focused their efforts on reducing those deaths using other means, including taking special care of the elderly, nursing homes, and assisted living facilities.

Have we been had?

Sweden in the time of COVID-19

https://www.timesofisrael.com/sweden-admits-virus-response-could-have-been-better

https://www.onenewspage.com/n/Politics/1zlreqwnfg/Trump-criticizes-Sweden-no-lockdown-stance-after.htm

https://www.rt.com/usa/489951-cuomo-nursing-homes-deaths-mandate/

Have We Been Had?

Richard Barnes

One of the most oft heard refrains in my childhood in Venezuela had to do with disappointments with “democracy.” It was roughly along the lines of, “We’ve been had.” Use of the phrase would invariably result in very animated discussions (not to say heated arguments) about the merits and demerits of the Pérez Jiménez and Juan Vicente Gómez (here and here, for example) regimes versus Rómulo Betancourt and following (see here, here, and here as examples). This blog has written much about both eras and will continue to do so. However, the refrain’s Spanish version has been on my mind for several months now. Since the virus panic, to be precise.

This blog has several posts on the panic: here; here; here; and here.

It would appear that the riots and looting taking place in cities across the United States have pushed the virus off the American news for now. Or perhaps for good.

Yet, while American cities were burning, several virus-related stories were quietly reported.

First, across the pond, in London, a certain professor, known to the world as Professor Lockdown, was being questioned on his opinions regarding Sweden’s rejection of his lockdown prescriptions and whether maybe-perhaps-could-it-be-that his draconian recipes, which were followed by the UK, the USA, and most of the rest of the world, except Sweden, may have been a tad excessive.

Second, some mainstream media reports surfaced, albeit surreptitiously, about the stratospheric death rates in nursing homes, to wit: close to half (maybe more than half) of total US virus deaths took place in nursing homes.

And, third, a large number of public health officials wrote an open letter in effect encouraging “protesting” despite the lockdown restrictions in place, which they had strongly urged, and still urge, upon all law-abiding Americans. So, lockdown is absolutely necessary … unless you decide to riot.

This post extracts from each of the stories alluded to above. [Comments by me are in brackets]. 

The stories are linked below.

From The Telegraph (London)

The scientist behind lockdown in the UK has admitted that Sweden has achieved roughly the same suppression of coronavirus without draconian restrictions.

Neil Ferguson , who became known as “professor lockdown” after convincing Boris Johnson to radically curtail everyday freedoms, acknowledged that, despite relying on “quite similar science”, the Swedish authorities had “got a long way to the same effect” without a full lockdown. [And, for good measure, if they achieved “herd immunity,” any second waves will have little impact on them, unlike the rest of us. See here]

Sweden has adopted a far softer approach to Covid-19 than elsewhere in Europe, introducing voluntary social-distancing measures and keeping restaurants and bars and many schools open.

The Daily Mail (UK)

The professor whose grim warning that 500,000 Brits [and 2.2 million Americans] may die from Covid-19 without action triggered lockdown has admitted Sweden may have suppressed its outbreak as well as Britain — without imposing the draconian measures. 

Professor Neil Ferguson, of Imperial College London, revealed he had the ‘greatest respect’ for the Scandinavian nation, which has managed to suffer fewer deaths per capita than the UK.

He made the comments at a House of Lord Science and Technology Committee today during his first public appearance since flouting stay at home rules to have secret trysts with his married mistress last month.

The epidemiologist — dubbed Professor Lockdown — has come under fire for his modeling which predicted half a million Britons could die from Covid-19 and heavily influenced the UK’s decision to rush into a nationwide quarantine.

Professor Ferguson appeared to praise Sweden for keeping infections low without the economically crippling curbs and said ‘they have gone quite a long way to [achieving] the same effect.’

[He] admitted that lockdowns are ‘very crude’ policies and scientists would like to have ‘a much more targeted approach with less economic impact’;

“I have the greatest respect for scientists there [in Sweden]. They came to a different policy conclusion but based really on quite similar science.”

‘They make the argument that countries will find it very hard to really stop second waves… I don’t agree with it but scientifically they are not that far from scientists in any country in the world.”

Professor Ferguson was quizzed about why Sweden had recorded such few deaths without imposing lockdown, and faced questions about whether the economically-crippling measures were necessary in the UK.

[And what newfangled theory did Sweden apply to this pandemic that had the same, or better, health results as the punitive lockdowns imposed on the rest of us and without the economic catastrophe? Some new, cutting edge research, perhaps? Why, no. They, wittingly or unwittingly, applied the Bible’s requirements: quarantine the sick; leave the rest of us alone. See posts here, here, and here.]

