Personnel of the Nigeria Police making an arrest.
In this
article, we critique Nigeria’s handling of COVID-19, suggest possible
improvements, and taking instruction from the response options being pursued by
Nigeria as a key developing country, we proffer our opinion as to where we
think the whole ball game is headed.
Italy
currently has the largest mortality figure attributed to COVID-19. According to
a study by the Italian government, 99% of the mortality is in people already struggling
with other medical conditions; and at least 50% of them have been diagnosed
with three or more diseases. COVID-19 death, then, was merely the proverbial
last straw. In Nigeria, the first death attributable to this coronavirus was reported on 23rd March.
However the 67 year old gentleman involved had diabetes and was undergoing
chemotherapy for multiple myeloma. Yet officially, his death is attributed to
neither of these two underlying chronic diseases, but coronavirus! If the ultimate goal is to save lives at
minimum socio-economic costs, it is necessary we examine how our efforts should
be weighted and distributed in fighting these two complementary agents of
death: COVID-19 on one hand, and underlying chronic medical conditions on the
other. Without COVID-19, the patient can still go ahead managing his health
condition for a couple more years perhaps; and without the health condition,
COVID-19 is virtually innocuous. This subject is extensively critically
reviewed on the Greenmedinfo blog.
Our view
in this piece is that such priority-setting decisions require carefully
conducted risk assessment, based on local values and sensibilities,
rather than policies uncritically imported from elsewhere. What is optimal in one location and
circumstances may not necessarily be the best at another - even while the
scientific contents remain unassailable. In our humble opinion, current efforts
to fight the novel coronavirus in Nigeria have been directed mainly at pleasing
global authorities and getting their commendation rather than what is actually
needed to produce desired local results. And since no one can lightly impugn the
intelligence of the folks handling our response, the choices they make is more
indicative of an overall philosophical outlook and agenda (global in nature),
rather than incompetence or naivety.
In a piece addressed to
“COVID-19 deniers”, Arefa
Cassoobhoy established the two basic reasons why COVID-19 is
deserving of the notoriety it has acquired while further arguing that no countering measure should be adjudged
extreme. The main strength of COVID-19 is
its being contagious in asymptomatic people who may not even know they are
harbouring the virus. They could
therefore transmit it unconsciously, ad
infinitum, seriously endangering other vulnerable people (both loved ones
and strangers) while they themselves remain healthy. This situation places a heavy moral burden on
the vast majority (who won’t be affected by the virus), such that what might
have been a chivalrous “I don’t fear the disease, I can risk my life” becomes
an ignoble “I am safe, I don’t care for others!” This invariably provides implicit
justification for the lockdowns, and their enforcements even via obnoxious
methods.
Secondly, neither vaccine nor proven routine treatment
is available at the present time; and being novel, we don’t have any pre-existing
immunity to it, as we do to the older coronaviruses. The implication of this is
that every symptomatic case (and this could be anywhere between 2%–3% among infected persons
aged £19 years, to ≥31% among infected
adults aged ≥85 years) could require intensive and specialized
medical attention. Should these present
at hospitals in too quick succession, both medical personnel and resources
could become overwhelmed, especially in societies where every single life
matters and qualifies to receive the best medical attention available. Thus the basic strategy for combatting the
virus involves slowing down the rate of new hospitalizations at all costs,
while stepping up efforts to find the cheap routine treatments or vaccine. This
goal is referred to as “flattening
the curve.”
Management of environment-based health hazards is
all about risk management and sustainable development. Risk management involves balancing the costs
and benefits, while sustainable development ensures that the three major
dimensions of Environment, Economy, and Society are holistically taken into
consideration even as we juggle the balls.
This delicate operation can only be meaningfully implemented by folks
familiar with the local terrain and values. A State House Press Release signed
by Garba Shehu on 19th March provided a brief report on steps being
taken by President Buhari’s administration to “mitigate the effects” of
COVID-19 on the Nigerian people. In the
short statement, President Buhari premised his assurance on the appropriateness
of measures he was announcing primarily
on the “commendation” already received from the World Health Organisation (WHO).
