Parallels
Ways in which aspects of the covid era resemble religion
Not least in the context of the UK government’s COVID-19 Day of Reflection — “five years since the pandemic began” — I thought it worth sharing some of my own reflections. Here are some thoughts about what happened during the covid era, and the ways in which it bore more than a passing resemblance to a form of religion.
1. Scripture — sacred texts that cannot be questioned
Religions have sacred texts to which their followers look for truth. For many believers, their scripture is considered to be authoritative and may even be regarded as infallible. The faithful are called to follow what the sacred texts say. And there is often rigid interpretation with little or no room for questioning.
During the covid era, official pronouncements were treated as unquestionable truth and the ultimate source of authority. At times “The Science” was presented as if it were a fixed set of doctrines rather than an evolving body of knowledge. The people were called to follow it. And there was little or no room for challenging the narrative.
The more that any idea relies on authority and dogmatism, unquestioning obedience, and social pressure rather than open discussion and a careful consideration of the evidence, the more it resembles religion rather than science. True science is never settled, and thrives in the context of open debate and robust challenge based on evidence.
2. Prophets — people who cannot be questioned
Religious prophets guide believers based on divine disclosure. They are often viewed as receiving reliable revelation, and sometimes even being inspired by God to impart an infallible message. As such, what they say they cannot be questioned.
During the covid era, public health experts — at a nation and international level — made statements that they claimed were based on The Science. Some had rather better track records than others. Many had conflicts of interest. But in any case, such people faced little by way of serious challenge. Selected journalists were allowed to ask questions, and some MPs. But few such people had much by way of a scientific background. And, in any case, certain topics appeared to be off-limits.
I am reminded of the words of the New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern during the covid era (emphasis added):
I want to send a clear message to the New Zealand public. We will share with you the most up-to-date information daily. You can trust us as a source of that information. You can also trust the Director General of Health and the Ministry of Health for that information… Do feel free to visit at any time to clarify any rumour you make hear… covid19.govt.nz… otherwise, dismiss anything else.
We will continue to be your single source of truth. We will provide information frequently. We will share everything we can… Everything… else you see… a grain of salt… so I really ask people to focus… and when you see those messages, remember that unless you hear it from us… it is not the truth.
3. A moral code — rules which must be obeyed
Religions have rules or laws to follow, which shape the behaviour of believers and impose a moral code. When considered objectively, some of the rules can seem arbitrary and to make little sense, but the faithful are nevertheless expected to obey without question. Social pressure and punishment can play an important part in enforcing the rules. Those who comply are seen as virtuous, whereas those who do not are frowned upon.
During the covid era, there were all sorts of rules and restrictions dictating e.g. where people could go, who they could meet, and how closely they could sit together. The regulations extended to what people should wear, and even to what they should have injected into their bodies. Some of the rules — such as when to wear masks in restaurants — made little sense, but obedience was still required. Social pressure played an important role. Those who complied were seen as virtuous, whereas those who did not were viewed as disobedient, and even selfish or dangerous.
One key difference was that the covid rules and restrictions were changed on a fairly regular basis.
Another thing in common was that adherence to the covid rules became something of an identity marker, much like religious observance indicates membership of a community.
4. Priests — authority figures to interpret and enforce the rules
In some religions, a key role of priests is to mediate between God and his people. This may involve administering sacraments, preaching, leading worship and interpreting and enforcing religious laws or rules. There is often a hierarchy within the priesthood: a High Priest, chief priests etc.
During the covid era there were many and various authority figures charged with administering covid tests and masks and vaccines, telling people what to do, leading the covid response, and interpreting and enforcing covid rules and restrictions. They included administrators of universities, schools, hospitals, workplaces, and religious organisations. And those on the ground: lecturers, teachers, doctors and nurses, middle managers, faith leaders. Etc. Journalists and media personalities also played a key role in discussing and interpreting regulations.
I wonder how many of those enforcing the measures would say that they were just following orders. And what was actually on their hearts and minds.
5. Isolation — withdrawal from society
Some religious people, such as monks and nuns, withdraw from society for what they see as part of their religious duty. This may be regarded as service or even obedience to divine authority, and considered beneficial to spiritual health. Such withdrawal may be associated with other forms of self-denial.
During the covid era, everyone was instructed to withdraw from society at least to some degree. Lockdowns — a term previously used mainly in the context of prison — were imposed with the claim that isolation was necessary to “slow the spread” of the virus and to “flatten the curve”. Movement restrictions were framed as a necessary sacrifice to prevent greater suffering. Those who refused to participate were seen as selfish or even dangerous. There were instances of people who went walking in the countryside being publicly shamed; others were punished with fines, in some cases for opening their small businesses.
Page 3 of the 2019 World Health Organisation (WHO) document Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza lists the following as not recommended in any circumstances: contact tracing; quarantine of exposed individuals; entry and exit screening; border closure. Lockdowns are not mentioned as such.
