“The Post’s greatest distortion isn’t about COVID itself, but how history is being rewritten. Erased from their memory are the catastrophic harms from lockdowns, closures, and exaggerated vaccine promises.”
In its recent retrospective on COVID-19, the Washington Post attempted a sleight of historical hand, conveniently blurring inconvenient realities and sanitizing the flawed pandemic response. Popular Rationalism will have none of it.
WashPo Myth 1: Lockdowns were narrowly tailored and successful
The Post claims lockdowns “flattened the curve,” preventing health system collapse. Yet, it ignores extensive evidence that lockdowns had minimal impact on COVID mortality while causing immense collateral harm. Meta-analyses by Herby, Jonung, and Hanke (2022) found negligible mortality reduction, while documented harms—economic collapse, delayed care, plunging cancer screening rates, and severe mental health impacts on children—mounted drastically. School closures devastated youth mental health, disrupted education, and exacerbated inequities (JAMA Pediatrics, PMID 35040870). The “flatten the curve” rhetoric quickly devolved into prolonged societal disruption far exceeding original public-health intentions.
No one who started it put an end to it. We ended it. YOU ended it.
WashPo Myth 2: COVID risk was uniform and universally grave
The Post suggests that early COVID severity has simply been forgotten. In reality, early analyses consistently revealed dramatic age stratification. COVID mortality risk ranged from extremely low in children and young adults (0.002%–0.057%) to very high in elderly populations (up to 20%) (Lancet, PMID 35219376). Pediatric COVID risk was concentrated among children with significant comorbidities, and severe outcomes were rare otherwise (Archives of Disease in Childhood, PMID 33593743). Policies failed catastrophically to reflect this nuanced understanding of risk, resulting in undue harm and misguided mandates.
WashPo Myth 3: Vaccine effectiveness was mildly oversold
Admitting only a modest “overinterpretation,” the Post brushes aside how profoundly public trust was undermined by exaggerated vaccine promises. Initial vaccine trials explicitly evaluated protection against symptomatic disease—not transmission (NEJM, PMID 33301246). Yet officials and former, including Presidents Biden, Obama and Clinton assured Americans vaccines would halt infection entirely. These categorical misrepresentations underpinned sweeping mandates, which collapsed ethically once transmission continued widely among vaccinated populations (CDC Barnstable County, PMID 34351882). Furthermore, documented waning immunity against infection was rapid and severe (NEJM Qatar, PMID 34614327), and public messaging neglected significant natural and hybrid immunity (Lancet Infectious Diseases, PMID 36681084). These were not trivial messaging errors; they were foundational, costly misrepresentations that cost the Pre-Kennedy era “Public Health” their control of the U.S. Health and Human Services.
WashPo Myth 4: Pandemic policies only later became politicized
The narrative of an initially unified governmental response ignores the intense early politicization of COVID policies. From their outset, responses were shaped heavily by political affiliation rather than scientific evidence. Masking and closure measures were particularly controversial, and evidence of their effectiveness was mixed at best. The Cochrane review concluded community masking likely made little difference overall (PMID 36715243). States diverged significantly, driven by political motivations rather than epidemiological clarity, contradicting the Post’s sanitized claim of initial consensus.
The Deeper Misconception: Rewriting history as harmless nostalgia
The Post’s greatest distortion isn’t about COVID itself, but how history is being rewritten. Erased from their memory are the catastrophic harms from lockdowns, closures, and exaggerated vaccine promises. Omissions of crucial evidence and suppression of inconvenient truths serve not historical accuracy, but institutional reputations.
Popular Rationalism insists on rigorous honesty. History is immutable; attempts to rewrite it can only obscure critical lessons. Our collective memory must include complexities, errors, and nuance—preferable based on reality. We cannot sweep particularly uncomfortable truths under the rug because rewriting history does not undo history. If we hope to handle future crises rationally and ethically, we will all condemn the Orwellian hacks at the Post.
Remember, forever: Rewriting history does not undo history—it only prepares us poorly for the challenges ahead.
We count on you, our readers, to keep us going. Please consider upgrading to a paid subscription and sharing this important article.
Keep an eye on IPAK-EDU Course opportunities for the summer!
IPAK-EDU is grateful to Popular Rationalism as this piece was originally published there and is included in this news feed with mutual agreement. Read More
Leave a Reply