He further added that “what this country is doing has been recommended as a
template” - presumably to other countries. Unfortunately, under some
conditions, such as a global pandemic, getting the praise of “global
authorities” is not necessarily a virtue.
It is an open secret that these Institutions are not (and really, could
not) be as independent as they themselves probably would like to be. They routinely come under tremendous pressure
and are forced to push values dictated to them by other clandestine but
extremely powerful interests. We have
seen this over the decades, from the operations of the various agencies of the
UN and the Bretton Wood institutions whose raison
d’etre, anyway, is to maintain global peace - even if it will come at the
expense of some “unfortunate” few. It is
remarkable that America’s
measures to counter COVID-19 announced on March 11, were
applauded neither by the WHO nor by America’s traditional allies in
Europe. As a wise man once said, “self
first is not selfishness!”
An especially apt and ongoing example of how risk
assessments carried out by an Agency such as the WHO can be seriously
flawed and dangerous to an uncritical society is the continued use of mercury-laden
vaccines for our children in Nigeria. According to the reasoning
of the eggheads at the WHO, the projected attending increased annual budget of
the Agency by up to $333
million and other issues bothering on logistics, tip the
scale in favour of the continued use of thimerosal (mercury) containing vaccines (TCVs) in
Nigeria rather than shifting to the alternative products used in the developed
nations, since TCVs were proscribed there, decades ago. Thus, based on the tacit counsel of the WHO
to a supposedly resource-challenged nation, we have continued to infuse the
brains of our own children with deadly mercury, jeopardizing their future
mental and emotional wellbeing. At the same time, we give lie to the basic
premise underlying this “scientific risk assessment” as the country continues to
squander enormous resources via crap corruption or insane battle for meaningless
ethnic or even religious superiority.
There are many other critical examples of us naively swallowing camels
prescribed by global bodies while straining out the gnats they fastidiously recommend
to us. But none could be as serious as this present issue of our response to
COVID-19.
Are the lockdowns, school closures, severe restrictions
on the economic, social, and even religious spheres, justified in Nigeria (even
without any suspension of the Constitution, declaration of state of Emergency,
or even just a courteous presidential address)? Perhaps yes, strange times
demand strange measures. However what is
clearly suspect are the dimensions and details of implementation which are
totally insensitive to local values; and which most likely would render the
entire exercise not only meaningless but futile. As we write this, the report came
in that the weekly statutory meetings of the Federal Executive Council, meant
to review and steer the affairs of the nation, are being suspended indefinitely, because
of COVID-19. This implies that the
country is then to be run as in a state of emergency with Mr Boss Mustapha
(head of the Presidential Task Force on COVID-19) effectively in control –
possibly for the next six months!
In the management of a pandemic, time is the
critical element. The two management
options available are first, containment - seeking to limit the spread of
infection via lockdowns and social restrictions. The other option is mitigation, when the bulk of
the efforts are directed at providing treatment while awaiting the attainment
of herd
immunity in society.
Obviously both should go on pari passu,
but the crucial point is on the relative weights allotted to each effort. As clearly spelt out by the WHO itself when
advising against border closures on account of COVID-19, the containment
option ceased to be viable around February 20, from which
time it had become more profitable to direct the bulk of efforts to combat the
virus at mitigation. Of course,
several individual nations, in exercise of their sovereign rights, chose to ignore
that particular counsel. Even right now, more nations are still deciding to
close their borders as containment efforts.
Our beef with the current measures adopted by
Nigeria to fight COVID-19 is mostly in the details and the spirit behind them.
First, the measures generally lack specificity and
convey the impression that not much preceding homework had been done. For instance, most of the lockdowns announced
have been “till further notice” without
some indications when they might be reviewed.
