Whitmer Cited ‘Science’ for Her COVID Lockdown Measures, Until She Didn’t

Hard sciences don't have all the answers, and shouldn't be the sole factor in making policy.

By
23

Since March 24, when Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer first issued a stay-at-home order, one word has come up again and again: science. She has defended both mundane and controversial elements of her various executive orders as being “informed by the best science” and relying on “a data-driven approach based on facts, based on science.” 

Using epidemiological medical science and data is crucial in aiding the political decisions required by a global pandemic. However, it’s important to note the downside of relying on science alone in making these decisions. 

During the press conference announcing the stay-at-home order, Whitmer justified the decision based on a model that predicted up to 7 million COVID-19 infections and 1 million hospitalizations in the state of Michigan alone. Attempting to assuage fears, she said that the order would be temporary “to buy time so we can create surge capacity in our hospitals.” 

Despite these initial claims, the order continued, even as hospitals throughout Michigan remained below peak occupancy, with major hospital systems laying off thousands of workers, partially due to another executive order prohibiting non-essential medical procedures. 

Create a free account
Access additional articles and newsletters for no cost, no credit card information needed. Continue ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
23
By
Comments (23)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    The Bell Tower

    An excellent article. There is seldom justice in democracy but perhaps an educated electorate will chuck Whitmer into the ash bin of history when her time comes.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    F.X. LEACH

    "In light of an unprecedented and continually evolving situation, the state’s response should be measured and reflect this imperfect knowledge. "

    I guess this applies to the imperfections of those we criticize, Tyler. Great analysis, but in an imperfect situation ... it creates imperfect response. If the science changes (and it really doesn't bc mostly its been spun studies without peer-reviews and a churn of blovation from left and right). The science... real science.. takes time. The rest is a guessing game until proper data and hindsight is made. So the statement that science is changing seems to ignore this. So... it isn't science... but best practice. Oh wait... we had no practice for this either. Hmmm. Seems that some over-reaching analysis is missing some reality. The piece and criticism has merit... but the over-arching theme... falls a bit flat.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Pat Riot

      Reminds me of that time the governor told everybody to prepare for a killer hurricane and it wasn't very powerful so the people criticized the governor because...?

      Collapse
      1. Chris Yim

        The difference being, when a hurricane flattens your home, the governor doesn't make a point of telling you your cries for help mean nothing to them. They also don't arrest you for digging through the rubble.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Pat Riot

          So wait, Whitmer didn't support hospitals in her state? Can you provide a link for this?

          I'm not sure what the "digging through the rubble" analogy would mean though.

          Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Pat Riot

    Um, "science" means making decisions based on the available evidence. It is not the same as "omniscience" for instance.

    The only mortal alternative to science is... whim.

    Yes, in retrospect Whitmer could have been wrong about some of her decisions at the time because we have the benefit of hindsight, which we didn't before. It will undoubtedly come out that some of the things we thought might be dangerous weren't very dangerous.

    Prudent government leaders keep people safe and err on the side of being safe. That's what we want.

    I don't understand what the author thinks Whitmer should have done here instead: just made up some other guess? Maybe played around with the Swedish approach and waited to see how many died? What?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      DougCLE

      Also, wouldn’t “omni-science” mean “all science”? In which case, all science is omniscience.
      Q.E.D.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Pat Riot

        English is a mess.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      DougCLE

      From what I hear - and I admit I haven’t followed it that closely - she could’ve started by being a lot more forthcoming about both her numbers and her reasoning. I can think of at least one good reason to ban buying paint but not bread, but it still *looks* arbitrary. If you have good reasons, you need to *tell* people; otherwise they’ll think you’re blowing smoke.
      And for goodness’ sake, admit it when you screwed up, and say you’re sorry. People are more forgiving of an honest apology than a “mistakes were made” sidestep, which is what her explanations sound like.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Pat Riot

        If a governor orders an evacuation for a hurricane that didn't come, it is not a "mistake" that needs an "apology". She worked with the science she had and erred on the side of public safety. This is what any prudent governor would do.

        I'm certainly willing to hear arguments that Whitmer and others didn't communicate well enough, but even *that* sounds like a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking. It was an emergency and they had *days* to figure out what to do with absolutely no help from the federal agencies we've all funded for the last century to help her.

        Now, could she have, say, changed some guidance as information became available? Maybe that would be fair criticism.

        Collapse
      2. Ann G

        Because painting without adequate safety measures could compromise your lungs making you more susceptible to the virus? Because people would have painting parties so they didn't have to do all the work to repaint the living room by themselves and it would mean violating distancing rules and compromising more lungs?

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          DougCLE

          O. M. G. It’s like you read my mind...

          Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Victor Clairmont

    Science sadly, is a term used to bludgeon your opponent into submission just because he doesn’t know or understand the facts, rather than calmly explaining why they are wrong. But to those that believe in science, many them are to ashamed to admit that it is also beholden to political pressure.

