Why has it been the Spanish Government, which is considered left-wing, that has applied one of the world’s hardest confinements, especially to the population and children?

We were lucky enough to be one of the first affected countries after China and Italy. At first, very little was known about the virus and there was a lot of fear for the evil it could cause. Draconian measures similar to those taken by China were adopted in Italy and Spain.

But in a few weeks the virus was well known. Among other things, it was immediately known to whom they attacked and to whom they did not. The coronavirus, in particular, attacks older people and people who are previously ill. From that point on, stricter and more stringent measures could be taken, and not so indiscriminate.

Statistics from the Spanish state are present: the average age of the deceased is 83-84 years and 97% had more than one risk factor ahead. So could efforts be made to protect those people? Everything is being very improvised.

It doesn't seem to have been very effective.

No, it hasn't gone much better than others. Quite the opposite. We are the European country with the most infections per million inhabitants. 500 million deaths per inhabitant. They are far above Italy and France, which are behind us, and they have three hundred peaks, and, for example, Germany does not reach 100.

Why have we gone so badly? It's hard to imagine. But the truth is that our whole lives have gone wrong. I've been working in public health for 40 years, and in all the winters, it was amazing to find a bed in intensive care. We have to ensure that public health systems in all territories are up to the standards that they deserve and that they are needed. Because there are governments that have been slowly destroying us.

I recently read him about the comparison between the Spanish State and the curves of Switzerland.

In Switzerland they are far below us, and they have established a very different lockdown there. The case of Switzerland draws attention, because statistics, as other countries do, show them by number of inhabitants and not by overall figures. For example, the United States is the country that has caused the most deaths, but yet, within the chaos they have, their overall mortality rate is far below the Spanish one. Switzerland presents its statistics very well for every 100,000 or one million inhabitants, as well as for population segments.

Then you realize that the pulse has barely damaged the children. In Switzerland, I mean myself, 100,000 people under the age of 20 have been infected. Between 20 and 70 years 200-300 and over 80 years, 800 cases. Through this data presentation, you are aware of who is affected by this pandemic. As for the deceased, they are also people over 80 years of age.

Some say, "Yes, a young man I don't know where he died." Yes, of course, we can die from angina, I've seen people die from angina, pneumonia or appendicitis... but it's not common. And in a minority of these cases, it's not normal for the media to hit them almost every day. It's terrible. They have a great responsibility for what has happened and no one has stopped them. Morbo and overinformation have created a lot of fear and probably many of the emergency services have been overwhelmed by it.

You rarely see yourself going back to a government in five hours. And it's significant that it happened with the first measure aimed at boys and girls.

Who is advising the government? Some have refused to give advice. For example, the Spanish Society of Pediatrics, in its first communiqué after the lockdown, said: "Let kids do what adults do." I mean, they didn't give him any advice.

They mainly have a team of scientific-technical advisors: virologists, epidemiologists, etc. Where are the pedagogues, sociologists, neighborhood associations or parents, for example? In his view, with a group that has a very technical profile, they will solve the problems and, in the end, as has happened in the case of children, they have made mistakes. On the subject of children, they do not understand anything, what the needs and rights of children are. They do not know the social reality of the country. How could you think of a nonsense like the one you just said?

Bring kids to the supermarket?

To realize that this is silly, it doesn't have to be an epidemiologist or something. To the supermarket? To a place where children are not usually taken, where there is also a greater danger of contagion, where there is also a closed and crowded space? That said, they are ill-advised.

In any event, it is to be welcomed that they have in the end left behind and that in a few hours they have made public mistakes. This is very much to be welcomed. I would like to know what other people who protest against them would do. They wouldn't have gone back or gone crazy. They would keep command of the war.

The command is unique and vertical.

Would it not be better to delegate management to the municipalities, to decentralise? Look, an example. In my village, Gandía, the beach is four kilometers away. It's a giant and it's empty. Every year all Madrid people come to this beach. Gandiars could never fill that beach, even if we were all together. However, children have not been able to go to the beach.

When it is repeated to us, because it happens again, because I am convinced that there will be a rise, I hope that we will think more and that we will choose the mentors better. In addition to mathematical and statistical technicians, they should be representatives of education, citizenship and parents.

After 43 days of work, the "asymptomatic" have begun to go out into the street.

It was clear from the beginning that children were not dangerous vectors for contagion. This has been the case in all the countries of the world, and everything that is written says that children are poorly polluted and have a very low impact.

The word asymptomatic has been used absurdly. Now it seems that the worst thing that can happen in this world is that you have no symptoms. Something good in itself, having a disease without symptoms, has become negative. The world upside down. The one who has few symptoms rarely coughs and the one who coughs seldom spreads little. Children can infect another person, of course, but all of us, because all of us humans pollute it. But the most polluting ones are the symptomatic ones. The children were stigmatized and then closed between four walls.

The first article of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states that we are children up to the age of 18. The Spanish Government, for its part, believes not.

How did it happen to you? Why go out on the street when you're 14 and when you're 15? Where did they get that border? The Government is a box of surprises. It is strange that they have been rejected. Once again, it seems that there is no trust in the younger citizens.

In a video he said: "Don't put face masks on children."

…put it on by adults who fear children.

Are masks useful to protect us from the virus?

To protect yourself from droplets in the saliva or from airborne microbes when sneezing or coughing like mucus, it's best to be away from someone who coughs. There are no studies that say that people wearing a mask outgrow an epidemic earlier. They don't exist.

Face masks prevent much of the mucus that we throw in the cough from coming out. But that doesn't mean that viruses don't come out. They have to be very well placed, many children don't know how to get well, they get very sharp, and besides, the mask is filled with mucus and respiratory vapours little by little, and they have shown that it can be harmful if you don't change a face mask many times, because it creates a closed, vivified environment around the mouth and nose.

There is no proven connection between mask use and the benefits of curbing an epidemic. Yes, on the contrary, those who show that it is more effective to maintain the interpersonal safety distance and wash their hands. Therefore, the WHO has not made the use of a mask an indispensable condition.

[More information and data on the effectiveness of face masks in Paricio's next article: Is the mask effective in protecting yourself from viruses?]

Masks appear to be another "fashion" copied from Asia.

In some Asian countries the mask is almost common, but above all it is seen by the high degree of pollution in the cities.

Little by little, we are getting used to seeing the masks and they are being imposed, but there is no valid reason for that.

The mask should be used by people who care for patients, as they often have to approach them. And maybe the sick should also use it, even in places where we can't keep a distance of a meter or a half a meter, as in the case of public transport. But putting on a mask to go for a walk doesn't make sense.

But I think the struggle is lost. We'll end up masked and sociologically it's a sad thing. When we talk, when we look at each other, the face is very important to contact friends, family and acquaintances. It's a subject for sociologists, to reflect on the kind of society we're leading.

 

Neither before nor now does it seem that the child is treated as a subject with his/her own needs.

That's important. Now we've confined them, but maybe we've done it because we've always done what we wanted with them. Perhaps it comes from failing to respect the fundamental rights of children. We do not have the habit of asking them anything.

Adultocentrism. If we find it normal that there are spaces without children: trains, hotels... So why not on the streets, no?

It should be prohibited. It is discrimination. Think if you put him in a hotel "it's forbidden to get the old" or "this hotel is not for the old." That says a lot about the society that allows it.

It was very easy to promise that the children would stay at home. But someone had to say it, and what if they stay home? The "very friendly" people have said that "it's a great opportunity to reunite with my sons and daughters." But please! If you have to confine yourself to finding your children, you have a problem.