Connect with us

Opinion

Lockdown Vs herd immunity

Published

on

There is, at present, a scientific debate on the relative merit of lockdown and herd immunity in the management of Covid-19 with substantial amount of good research going on. However there is no consensus among top researchers on this matter. They still do not say in one voice that one method is better than the other though the majority view seems to be in favour of lockdown.

Lockdown methods aim at lowering the reproduction number, ie. the actual number to whom each infected person could transmit the infection. Herd immunity attempts to allow people less likely to die lead their normal life thereby allowing the disease to spread causing immunity in a majority, while protecting those at high risk. Opponents say lockdown method doesn’t prevent but only delays the spread of infection. On the other hand herd immunity is said to be unethical and perhaps criminal allowing a viciously virulent virus free access to susceptible people.

England and Sweden had been suitable countries for comparative study and several researchers had studied the method adopted to control Covid in these two countries. Infection and death rates have been determined and analyzed using sophisticated statistical methods. England had first tried out herd immunity and later changed over to lockdown methods after advisers had asked Prime Minister Boris Johnson how many millions will have to die before herd immunity became effective and a mathematical model had shown that 5100000 would die if steps to lockdown are not taken. Sweden had chosen herd immunity from the time Covid started in that country up to the present. Some studies compare the situation in Sweden with that of other Scandinavian countries that had adopted lockdown methods.

According to most of the studies incidence of infection and death rates in England had come down after it started lockdown. Further it was found that these rates in England were lower compared to those in Sweden (Moaath K, et al, 2020, Thomas L, Aug. 2020). The daily incidence of infection dropped by 19 cases per 10 million after the lockdown in England compared to Sweden, and death rate by two deaths per 10 million. Also rates in Sweden were high compared to those in other Scandinavian countries such as Netherlands and Finland which had opted for lockdown methods.

Notwithstanding all these findings a statement known as the Great Barrington Declaration has been issued by three eminent scientists; epidemiologists from Harvard and Oxford and community medicine expert from Stanford and also several other cosigners. They are of the opinion that lockdown is a case of the cure being worse than the illness. Lockdown not only disrupts the economy but also the health of the people as normal health activities like vaccination of the young and cancer screening of the elderly are not possible. These could be irreparable effects that cannot be corrected after Covid.

However critics say herd immunity method could cause long term health consequences, which are known as Long-Covid, in the young as well as the elderly. Four types of syndromes are identified as Long-Covid cases, some have permanent damage to lungs and heart, others get post infection fatigue, some end up with continuous Covid symptoms and some have post ICU syndrome. These complications have prompted epidemiologists like G. Gonsales of the Yale University to say herd immunity method is nothing but “culling the herd of the sick and the disabled. It’s grotesque”. There are researchers who conclude that herd immunity has failed in Sweden. They have found that antibodies are not present in the mildly ill or the asymptomatic patients which is central to the concept of herd immunity.

Population of Sweden is about half that of Sri Lanka. Number of Covid cases in Sweden is more than 100,000 and deaths almost 6000. In contrast we have in Sri Lanka with double the population about 6000 cases and 13 deaths, what a contrast !. Is there any reason why we should change our strategy in tackling Covid. The first wave was controlled with an island-wide curfew and lockdown in the affected areas. Cases were cut down to a minimum and this allowed the limited health facilities to be used with optimum results, the death rate being among the lowest in the world. Our concern for stranded citizens in foreign lands where Covid raged made us make a special effort to bring them home and some of them came with Covid and have caused a second wave. Should we grumble, I am sure not. This time around the strategy has somewhat changed with lessons learnt. There is no island-wide curfew, let us hope the need would never arise, and instead there is strict lockdown in the affected areas and in the rest of the country life goes on as usual. Let us hope the death rate would remain at present level and the infection brought under control. If the people cooperate with the health authorities and the armed forces and the police we could succeed yet again.

N.A. de S. Amaratunga



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

We do not want to be press-ganged 

Published

on

Reference ,the Indian High Commissioner’s recent comments ( The Island, 9th Jan. ) on strong India-Sri Lanka relationship and the assistance granted on recovering from the financial collapse of Sri Lanka and yet again for cyclone recovery., Sri Lankans should express their  thanks to India for standing up as a friendly neighbour.

