A new study suggests Kiwis were prepared to accept the Covid-19 elimination strategy's downsides at all costs, including deaths and job losses.
When New Zealand closed its borders and the country entered lockdown in March hundreds of businesses closed almost overnight and many Kiwis were left without a job.
Treatments and diagnosis for illnesses such as cancer were delayed for many Kiwis during the lockdown period.
Despite this, Kiwis were largely united in their stance to eliminate the virus, prevent the healthcare system from becoming overwhelmed and stop the economy from sliding into depression.
A mass health crisis was prevented and New Zealand’s healthcare system and economy is faring far better than other countries battling the pandemic.
Today new figures show GDP bounced back 14 per cent in the last quarter.
However, Covid-19 restrictions, although effective, didn’t come without great cost with the likes of international tourism coming to an end and unexpected unemployment for many.
Yet, elimination was a goal Kiwis were determined to reach despite those impacts, a new study has revealed.
A collaborative study led by the University of Otago - Moralization of COVID-19 Health Response: Asymmetry in Tolerance for Human Costs - examined how New Zealanders overlooked the harmful costs of eliminating the virus.
“I’m really interested in how people perceive the human cost, how people perceive human suffering – so that was our initial goal. How do people compare one cost verses the other?” lecturer in business ethics Dr Maja Graso says.
COLLATERAL DAMAGE
The study found New Zealanders were more likely to accept “collateral damage” from elimination efforts such as social shaming, lives lost, illnesses and police abuse of power.
Graso, who helped lead the research, says she was surprised by how strongly and consistent their findings were, but was also concerned about Kiwis' attitudes.
“The cost that people are accepting for preventing Covid and measures [taken] are extreme.
“It appears that Covid-19 has been elevated to one such invisible threat that must be combated at all cost.”
Graso says participants were more accepting of people dying or becoming ill because of postponed treatment due to Covid-19 restrictions than they were to people dying or becoming ill from the virus.
“Somehow people thought it was more acceptable, like the deaths are less troublesome because we overestimated Covid. So if we overreacted [to the virus] the deaths are more acceptable.”
The study found a similar trend with power given to police officers during lockdown. The study found Kiwis were accepting of officers "abusing their power" for preventing Covid over "abusing their power" to prevent the high rate of deaths on the roads.
She says even questioning if the restrictions were worth the financial and health consequences we face now and into the future was not tolerated by many Kiwis.
“It doesn’t even look like you can ask questions from peer-reviewed journals. I find that a bit concerning.”
Any evolving scientifically proven information on Covid-19 is treated as misinformation by the public if it doesn’t align with the elimination strategy New Zealand followed back in March, Graso says.
“Our study uncovered a clear and strong bias against research that uses peer-reviewed information to merely question elimination.
“What surprised us is that even peer review data was viewed as inaccurate or wrong if it was used to simply ask whether human suffering from continuing elimination could be worse than human suffering from abandoning elimination.”
RESPONSE MORALISED
The study, which surveyed 700 people, found New Zealanders ‘moralised’ the country’s response.
“Moralisation is elevating something to the level of ‘good’. The challenge is when things become moral imperatives - ‘this is for the greater good’ - then we cannot question it, we find it’s OK to demonise others, we find it more acceptable to shame other people and to silence them.
“I do find it concerning how easily people find it to demonise others and how they don’t necessarily think of how damaging it could be to them.”
Graso says examples of people bullying others online for different scientifically-backed ideas were an illustration of how people are reacting to “taboo Covid issues”.
“It’s changing the way we’re relating to each other - I mean going forward if this is how we’re going to engage with other people if there’s a mistake you’re penalised for it - it’s going to be a challenge.”
One of the reasons Kiwis may have such a passionate stance on the Covid-19 response is the raft of conspiracy theories shared online, says Graso.
“I believe that this finding can be explained by strong and highly necessary drive to combat deliberate misinformation in New Zealand.”
Moralising the response can also be the way New Zealanders ensure that the threat to them is taken seriously, she says.
Going forward, Graso says she is concerned New Zealanders will become closed to discussions on how to deal with Covid-19 and will disregard new scientific evidence.
“My greatest concern is that people aren’t even open to information that is from reliable sources. I view that as a significant barrier to going forward.”
SHARE ME