USA Today

Over the last three months, more than 40,600 long-term care residents and workers have died of COVID-19 — about 40% of the nation’s death toll attributed to the coronavirus, according to an analysis of state data gathered  by USA TODAY. That number eclipses a count released Monday by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the federal government’s first attempt at a comprehensive tally. CMS said 25,923 residents had died, but its number only includes federally regulated nursing homes, not assisted living facilities.

Even USA TODAY’s larger total — which amounts to roughly 450 COVID-19 elder care facility deaths per day — is an undercount. Seven states did not provide the number of deaths in long-term care. And New York, the state with the most resident deaths, doesn’t include those who had been transferred to hospitals in its count of long-term care fatalities.

[The article goes on to tell about families whose loved ones died in nursing homes because the homes had been ordered to accepts patients infected with the virus: “I would be at peace … but this did not have to happen,” was how one grieving daughter put it.]

[Given that almost half the total virus-related deaths in the USA have taken place in nursing homes {and that number is understated, according to USA Today}, tell me again: why was most of the country locked down? And why did state governors, such as the much-vaunted Governor Cuomo, order such facilities to admit virus infected patients, thereby sentencing such patients and the entire nursing facility to death?]

In Michigan, the state health department for months failed to track COVID-19 cases in its more than 1,000 assisted living facilities. A spokeswoman said the state began collecting that information on May 22 but doesn’t have plans to release it publicly at this time.

[Imagine that: the Michigan governor won’t release the data. Let them eat cake, I guess.]

In New York, the state’s official count of long-term care residents who have died doesn’t include those transferred to hospitals or other health care settings. 

In Pennsylvania, officials released a list of 557 facilities with COVID-19 cases for the first time on May 19. Almost immediately, the state health care association said the list was riddled with mistakes and demanded the errors be fixed. State officials made numerous updates to the data, including lowering the number of deaths and cases at some facilities.

[Why am I not surprised?]

Open Letter (NPR)

Infectious Disease Experts [“Experts”. I am sick of that term, aren’t you?] publish an open letter [encouraging “protests”.]

The letter was started by infectious disease experts [sic] at the University of Washington [the same university whose models, along with those from Professor Lockdown, the government had been using to inform policymaking that proved to be wrong over and over again].

Initially written by infectious disease experts [sic] at the University of Washington, the letter cited a number of systemic problems, from the disproportionately high rate at which black people have been killed by police in the U.S. [this is false, by the way] to disparities in life expectancy and other vital categories — including black Americans’ higher death rate from the coronavirus. […]

Local governments should not break up crowded demonstrations “under the guise of maintaining public health,” the experts [sic] said in their open letter. They urged law enforcement agencies not to use tear gas, smoke and other irritants, saying they could make people more susceptible to infection and worsen existing health conditions.”

The public health experts [sic!] noted the ‘potential for COVID-19 cases to rise in the days to come, according to NPR, and suggested access to testing and care in these communities be increased.

[So we must stay home. Except that we can go out, walk, and run should-to-shoulder with a mob. And throw bricks. “No” to church. “Yes” to riots. I really trust these public health officials, don’t you?]

Have we been had?

A troglodyte’s counsel: you and I have a duty to look askance at any “expert” advice which contradicts the Bible, no matter from whom such advice proceeds. 

All articles referred to above are linked below.

I’ll take Sweden.

‘Prof Lockdown’ Neil Ferguson admits Sweden used same science as UK

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8379769/Professor-Lockdown-Neil-Ferguson-admits-greatest-respect-Sweden.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/06/01/coronavirus-nursing-home-deaths-top-40-600/5273075002/

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jyfn4Wd2i6bRi12ePghMHtX3ys1b7K1A/view

Can we trust Covid modelling? More evidence from Sweden | The SpectatorJohan NorbergAt last we’re getting a debate about Covid-19 modelling. When people finally got to look under the hood of the f…

How Wrong Were the Models and Why?
Analysis of both the Imperial College and the University of Washington COVID-19 models.

The Bible on Quarantine Part 2

Richard Barnes

Last week’s post (Part 1) addressed the Biblical model with regards to pandemics or infectious diseases.

As we saw, that model requires quarantine of the sick but not of the entire population. 

There is a country that has followed that model. It is a country that long ago abandoned its Christian and Biblical heritage, but that, in this case, whether knowingly or not, has been following the Biblical model pretty closely.

That country is Sweden.

Sweden and the state of Michigan each have populations of about 10 Million people. Michigan has followed a draconic lockdown, which has spurred protests in the capital city of Lansing. Sweden has not resorted to any lockdown, the only developed country which has not followed the example set by the rest of the world. Michigan has over 3,300 deaths; Sweden has a thousand less than Michigan.