On the Defence Cooperation agreement, the Indian High Commissioner’s assertion was that there was nothing beyond that which had been included in the text. But, dear High Commissioner, we Sri Lankans have burnt our fingers when we signed agreements with the European nations who invaded our country; they took our leaders around the Mulberry bush and made our nation pay a very high price by controlling our destiny for hundreds of years. When the Opposition parties in the Parliament requested the Sri Lankan government to reveal the contents of the Defence agreements signed with India as per the prevalent common practice, the government’s strange response was  that India did not want them disclosed.

Even the terms of the one-sided infamous Indo-Sri Lanka agreement, signed in 1987, were disclosed to the public.

Mr. High Commissioner, we are not satisfied with your reply as we are weak, economically, and unable to clearly understand your “India’s Neighbourhood First and  Mahasagar policies” . We need the details of the defence agreements signed with our government, early.

 

RANJITH SOYSA 

Continue Reading

Opinion

When will we learn?

Published

on

At every election—general or presidential—we do not truly vote, we simply outvote. We push out the incumbent and bring in another, whether recycled from the past or presented as “fresh.” The last time, we chose a newcomer who had spent years criticising others, conveniently ignoring the centuries of damage they inflicted during successive governments. Only now do we realise that governing is far more difficult than criticising.

There is a saying: “Even with elephants, you cannot bring back the wisdom that has passed.” But are we learning? Among our legislators, there have been individuals accused of murder, fraud, and countless illegal acts. True, the courts did not punish them—but are we so blind as to remain naive in the face of such allegations? These fraudsters and criminals, and any sane citizen living in this decade, cannot deny those realities.

Meanwhile, many of our compatriots abroad, living comfortably with their families, ignore these past crimes with blind devotion and campaign for different parties. For most of us, the wish during an election is not the welfare of the country, but simply to send our personal favourite to the council. The clearest example was the election of a teledrama actress—someone who did not even understand the Constitution—over experienced and honest politicians.

It is time to stop this bogus hero worship. Vote not for personalities, but for the country. Vote for integrity, for competence, and for the future we deserve.

 

Deshapriya Rajapaksha

Continue Reading

Opinion

Chlorophyll –The Life-giver is in peril

Published

on

Chlorophyll

Chlorophyll is the green pigment found in plants, algae, and cyanobacteria. It is essential for photosynthesis, the process by which light energy is converted into chemical energy to sustain life on Earth. As it is green it reflects Green of the sunlight spectrum and absorbs its  Red and Blue ranges. The energy in these rays are used to produce carbohydrates utilising water and carbon dioxide and releasing oxygen in the process. Thus, it performs, in this reaction, three functions essential for life on earth; it produces food and oxygen and removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to maintain equilibrium in our environment. It is one of the wonders of nature that are in peril today. It is essential for life on earth, at least for the present, as there are no suitable alternatives. While chlorophyll can be produced in a lab, it cannot be produced using simple, everyday chemicals in a straightforward process. The total synthesis of chlorophyll is an extremely complex multi-step organic chemistry process that requires specialized knowledge, advanced laboratory equipment, and numerous complex intermediary compounds and catalysts.

Chlorophyll probably evolved inside bacteria in water and migrated to land with plants that preceded animals who also evolved in water. Plants had to come on land first to oxygenate the atmosphere and make it possible for animals to follow. There was very little oxygen in the ocean or on the surface before chlorophyll carrying bacteria and algae started photosynthesis. Now 70% of our atmospheric oxygen is produced by sea phytoplankton and algae, hence the importance of the sea as a source of oxygen.

Chemically, chlorophyll is a porphyrin compound with a central magnesium (Mg²⁺) ion. Factors that affect its production and function are light intensity, availability of nutrients, especially nitrogen and magnesium,  water supply and temperature. Availability of nutrients and temperature could be adversely affected due to sea pollution and global warming respectively.

Temperature range for optimum chlorophyll function is 25 – 35 C depending on the types of plants. Plants in temperate climates are adopted to function at lower temperatures and those in tropical regions prefer higher temperatures. Chlorophyll in most plants work most efficiently at 30 C. At lower temperatures it could slow down and become dormant. At temperatures above 40 C chlorophyll enzymes  begin to denature and protein complexes can be damaged.  Photosynthesis would decline sharply at these high temperatures.