In most countries clear timelines are courteously announced to the
citizens – with reasonable time to quickly adjust. For instance South Africa announced days
ahead, that a 21 day national lockdown would be commencing on Thursday 26th
March. Also in a similar vein, in
prescribing limits for the number of people that could publicly gather, the specifics in the Nigerian measures have been hazy as
well as arbitrary. For instance in Osun
State, Christians went to bed on the night of Saturday 21st March
with the instructions that they could meet for worship and prayers in groups
not exceeding 50; but overnight there was another directive that no meeting at
all would be permitted. A number of
Church meetings were subsequently physically disrupted and the buildings locked
up on Sunday, based on just a few hours of prior poorly-disseminated
notification! Meanwhile the Presidential Task Force as at March 23 still allows
gathering
of up to 50 people.
The real problem with these non-specificities is
that no one is really sure what informed the measures being announced. For instance what is the basis for
pronouncing a flat maximum attendance figure for a cathedral with regular
seating capacity of 10,000 and another Church auditorium that could only sit
100? With such opacity, citizens are not
sure the orders are actually meant to achieve any concrete results or to merely
create required news items for the global press. Or perhaps, as we are
suggesting here, they are actually meant to please some global elites and further
their hidden agenda.
Still on the apparent non goal-oriented nature of
the lockdowns, it is also difficult to understand the basis for determining
which facilities and sectors qualified for “lockdowns” and
which do not. While Churches and Mosques
were prominently cited, markets which in Nigeria tend to have higher human
densities were excluded. Some cosmetic attempts were made to regulate
commercial transportation systems. But
even without the customary “overloading” of passengers, the proximity between
passengers in a commercial car or bus is far less than what could be obtained
in a typical Church meeting. On the same confusing note, the Nigeria Railway
Corporation reversed itself (probably on
orders from above) and announced it will now continue its services even amidst
all the stay-at-home orders. Imagine the
bewildering contradiction: folks who just arrived together in a crowded public
transportation are not allowed to subsequently sit together, pray and study the
Bible even in a more spacious location!
It is difficult for the public to cooperate with measures that clearly
are not meant to achieve anything tangible.
Even then, the restrictions announced in Nigeria are
still less baffling than the ones being announced elsewhere. In Ghana, President Nana Akufo-Addo with all
candour and gravity announced the proscription of
any gatherings in Churches and Mosques for four weeks; but in the same speech, could
only advise patrons at “shopping malls, restaurants, Night Clubs, hotels and
drinking spots” to kindly ensure they practice social distancing! Does this
give a hint about where all this is coming from, and where it might be headed
in the not too distant future?
Beyond these technical details however is the question
of morality in compelling people to stay at home indefinitely when no provision
had been put in place to meet their basic needs of food, water, and probably
also required prescribed drugs. In the
developed countries where lockdowns were being pronounced, well-established
online supply chains exist. Sad to note
that in Nigeria, a good fraction of our people actually need to go and slug it
out virtually every day before they can earn the money needed to bring food to
the family table. Compare this with the
reports from the UK, Italy, among others, that government
will support private employers in paying salaries for workers who have to
remain at home in the lockdown. Self-employed
folks also qualify for a one-time grant.
Various other measures of economic bailouts are being announced by several nations to cushion
the financial stress on citizens who are being asked to stay at home. Of
course, all these have economic implications for the state, as we shall be
mentioning later!
Associated with the non-specificity of details in
the lockdowns being pronounced in Nigeria, is the absence of specific
measurable indicators to judge success or failure of the measures. In fact it
was not only till 24th March that considerable number of diagnostic
test kits (donated by Jack Ma and Ali Baba) reportedly arrived in Nigeria, buttressing
the stories circulating on social media that many people who observed relevant
symptoms in themselves and requested for testing were being rebuffed by the
responsible authorities. As the WHO had
earlier affirmed, lockdowns without measurable targets are meaningless and
cannot be expected to produce any tangible result on the long run. According to Mike Ryann, WHO Chief Emergency expert: “The danger right now with
the lockdowns is that, if we don’t put in place the strong public health
measures now, when those movement restrictions and lockdowns are lifted, the
danger is the disease will jump back up.”
In our opinion, “lockdowns” would have been more
meaningful, understandable, and implementable if based on movement restrictions
within specific geographical entities. Thus,
people might be restricted to their cities, wards, boarding schools, and so on;
but allowed to interact freely within that sector in other to provide other
extremely important social supports as needed.