In the UK, lockdown was imposed when the number of people dying had been at normal levels for two months while covid was known to be circulating. Here are the government’s Office for National Statistics figures at the time when Boris Johnson warned — presumably following “expert advice” — that the UK faced the “worst public health crisis for a generation”:
6. Rituals — things that must be done
Religions involve rituals that serve as expressions of faith and reinforce communal beliefs and identity: dressing up; forms of greeting; saying prayers and creeds; cleansing and sacrifices; rites of passage; sacred journeys. Among other things, compliance signals obedience, faith and belonging.
During the covid era, there was no shortage of rituals: mask-wearing; elbow-bumping and “Stay safe”; saying things like “Thank God for the vaccines”, and “Think how much worse your covid would have been if you hadn’t been vaccinated”; regular testing; and use of hand sanitiser — for an airborne virus… It would be an understatement to say that the rituals took on a symbolic importance beyond their actual efficacy. Was not their primary function to signal obedience, faith and belonging?
I often wondered exactly what was going through people’s heads during the covid era, and to what extent their actions were motivated by fear versus compliance versus being seen to do the right thing, all of which had played on my mind at some stage during the previous couple of years. I also wondered how many people thought that what they were doing was actually making much difference. And indeed whether they were giving much thought to what they were doing at all.
7. Initiation — rites of entry
Initiation rites such as a bar (or bat) mitzvah or baptism symbolise entry into the faith. Such ceremonies are regarded as marks of a true believer and membership of a faith community. Those involved often celebrate their new status publicly, and taking part grants them a measure of social acceptance. In contrast, those who steer clear of such rites are viewed with suspicion by those who have undertaken them. Social pressure is a strong reason for taking part. And proof of having been baptised — or similar — may be required to participate fully in the life of the community.
During the covid era, vaccination was seen by many as an initiation into safety and societal responsibility. It was commonplace — and certainly socially acceptable — for people to talk openly about when they were going for an injection, and which pharma company’s product they had received.1 In contrast, those who declined what was plainly a novel technology product with no long-term safety data were widely derided as “anti-vaxxers”.2 For many who did partake, social pressure played a significant part in their decision. Not least because, in some parts of the world, proof of the procedure was a pre-requisite for participation in normal life.
It soon became clear that this was no ordinary initiation. Two initial injections were required within a matter of weeks of each other. And even in February 2021, before many people had even been offered their first dose, the Archbishop of Canterbury was talking about “[doing] the boosters as the years go by”. I am reminded of the various annual religious festivals.
While baptism and vaccination share similarities, baptism is often regarded as a symbolic outward sign of an inward change, whereas vaccination results in physical changes to the body which cannot be reversed. In that regard, there are some parallels with e.g. circumcision. But there are other similarities between baptism and vaccination, not least in terms of a priest/doctor administering something that may be regarded as a form of cleansing. And in the eyes of the faithful, both symbolise an unseen transformation that changes the status of the person concerned.
8. Zealotry — going beyond what is required
While some people reluctantly adhere to religious protocol, others go beyond what is actually required, and are keen to be seen to be doing so. They may regard their religiosity as a mark of moral superiority, and even expect (or insist) that others do likewise.
During the covid era, there was no shortage of people who wanted to go beyond what was actually required, and, at least in some cases, were keen to be seen to be doing so: testing more often; isolating longer, maybe alone in the bedroom; wearing a mask even when the guidance says you needn’t; masking the children; striving for zero covid. Etc. It was a revealing time.3
9. Heresy — challenging orthodox belief
Heretics challenging religious orthodoxy are rarely welcomed by the authorities. Those who challenge the received wisdom may face condemnation, loss of privileges, exclusion, excommunication, or even death. Those asking questions are often viewed as a threat by religious leaders.
During the covid era, those challenging covid orthodoxy were shunned by most public health authorities and governments. Even those merely asking reasonable questions about the harms of lockdowns, or the efficacy of masks, or raising concerns about injections with no long-term safety data.
Scepticism is a key ingredient for establishing scientific truth, and yet those raising questions were dismissed as dangerous. Doctors and scientists challenging the narrative were — and still are — particularly unwelcome, and there has been unprecedented censorship in the past few years. Many dissident doctors have been hounded by the medical authorities.4 We all owe a debt of gratitude to those who have had the courage to speak up.
I am reminded too of Dr Mike Yeadon, Pfizer’s former Chief Scientific Officer for Allergy and Respiratory Diseases, who is a strong contender for the most-qualified person in the country to comment about respiratory viruses. The fact that he was not being allowed to speak on any mainstream media outlet was enough on its own to tell me that there was something seriously wrong. He remains among the most censored scientists in the world.
