Ein Wissenschaftler*innen-Trio rund um John P. Ioannidis untersuchte die unübersehbaren Kollateralschäden der Covid-19-Maßnahmen und gibt Empfehlungen für die Zukunft.
Die in der Zeitschrift Frontiers in Public Health veröffentlichte, lesenswerte Studie behandelt auch Gruppenbildungs- und Sündenbock-Dynamiken in der Pandemiediskussion: „In times of crisis people will be inclined to look at governments and authorities to guide their behavior (…) Members of such groups often develop a high degree of emotional like-mindedness, and conventional inhibitions in such groups often decrease (…) the debate became highly polarized and politicized (…) In such a crowd, individuals tend to follow predominant ideas and emotions of the crowd, in a form of shared consciousness, or “collective mind.” Then it becomes relatively easy to violate personal and social norms and such crowds can become destructive (…) In times of crisis, blame is often laid on minority groups, who are subsequently scapegoated and persecuted (…) Mass formation can make people adopt ideas that are incompatible with their previous beliefs (…) Many people may realize that the direction society is moving in does not match with core values, such as humanness (e.g., consideration, empathy), critical thinking, and freedom (…) This kind of dehumanization of a large group could create a whole new kind of inequality: a privileged group of people religiously following governmental response vs. a scapegoated group questioning official policies.“
Die Empfehlungen der Autor*innen sind klar: 1. Keine Lockdowns mehr in der Zukunft; stattdessen Vorzug für „nicht-disruptive“ Maßnahmen. 2. Die Folgeschäden aggressiver Maßnahmen sollten nüchtern bilanziert und ihre Last und Langzeitfolgen abgemildert werden. 3. Gruppenbildung sollte verhindert und der Reflexivitätsgrad politischer Entscheidungen erhöht werden.