If you prefer comparing against neighboring countries, which did impose lockdowns, the results are comparable when taking population densities and other factors into consideration. Two California emergency room physicians in the front lines of this pandemic were interviewed last week and addressed comparisons between Sweden and Norway (links below).

Let us take a look at the model that Sweden has been following.

In the first place, Sweden has not mandated the closing of anything. Everything is voluntary. If the businessman wants to stay open, he may stay open. If the lady wishes to eat in a restaurant, she may eat in a restaurant. Schools, churches, and cities continue open. Warnings have been issued addressing the aged, advising they should stay inside, especially during times of high contamination, since the aged are the ones most affected.

If someone gets sick, they are asked to quarantine or to go to a hospital until well.

The police do not go about arresting or penalizing anybody for going shopping, or enjoying a day in the park, or just going for a ride in a car or on a bicycle. 

Of course, Sweden has been criticized, attacked, mocked, and despised.

Why?

Could it be that the experts in other countries do not like it when they are contradicted? Two weeks ago, a group of 22 “scientists” attacked the officials of Sweden’s department of health, demanding the Swedish government discard the directives of that department and impose the measures all the other countries have imposed. They implied that the Swedish population had been willfully deluded by ignorant authorities and by an epidemiologist who has been seduced by his sudden fame.

Wow. It’s not nice to contradict “experts.”

A French journalist may have let the cat out of the bag when, while interviewing a Swedish epidemiologist, he said, “…it’s almost as if we want Sweden to fail because then we’d know the fools are they and not us.” [the quote is a paraphrase; I cannot find the original source]

But, leaving polemics behind, let us take a look at the results thus far.

The development of the contamination and the illnesses and deaths has been following the Swedish medical predictions pretty closely. Their models differed dramatically from the English models, to which the great majority of the governments of the world submitted. Their initial numbers have since been substantially reduced because they were exaggerated numbers to begin with.

Sweden counts each death as a Covid-19 death if the deceased had the virus, even though they know that the virus is not necessarily the cause of death for all who die and test positive for the virus. In other words, someone might die of cancer but if he had the virus, they count the death as a Covid death. Sweden does it so in order to be consistent with the majority of countries (and states) which have been categorizing their deaths in like manner.

Daily deaths are about 80 but have been decreasing. More will die in the coming weeks and months, but the mortality rate has been much less than the alarming predictions of 80 Thousand to 90 Thousand that were supposed to have died by summer.

The contamination rate has also been decreasing. The hospital situation is acceptable. The English models (to which most other countries adhered) anticipated that there’d be 8 Thousand to 9 Thousand patients requiring intensive care. The actual numbers are a fraction of that: 530. The hospitals are not overwhelmed. 

Sweden did not buy the “flatten the curve” meme.

The Swedish department of health is expecting that the country will develop a “herd immunity” against the virus. This is something that would not be easy to develop in other countries who have, in effect, quarantined the entire population. For now, this expectation cannot be proved. But, going forward, when the other countries proceed to “loosen” their lockdowns, we shall see how acute the next “waves” of contamination in those countries will compare to Sweden. For now, some Swedish medical researchers believe that 40 percent of Stockholm’s population has had the virus and the herd immunity will be achieved by end of May. This too has not been proved, but if it turns out to be so, then the Swedes will be in a far better situation than the rest of us.

Of course, the Swedish economy has suffered: GDP is expected to decrease by 4% and unemployment is expected to hit 9%. But that compares extremely positively against the economic reality of other countries who’s numbers are far worse. For example, England’s GDP decrease is expected to be 13%, or more than triple the Swedish drop.

In sum, it would have been far better to have followed a model more aligned with the much maligned Bible, where the aged and the sick would have been placed in quarantine; where we would have had a better chance of achieving herd immunity; where the models predicting catastrophic (“apocalyptic”) death rates would have been scrutinized more closely and would have been seen to have been greatly exaggerated (in fact, historically, those models have never been very accurate).

It is not unwise to seek our guidance from the Word of God. 

Below you will find a link to one of the articles addressing the Swedish experience from The Spectator (London).

Also, further below, you will find two links to a presentation before the press given last week by two California doctors who are in the front lines of the fight against the virus. The interview is about 62 minutes long and is excellent. 

This presentation is now at 4.7 Million views. 

“We’ve never seen it where we put the healthy in quarantine.” The first link is about 50 minutes long; the second is about 12 minutes. Very informative and very valuable. These two emergency room physicians also compare the results between Sweden and Norway. In addition, they talk about the immune system.