Several studies have pointed out the
immense health and mental hazards that would certainly follow a blanket mass
self-isolation policy in society. The limited resources available for testing
and identifying infected people could then be more profitably deployed to
checking those who wish to exit or enter those set boundaries.
Furthermore, and probably most importantly, the
vulnerable population within each lockdown sector should be scrupulously
identified and put on strict but supported self-quarantine. This would be a
reasonable easy-to-communicate measure, which the populace would then
creatively seek to implement within local contexts. For instance, strict isolation of the elderly
has now become the cornerstone of Israeli’s strategy against COVID-19 after the
initial efforts at mass containment. In the words of Israeli Defence Minister,
Naftali Bennet, “The
most important thing, more than general social distancing, more than testing
testing testing, is to separate old people from younger people.” In Britain, the vulnerable people recommended for self-quarantine has
been identified as “people over 60 years of age,” together with younger people
with serious health problems (such as asthma, HIV), as well as pregnant women. According to Prime Minister Boris
Johnson, "The (National Health Service) will be contacting these
people (1.5 million of them) in the coming days urging them to stay at home for
a period of at least 12 weeks."
In the meantime as counselled by WHO’s Mike Ryann, the
period of the “lockdowns” should be used to strengthen our healthcare systems
all over the nation with facilities for cheap and fast diagnosis of COVID-19
provided across board. It could also be
a great time to help the citizenry cultivate sound hygienic practices such as
handwashing, and perhaps that excellent age-long traditional practice
whereby the right hand is dedicated for use for interactions with people, and
the left hand reserved for handling bio-hazardous objects and for interactions
with non-humans. Imbibing these would be of considerable value in curtailing
COVID-19 now and promoting sound health thereafter.
In concluding the
technical critique segment of this article, we hasten to emphasize again the
importance of exercising caution and holistic discernment as we attempt to draw
lessons from situations in other times and climes. For example, many have
simplistically attempted to justify apparently half-baked measures being
proposed today by citing their presumed effectiveness during the Spanish flu pandemic
of 1918-19. However analysts have warned
that such comparisons cannot be glibly made, considering the vast differences
in clinical profile, severity, biological signs and the level of knowledge
between the two pandemics. Dwelling on
the issue of level of knowledge, French historian Rassmussen pointed out that: “At the time of the
Spanish flu, people didn’t know the influenza pathogen, and without this
knowledge, it wasn’t possible for them to create a vaccine. Scientists did not
isolate the particular virus strain that causes influenza in humans until
1933…..we decrypted the RNA of the coronavirus within a few days...” One has to be very careful to avoid using
comparisons that create more fear than illumination.” he warned. https://www.france24.com/en/20200320-how-does-the-coronavirus-compare-to-the-spanish-flu
Similarly, in copying measures successfully being
deployed in countries like Israel and the US in their response to COVID-19, we
must learn to go the whole hog and begin to value human life in this country,
in general terms, and not only when we are under the scrutiny of international
radar – as in a global pandemic. For
instance we may ask if it is really appropriate to use the same parameters to
assess risks to COVID-19 in Nigeria as is done in Israel, when we currently
have over
two million Nigerians living in squalid pitiable conditions in IDP
camps, years after being
unlawfully displaced from their homes. Who
is able to convince these people that the government of Nigeria really cares
about them! On the other hand we see
from time to time, how sacrosanct the Israeli government considers the life of
each of her citizens. In fact, on one
occasion, it swapped over 1,000 enemy prisoners in exchange
for one soldier, Gilad Shalit! One
wonders what could have been the condition today, of that young courageous lady,
Leah Sharibu, were she to be an Israeli or American citizen. Risk assessments have to be holistic and
comprehensive, not half-measured and haphazard.
All the current razzmatazz of a response to COVID-19 in Nigeria gives
the sinking impression that we are again merely being pushed in certain
directions by foreign (specifically globalists), interests.