    When a scientist in the UK made a joke about falling in love in a lab and that’s why women shouldn’t be in the laboratory (The joke was this is how he met his wife), not even Richard Dawkins could save him from being fired and the torrent of abuse heaped upon him by the politically active. When Sam Harris promotes science and reason, only to see how easily the hus fellow citizens are not the good rational types he thought that humanity had evolved and become with rioting in 50 states, he retreats off Twitter to play with his kids because he has no answer to the fact that in the few thousand years of written history, humanity is still as base as it was in the paganistic tribes that sacrificed children (stepping off the internet to raise your family is great by the way) and law and civilization and morality keeps this tendency in check. When J.K. Rowling, and absolute ally of the LGBT movement makes the simple scientific observation that maybe, MAYBE we should be careful of children who wish to transition from male to female or vice versa that it may not be safe at such a young to take chemicals and do surgeries that forever change your body with no way to go back, and and we are erasing the concept of male, female, or sexes, she is met with torrents of abuse, former actors like Harry Potters Daniel Radcliffe denouncing her. Book burning of a fictional magical hogwarts world for gods sake. She then has to give a full throated defense of feminism from the mob. Science? What science? This is the Post Age of truth. Rage above truth. And this is what the religious, whether one likes it at all or not (or doesn’t believe in God/gods etc) always knew: man’s nature hasn’t changed. No matter how far technology advances or how many iPhones we wield. After all, we were always “One generation away from losing our freedom”. It still is today. Isn’t that why you are all on the dispatch? To seek after truth in a post truth world.

    Collapse
    1. David Gaskin

      Would be very interested to see approximately how many social media mobsters there really are out there? They do seem like the tail wagging the dog b/c, despite their likely small numbers, their agenda is driving a wedge between larger groups so as to control societal norms and behaviors. The world would not be so bad had twitter and Facebook not come along.

      Collapse
      1. Luke Thompson

        The problem is that a lot of brands need high ratings and don't want negative feedback. And sympathetic outlets will amplify both the attacks and the apology far beyond what they deserve. Ben Shapiro has actually said multiple times that he regrets doing it, but he set up a counter-Media Matters for a little bit that was apparently successful without a whole lot of work.
        As Mr. Goldberg has said a few times, we're really bad at knowing whether Twitter is some abstract concept that doesn't apply to us, or our neighbors. Our brains aren't really set up to recognize that all of the people saying mean things are strangers and their opinions don't matter. So any group that appears larger than Dunbar's number, unless it's significantly outnumbered by supporters, is going to wreck us.

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Victor Clairmont

        Honestly? And this is guesswork on my part with what facts we have: There are 43 million twitter accounts in the US, (This does not account for US bots, trolls making multiple accounts to spam or buttress their accounts or harass. Twitter just banned 200,000 Chinese bot accounts spreading disinformation after an expose in NYT's and other news outlets) There are 262 million international accounts (People from the UK, Russia, etc). So you are at a platform in total of 300 million plus users. Out of that, 152 million twitter users do daily interactions. The US is 31 million active users. So out of 320 million Americans, a little under 10% actively use twitter. Now, how many of those are just grandma or mommy using twitter to follow their kids or favorite Kardashian? Don't know. How many of those are the loudmouth hardcore political types asking for boycotts? Not sure, but I doubt it's as big as they seem.

        However, even if it's small, if 1000 people on twitter decide to swamp a single person's account for something politically incorrect, you would think that the whole world hates you. Even though 6,999,998,000 don't care around the planet or know who you are. Also, it's easier to start conflict for clicks and retweets (Grifters, racists, liars, biased accounts) than it is to be kind and rational that doesn't rial people up. Remember, any correction done on twitter gets so few retweets, as opposed to the false information or lie tweeted in the first place.

        A lot of it is fake, and that's why facts die the death of a thousand deaths: It doesn't get you clicks.

        I could be wrong, feel free to disagree. If you want access to the info I pulled up, just type in google Twitter by the numbers.

        Collapse
  5. Smokey Bandit

    I'm going to have to add Hayek to my bookshelf now after seeing nuggets like this, “The collectivist method … bases its demands for conscious control on the assumption that it can comprehend the process as a whole and make use of all knowledge in a systematically integrated form. It thus leads directly to political collectivism.”

    Collapse
    1. Luke Thompson

      My favorite Hayek quote is "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design," from The Fatal Conceit. And, of course, everyone should watch the econstories videos, because they're phenomenal.
      http://econstories.tv/video/fear-the-boom-and-bust
      http://econstories.tv/series/keynes-vs-hayek

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Victor Clairmont

        Always a great quote from Hayek.

        Collapse
  6. John Anthony

    The folly and tragedy of political theater. There was no science at work in the governor’s orders. I’m not even entirely convinced this is an example of Hayek’s carefully constructed critique of scientism. This is more an example of sacrificing the few for the good of the political agenda.

    Collapse
  7. Mitchell

    It is incredibly gross that the governor has abused her power this egregiously. Her allowing her own biases to affect her public policy in regards to COVID makes me want to vomit. People lost their jobs and lives because of her orders to shelter in place (ironically in place, ostensibly, to protect lives), yet she also has exactly zero issues with defying her own orders for the purpose of pushing her own social justice agenda. How should this be seen as anything other than hypocrisy of the highest order? Or, more accurately, how should this be viewed by all the unemployed in her state as anything other than a giant slap in the face?

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Aylene Wright

    Excellent points here about "scientism", which I have long noted being used in politics as a debate-stifling Appeal to Authority. I should also note that public health is not just about disease suppression anyway; I agree that racism DOES threaten public health, and I suspect not just of those directly affected, but so do the negative effects of lockdown measures. I read a tear-inducing article recently about how patients locked away in nursing homes without being able to contact their loved ones basically lost their will to live, and died. https://www.npr.org/2020/06/09/870159589/banned-from-nursing-homes-families-see-shocking-decline-in-their-loved-ones

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Chris L

    Seeing three paragraphs devoted to Hayek woven into a COVID-19 governance article makes me feel warm and fuzzy.

    Collapse