“Academics and reality are two different things.”

“When I write a death note, we are being pressured to add Covid…even when we think that the death had nothing to do with Covid.”

They allude to the Bible’s requirements for quarantine. 

It is fascinating to listen to the journalists’ questions. In effect they tend toward: dare you question the wisdom of Dr. Fauci?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-swedish-experiment-looks-like-it-s-paying-off

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiRqlxN9E60&feature=emb_logo
Well. The longer link below got close to 5 Million views and was blocked by YouTube. Surprise! So it’s not really “Listen to the experts.” It’s more like, “Listen to OUR experts!” Anyway, link above had not been blocked as of this morning. Hopefully it is still accessible for you. It combines both links below.

Dr. Erickson COVID-19 Briefing

Dr. Erickson COVID-19 Briefing, Pt. 2

The Bible on Quarantine Part 1

Richard Barnes

Sometimes, this blog will “stray” from its focus on Venezuela. 

This is one of those times.

In our modern age, it is easy to scoff at any writing that has “The Bible” in its title, unless the purpose of the writing is to mock, degrade, or lightly esteem. However, our own founding documents, to which we adhere to this day (whether joyfully or grudgingly) were written in an era when the Bible was the most cited source in all polemics.

John Eidsmoe, in his Christianity and the Constitution reports on exhaustive research by Professors Lutz and Hyneman who reviewed “an estimated 15,000 items, and closely read 2,200 books, pamphlets, newspaper articles, and monographs with explicitly political content printed between 1760 and 1805 [our founding era]….

“…the source most often cited by the founding fathers was the Bible, which accounted for 34 percent of all citations. The fifth book of the Bible, Deuteronomy, because of its heavy emphasis on biblical law, was referred to frequently….”

In fact, in the 1770’s, when the Declaration of Independence was written, the Bible accounted for 44% of all citations. In the 1780’s, when the Constitution was written, it accounted for 34% of all citations. More than any other by far.

My point is simply that, however much the Word of God may be mocked by our illustrious elites and moderns, it clearly was foundational to the thinking of our founders and to the origins of our nation.

So, what does it have to say about quarantines and how might that apply to the “lockdowns” afflicting much of our country and the world?

The link below is to Thoughts on Quarantine by Chris Zimmerman.

I believe it is of utmost importance that we see all things by the Light of God’s Word. He not only defines reality, He created reality. He has determined how we should live. We stray from that path to our detriment and risk.

Our lenses should be the Bible, not daily press briefings or newspapers or the internet or — heaven help us — Hollywood celebrities.

Next week, the second part of this post will focus on a country which, knowingly or not, actually followed the biblical model pretty closely. How have they fared compared to the rest of the world, which has not?

The following is from the Chalcedon newsletter.

Thoughts on Quarantine

Chris Zimmerman

“Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.” Rev. 18:10

In recent weeks we have witnessed the frailty of all the systems of man worldwide. Indeed, Revelation 18:10 should come to mind to all of us and shake us to the core in the realization that when God’s just judgment comes it can bring down any stronghold of man in an instant. With the endless stream of press conferences and news, we have heard repeated assertions that all actions done in response to the recent virus spread and resulting quarantine are to protect lives and must be accepted as valid (read: morally right) regardless of the consequences. But, of course, for the Christian examining all things in light of Scripture, questions should arise:

1. Are the actions taken in alignment with Biblical laws on quarantine?
2. Against whom should these actions legitimately be taken when valid?
3. What is our responsibility to protect lives in respect to this issue?
4. Where are the Christians who should be leading in this battle for the truth?

We have seen the actions at the federal and state levels and, no doubt, felt their impact. Social distancing, prohibitions against gatherings of 10 or more (sometimes even fewer), restrictions on retailers and more have been mandated. It seems with each passing week the doomsday predictions were justification for further restrictions. As the weeks slowly crawled by we began to hear a growing crescendo of cries against the quarantine actions under the banner of “the cure cannot be worse than the disease” and, thus, invalid. Is there truth to this? What saith the Scriptures?

While all of Scripture is God’s Law-Word, central to this discussion will be the laws of hygiene and disease found in Leviticus 13-15. It is here we can see the patterns, precepts and principles of God’s commands that must be the foundation of any of our thinking on the issues of disease and quarantine. What do we see? We see that there are responsibilities for family, church and state with respect to these questions. God’s Law speaks to the reality of disease in a fallen world and gives us the lawful responses to it. These responses not only limit the spread of said disease but support its elimination at the same time while minimizing the impact on the larger community and its dominion work.