Global warming therefore could affect chlorophyll function and threaten its very existence. Already there is a qualitative as well as quantitative decline of chlorophyll particularly in the sea. The last decade has been the hottest ten years and 2024 the hottest year since recording had started. The ocean absorbs 90% of the excess heat that reaches the Earth due to the greenhouse effect. Global warming has caused sea surface temperatures to rise significantly, leading to record-breaking temperatures in recent years (like 2023-2024), a faster warming rate (four times faster than 40 years ago), and more frequent, intense marine heatwaves, disrupting marine life and weather patterns. The ocean’s surface is heating up much faster, about four times quicker than in the late 1980s, with the last decade being the warmest on record. 2023 and 2024 saw unprecedented high sea surface temperatures, with some periods exceeding previous records by large margins, potentially becoming the new normal.

Half of the global sea surface has gradually changed in colour indicating chlorophyll decline (Frankie Adkins, 2024, Z Hong, 2025). Sea is blue in colour due to the absorption of Red of the sunlight spectrum  by water and reflecting Blue. When the green chlorophyll of the phytoplankton is decreased the sea becomes bluer. Researchers from MIT and Georgia Tech found these color changes are global, affecting over half the ocean’s surface in the last two decades, and are consistent with climate model predictions. Sea phytoplankton and algae produce more than 70% of the atmospheric oxygen, replenishing what is consumed by animals. Danger to the life of these animals including humans due to decline of sea chlorophyll is obvious. Unless this trend is reversed there would be irreparable damage and irreversible changes in the ecosystems that involve chlorophyll function as a vital component.

The balance 30% of oxygen is supplied mainly by terrestrial plants which are lost due mainly to human action, either by felling and clearing or due to global warming. Since 2000, approximately 100 million hectares of forest area was lost globally by 2018 due to permanent deforestation. More recent estimates from the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) indicate that an estimated 420 million hectares of forest have been lost through deforestation since 1990, with a net loss of approximately 4.7 million hectares per year between 2010 and 2020 (accounting for forest gains by reforestation). From 2001 to 2024, there had been a total of 520 million hectares of tree cover loss globally. This figure includes both temporary loss (e.g., due to fires or logging where forests regrow) and permanent deforestation. Roughly 37% of tree cover loss since 2000 was likely permanent deforestation, resulting in conversion to non-forest land uses such as agriculture, mining, or urban development. Tropical forests account for the vast majority (nearly 94%) of permanent deforestation, largely driven by agricultural expansion.  Limiting warming to 1.5°C significantly reduces risks, but without strong action, widespread plant loss and biodiversity decline are projected, making climate change a dominant threat to nature, notes the World Economic Forum. Tropical trees are Earth’s climate regulators—they cool the planet, store massive amounts of carbon, control rainfall, and stabilize global climate systems. Losing them would make climate change faster, hotter, and harder to reverse.

Another vital function of chlorophyll is carbon fixing. Carbon fixation by plants is crucial because it converts atmospheric carbon dioxide into organic compounds, forming the base of the food web, providing energy/building blocks for life, regulating Earth’s climate by removing greenhouse gases, and driving the global carbon cycle, making life as we know it possible. Plants use carbon fixation (photosynthesis) to create their own food (sugars), providing energy and organic matter that sustains all other life forms.  By absorbing vast amounts of CO2 (a greenhouse gas) from the atmosphere, plants help control its concentration, mitigating global warming. Chlorophyll drives the Carbon Cycle, it’s the primary natural mechanism for moving inorganic carbon into the biosphere, making it available for all living organisms.

In essence, carbon fixation turns the air we breathe out (carbon dioxide) into the food we eat and the air we breathe in (oxygen), sustaining ecosystems and regulating our planet’s climate.

While land plants store much more total carbon in their biomass, marine plants (like phytoplankton) and algae fix nearly the same amount of carbon annually as all terrestrial plants combined, making the ocean a massive and highly efficient carbon sink, especially coastal ecosystems that sequester carbon far faster than forests. Coastal marine plants (mangroves, salt marshes, seagrasses) are extremely efficient carbon sequesters, absorbing carbon at rates up to 50 times faster than terrestrial forests.

If Chlorophyll decline, which is mainly due to human action driven by uncontrolled greed, is not arrested as soon as possible life on Earth would not be possible.

(Some information was obtained from Wikipedia)

by N. A. de S. Amaratunga ✍️

Continue Reading

Trending