CG Podcast

In this episode, we’re joined by Professor David Paton, a health economist at the University of Nottingham, to reflect on the UK government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We’ll examine the costs of lockdown measures, the societal impact, and explore the decision-making process. A central question in assessing the government's actions is whether they fully considered the costs of their decisions. Rishi Sunak, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, later admitted some Cabinet members tried to raise concerns about the economic and social consequences of lockdowns but were discouraged from speaking out. Professor Paton argues that this highlights a fundamental flaw in the decision-making process, which focused almost entirely on reducing COVID-related deaths and preventing the NHS from being overwhelmed. However, he says this approach overlooked long-term economic and social consequences. The economic costs were vast. The government spent around £400 billion on measures like the furlough scheme and business support, with £140 billion used to pay people and businesses to stay closed. While some argue these measures were essential, Professor Paton questions what else that money could have been used for, such as improving healthcare or education—services linked to health and longevity. The fiscal consequences are still felt today, with tax increases and cuts to services now on the horizon. Mental health also suffered, with isolation and uncertainty taking a psychological toll. Professor Paton stresses that these social and mental health costs are just as significant—and harder to quantify—than financial ones. Prof Paton also argues, the government didn’t explore whether lockdowns were truly effective in reducing COVID cases or saving lives. While some scientific models predicted disaster without lockdowns, they failed to account for the voluntary behavioural changes people were already making. His research shows many people were social distancing and avoiding crowded spaces long before any formal government measures were enforced. Professor Paton says these voluntary actions were likely more impactful than the strict legal mandates that followed. The podcast also touches on censorship and the suppression of alternative voices during the pandemic. Many experts questioned the effectiveness of lockdowns but faced pressure to conform. Countries like Sweden, which implemented fewer restrictions, fared no worse than those with stricter measures, suggesting there was no one-size-fits-all solution. Ultimately, Professor Paton argues that future decision-making must include a wider range of voices, with open debate ensuring more balanced and effective responses to public health crises.

In this episode, we discuss the profound impact of school closures and online education during the harsh COVID-19 lockdown in Peru. We talk to Professor Norma Correa Aste, a specialist in social policy and child development, based in Lima. As the mother of two girls, Norma became a high profile campaigner for school and university reopening and better pandemic responses for children, young people and vulnerable families in Peru and Latin America. In Peru, the education system was shut down for nearly two years, during the pandemic from March 2020 to December 2021. Professor Correa highlights the huge challenges faced by children and families, shedding light on the often-overlooked consequences of these decisions. While shopping centres, stadiums, and other public spaces reopened, schools remained closed, with children left to navigate online lessons in isolation. For many, the shift to remote education exacerbated existing inequalities, as many had no access to the internet, computers, or a stable home environment conducive to learning. Prof Correa says children’s welfare was not considered in decision-making during the pandemic. In Peru, she says, even pets were allowed outside before children, and public parks were sealed off, making it nearly impossible for children to get fresh air or exercise. Official communications even reinforced the idea that children were major vectors of the virus, further stigmatising them as a threat to public health. The emphasis on safety, while important, often came at the cost of children’s mental health, social development, and access to education. For children in rural areas or low-income families, the lack of connectivity and technological resources meant remote education was not viable. In many cases, children were forced to leave school to help their families survive, as poverty rates increased and economic hardship worsened. Remote learning, instead of bridging the gap, deepened social inequality, especially for children in public schools who lacked the resources enjoyed by those in private education. As the situation grew more dire, a group of concerned parents, including Prof Correa formed a grassroots initiative "Volvamos a Clases" (Go Back to Class) calling for children to return to school. Despite intense opposition and misinformation, their efforts eventually led to the reopening of schools in 2022. This podcast episode highlights the stark contrast between the experiences of children from different socio-economic backgrounds during the pandemic and emphasises the importance of considering the broader social, psychological, and educational costs when making policy decisions. It also serves as a powerful reminder of the need for inclusive policy making that prioritises the well-being of children and addresses the systemic inequalities that were exposed by the pandemic.