Why, for instance, do we have to wait endlessly for
WHO
endorsement before deciding that the well-reported treatment regime of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, could be incorporated under
appropriate medical supervision for the treatment of COVID-19 in Nigeria, as
some other countries (China, France, US) have reasonably decided – in the face of the
enormous socio-economic deprivations already being imposed? According to UN chief, Antonio Guterres: “We are in an
unprecedented situation and the normal rules no longer apply.”
Finally, we hasten to warn that the ongoing health
issue is only preparing the way for even more gruesome disruptions in the
social and economy sectors! While we envisage that the health-related issues
will be resolved as mankind generally achieves herd immunity towards COVID-19,
possibly in a couple of months from now; we expect the calamitous impact on the
global economy to become apparent soon thereafter. As averred by UN chief Antonio Guterres, a global economic recession, “perhaps of record
dimensions”, is a near certainty. Coming
from the world’s number 1 diplomat, that’s a very heavy statement indeed! And
yet, we believe, even that economic fall-out would be a childplay compared with
the monumental fall-outs on the social dimension that would conclude the whole
process.
One doesn’t need to be a prophet or professor to
discern these forthcoming scenarios. The simple open truth is that the major chess
game that has been ongoing between globalists and
nationalists for a couple of centuries is now heading towards a sure closure. When ordinarily brilliant people begin to
advocate silly unsupportable positions, it is only indicative of some ulterior
agenda at work! Noting how global health
authorities are suppressing information about upcoming efficient treatments for
COVID-19, Senta Depuydt penned a very insightful article on the Children’s Health
Defense blog, with the self-explanatory title: Does the Coronavirus Pandemic
serve a Global Agenda? The article beautifully summarized the position to which
we (ChurchArise!) have been sensitizing the Church in Nigeria for over two
decades. For example an article in this 2001 newsletter described ongoing desperate moves to push the
global government agenda forward, using the Hegelian principle of Thesis (Create
a Problem) – Antithesis (Generate opposition
to the problem – fear, panic, hysteria) – and finally Synthesis (Offer THE Solution
to the problem). As we further highlighted severally, (for
example see section II of our Book Behold I come Quickly Vol II), apart
from Health, other possible instigators of “global problems” that would require
“global solution” in the Hegelian scheme are Environment, Terrorism, and the Economy.
It is not likely that the globalists would allow to go
“waste,” the opportunities currently being offered them by COVID-19. We believe the process described above is
already irreversibly initiated. The
genie is out of the bottle, the hounds have tasted blood. For instance, it is
now demonstrated that Churches all over the world (including militant Nigeria),
could be politely asked to close indefinitely; and that the general populace could
be restrained from social gathering -
even in a democratic dispensation. Clearly, the path to the
scenario described in Rev 13:16-17 is opened, and it is only a matter of time (probably
a short time) before the man arrives, who would keep “all, both
great and small, rich and poor” under absolute economic and social lockdowns on
his terms.
Our confidence as a Christian organization however, is
that in all these things our God indeed holds all the aces and all things work
together for the good of those who love Him. He is master at catching the
wicked in their own conceits and He can well use even our mistakes and
imperfections to His glory and our ultimate benefits. We therefore urge everyone reading this to
cooperate, as far as they are able, with the policies being rolled out by the government
in Nigeria, albeit with keen discernment. Instead of this being a time to worry
endlessly, the ongoing lockdowns could provide physical rest for children of
God across board. Instead of the closure of church buildings dousing our
spiritual fire, this could be a time to step up personal Bible study and
strengthen the koinona house fellowship, as in the early Church.
The ultimate
loser will be the fellow who refuses to see the cascading evil and fails to
safeguard himself appropriately by taking refuge under the sure shadow of the
Almighty God (Proverbs 22:3, Psalms 91).
There is room for everyone under His loving wings, and He has promised
never to reject anyone who would approach Him with humility and sincerity. As
it is written in the Scriptures, “Draw nigh unto God, and He will draw nigh
unto you” (James 4:8). I will never, no never, reject one of
them who comes to Me].
(John 6:37
Amplified).
Church Arise!
Ile-Ife,
26th March, 2