First, the actual practice of quarantine is thoroughly Biblical. What is described as leprosy in our translations can be better understood as typical of any infectious disease. As Rushdoony points out,

“It is important to note that the concern is for the welfare of the family and the community; neither can be sacrificed out of pity for the victim. It is thus noteworthy that we have here the source of the idea of quarantine . The concept is Biblical. As applied by Orthodox Jews and by orthodox Christians, it has included the quarantine not only of infected persons but also of infected animals and plants.” (1) [emphasis mine]

Rushdoony’s point is that pity for a diseased victim should not override the well being and health of the family and broader community by allowing the infected person to destroy either. Indeed, he goes on to say,

“Quarantine, it should be noted, is a moral fact: it asserts that there is a good and evil response to a situation. Quarantine does not say that the sick man is evil, but to expose others to a serious illness or disease is evil, and therefore separation is good, healthy, and necessary.” (2)

So, this is an open and shut case today, then, right? We have a virus making its rounds across the world so all actions taken by the state are, thus, good and right? Or, is there more to this issue than initially thought?

“Many commentators have seen the forms of “leprosy” or diseases described in Leviticus 13-14 as types or symbols of sin. However, as Harrison reminds us, the Bible never does so. Disease is simply presented as disease, one consequence of a fallen world. Quarantine is a separation of disease, and more quarantine is a separation of evil from society. This is very important to note. We do not flee from disease and sin, but rather separate sin and contagious disease from the community. Our Lord says, “I pray not that Thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that Thou shouldest keep them from the evil (or, the evil one)” (John 17:15). Modern separationism too often quarantines the healthy and the moral, not the diseased and the criminal members of society.” (3)

There are two points that are missed when considering whether quarantine actions are lawful. First, note that in all cases it is the sick individual that is quarantined, not the healthy. As pointed out in these same chapters, the fact that the healed member is required to be consecrated back into his priestly, dominion work means that the healthy member is expected to continue in his, without interruption. Rushdoony recognized this in the earlier quotes where, historically, infectious persons, plants, homes, etc were placed in quarantine; in other words, those confirmed to be sick or, as Leviticus 13:1-8 points out, those who were believed to be sick by outward evidence . This requirement of outward evidence is crucial as it strikes the balance between the freedom of the individual (this would include protections opposed to mandatory invasive testing) against the protections for the community. We have a similar practice in the legal sphere: the Biblical requirement of “innocent until proven guilty” is likewise to be applied here as “healthy until proven diseased.”

Second, Rushdoony has pointed out that disease in the Bible is “presented as disease, one consequence of a fallen world.” Inherent to true freedom are the risks of life in a fallen world: you could fail in business, you could be injured or killed in a collision or you could be exposed to any number of sicknesses that abound in our world. That world, true, is being renewed by the Lord through His actions and those of His people in their dominion work but the pushing back of the curse means we must deal with the problems of the curse along the way. This means exposure to a hidden illness is not the same as being made ill by it. We regularly swap viruses and bacteria in our daily interactions with others without a single incident due to the body’s normal, God given immunities. So, while we must apply the laws of quarantine to those who are actually ill and manifesting the symptoms thereof, we must also protect the work for the kingdom among those that are healthy.

The implications of this in light of the present debate are enormous: so called “social distancing” should be between the diagnosed ill and the healthy, not between the healthy alone. Businesses should function as normal but those that become ill should remain at home until healthy. Risks of disease have always been present in any large gathering of people, today’s virus notwithstanding. It is a simple fact that we must choose to live in the reality of this fallen world, God’s world marred by man’s sin and full of risks (and blessings), or we will be forced to submit to increasing tyranny “for our own safety.”

We must therefore recognize that while it is wrong for Christians to think that the state has zero authority in regard to disease it is also equally wrong to lock down the healthy with the sick. Christians alone bear the Truth in this world and we need to be about the business of directing the debate on this issue accordingly so that true freedom can be realized. To just blindly follow the masses only adds to our judgment and is our assent to tyranny.

(1) R. J. Rushdoony, Leviticus, Vol. III of the Commentaries on the Pentateuch (Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 2005),135.

(2) Ibid., 136.

(3) Ibid., 144

One of the most mocked books in the Bible, yet its remedies have always had a salutary relevance to a healthy society throughout history. We see yet again that God’s injunctions are less draconian or cruel than those of men: Leviticus requires quarantines of the few; most modern governments are requiring quarantines of the many (except for themselves, of course).
This is NOT in line with proper quarantine
Quarantines have worked throughout history

https://mailchi.mp/791fbab642b8/our-worries-get-in-the-way-3046954?e=be71bf23aa