In this insightful podcast episode, Professor Norma Correa explores how Peru's strict and prolonged lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted education and poverty. The lockdowns led to a sharp rise in poverty levels from 20 percent to 30 percent, particularly in urban areas where informal employment was as high as 72 percent. Government interventions, such as cash transfers and company financing, offered some relief, but many vulnerable groups were overlooked. Civil society initiatives, stepped in to support those in need, highlighting the resilience of local communities. Rural regions faced additional struggles, with limited access to healthcare and essential services worsening existing inequalities. The enforcement of strict measures by the military and police further highlighted the challenges faced by Peru during this period. Despite its harsh lockdown Peru was one of the worst hit countries in the world for Covid deaths.

Prof David Paton, Professor of Industrial Economics from Nottingham University, discussed his research on COVID-19 suppression measures, including vaccine mandates and lockdowns. He said lockdowns - designed to save lives lacked evidence and may have even increased death rates due to reduced non-covid healthcare. Prof Paton criticised the government's decision-making process, emphasising the importance of considering the harms and ethics of public health measures. He also examined the impact of vaccine mandates in care homes, finding no significant reduction in mortality and a net loss of 14,000 to 18,000 care home workers. Prof Paton argued the focus on vaccinating younger, low-risk groups was misguided and unethical because the risks outweighed any potential benefits for them.

Professor Karol Sikora, a leading cancer professor discusses censorship with journalist Lucy Johnston, with particular emphasis on a study about the risks and benefits of masks for children, a social media post by Karol about this study was deleted from LinkedIn. Professor Sikora criticises the censorship of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccine debates online during the pandemic, highlighting the negative impact on cancer diagnosis and treatment. He argues that the pandemic response was overreactive, leading to delayed cancer diagnoses and poorer outcomes for those patients affected. The discussion also touches on the need for open debate and evidence-based decision-making in future pandemics.

Graham Brady sits down with journalist Lucy Johnston to discuss his book "Kingmaker," detailing his unique perspective on British politics. He highlights the negative impacts of pandemic measures, including £400 billion in public debt, NHS backlogs, and increased mental health issues among children. Brady criticized the arbitrary nature of lockdowns and restrictions, noting their ineffectiveness and the government's reluctance to change course. He recounted interactions with the then Prime Minister Boris Johnson, emphasising inconsistencies in policy decisions and the suppression of dissenting scientific views. Brady also addressed the role of big tech in shaping public opinion and the need for nuanced debate on future pandemics.

Kevin Bardosh sits down with Geoffrey Shullenberger, an American cultural theorist and editor at Compact magazine, to discuss his latest book (edited with Elena Lange), Covid-19 and the Left: The Tyranny of Fear. We discuss how the political left, in America and Europe, responded to the pandemic both early on and as it unfolded. Despite some significant contributions in critical analysis, the majority of left-leaning thinkers were silent about Covid authoritarian tendencies. Why was this? And what happened? We explore these questions, and situate them in the broader historical changes within leftist thinking and culture that shaped how people reacted to fear, tribal identity and scientific evidence. We end by discussing the legacy of Covid on our cultural landscape.

Kevin Bardosh sits down with Rajiv Bhatia, a Stanford primary care physician and former deputy health officer in San Francisco, California. Rajiv discusses his experience challenging the state of emergency in California on ethical and process grounds, including his communication with public health colleagues in the early days of the Covid pandemic. A veteran public health officer, Rajiv also discusses the alarming lack of basic epidemiological analysis in California at the time and the implications of this, as the pandemic evolved, for government policy blindspots and groupthink. We finish by reflecting on the future of pandemic response.

Kevin Bardosh sits down with Eric Winsberg, a professor of philosophy at the University of South Florida and British Academy Global Professor at the Department of History and Philosophy, University of Cambridge. Eric is the author (along with Stephanie Harvard) of a recent book, Models in Science and Decision-Making. We discuss his book and how philosophy can help us better understand how models are constructed under conditions of uncertainty, their role in guiding public policy, and how they are influenced by contested value judgements. We end by reflecting on some of the critical lessons from the Covid years for the future of infectious disease modelling and the governance of science.

Kevin Bardosh sits down with Christine Van Geyn, a lawyer and the director of litigation at the Canadian Constitutional Foundation. Christine is the author (along with Joanna Baron) of the 2023 book, Pandemic Panic: How Canadian Government Responses to Covid-19 Changed Civil Liberties Forever. We discuss the most egregious civil liberties violations in Canada during Covid, the erosion of legal standards that accompanied them, and the implications of this for the future.