On the plus side, seeing who is de-platformed and/or attacked is actually a good way to discern who is telling the truth. “Follow the silenced” is a much better motto than “follow the science”. And whatever the context, it is important to remember that those who tell the truth do not mind being questioned, and that those who lie do not like being challenged.
10. Damnation — the threat of grave consequences for non-compliance
In religious traditions, hell is a place of suffering, punishment and even eternal torment for those who reject divine law. Scriptures warn of grave consequences for the disobedient, and feature frightening imagery and even apocalyptic visions. Fear is used to influence behaviour.
During the covid era, The Science — based largely on computer modelling — was used to present worst-case scenarios as a kind of earthly hell that would result if people did not comply with covid policies. We were warned of hospitals being overwhelmed, many people dying, and endless lockdowns. The fearmongering was used to effect behavioural change.
The media fed us graphic images: a man collapsing in the street in China; mass burials in New York; Italy and “the world’s deadliest coronavirus outbreak”; massive temporary hospitals in the UK. Despite the fact that, before lockdown was announced, deaths were at normal levels for the time of year.
And I wonder now — much as I did even in Spring 2020 — how much of the fearmongering actually ever had any basis in reality. Even at the time, the image of someone falling down in the street as a result of a respiratory virus seemed to me implausible. The numbers in Bergamo (Italy) and New York now seem dubious to say the least. And even the BBC came to acknowledge that the Nightingale hospitals were “largely not needed”, noting that “the London site treated 20 patients during the first wave of the pandemic”.
It seems that the UK government’s advisers were well aware of the lack of actual basis for fear. The minutes of the UK government’s SPI-B5 meeting on 22nd March 2020 stated: “The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased… using hard-hitting emotional messaging.” Hard-hitting emotional messaging. Rather than evidence-based facts. Those words came three days after the government had announced that “COVID-19 is no longer considered to be an HCID in the UK”. I can’t help but recall the (probably) apocryphal preacher who noted in the margin of his sermon: “Point weak here. Raise voice and thump pulpit.”
As to government ministers, it was later revealed — in something of a limited hangout6 — that the Health Secretary Matt Hancock had suggested on a WhatsApp group that “we frighten the pants of [sic] everyone with the new strain”.
I wonder to what extent the eventual decision to allow people to return to normal was driven by the growing realisation among a significant proportion of the population that the fear was being manufactured, and that covid restrictions would only actually end when people stopped complying. I am reminded of this short clip (transcript below) from Susan Michie, a Professor of Health Psychology at University College London. In 2020, Michie was a member of both SAGE7 and SPI-B. She is an author on three of the first five papers referenced in the 22nd March 2020 SPI-B minutes. And she also happens to be a long-standing member of the Communist Party of Britain.8
Here is what she said — in July 2022 (emphasis added):
Vaccines are a really important part of the pandemic control, but it’s only one part. The test, trace and isolate system [and] border controls are really essential. And the third thing is people’s behaviour, that is the behaviour of social distancing, of when you’re indoors making sure there’s good ventilation, or, if there’s not, wearing face masks… and hand and surface hygiene. We’ll need to keep these going in the long term. And that will be good not only for covid but also to reduce other…
And when asked by the interviewer, “When you say long term, what do you mean by that? How long…?” her reply is:
I think forever… to some extent…
11. Salvation — the promise of reward for the obedient
In contrast to hell, heaven represents an end to suffering, fear and death. There is the promise of salvation and all that that means: peace, restoration, and even true freedom as a reward for the faithful. Plus a reunion with family and friends from whom we have become separated through death. Such blessings are promised to those who follow Scripture. And the hope of heaven may be used to shape people’s behaviour in the present.
During the covid era, compliance with covid policies was presented as the path to salvation: a restoration of normal life — being able to meet freely again with friends and family, to hug loved ones, to travel etc. Freedom was promised, to the extent that was 19th July 2021 in the UK was dubbed “Freedom Day”.
But the return to normality was presented as something that would happen only if people followed the rules: complying with the restrictions, testing, masking. And when enough people had had injections. The prospect of the restoration of what had until 2020 been regarded as fundamental liberties was used to keep people complying.
12. Religion — a means to dominate and transform society
Religion has historically been used to dominate and transform societies by shaping how people think and act.9 This can be achieved through a combination of fear, authoritative messaging and social pressure, in the context of sermons based on sacred texts. Dissenters are punished and excluded, and religious laws are upheld by both spiritual and political authorities, making defiance dangerous.
During the covid era, society was dominated and transformed through the narrative of what was claimed to be a public health emergency. People changed their behaviour in unprecedented ways. The authorities and media scared people into compliance, based on proclamations about “following The Science”. And those who raised legitimate questions were — and still largely are — excluded from public debate.
The number of pandemic simulations in recent years — of which Robert F. Kennedy Jr. counted 22 — seems at least consistent with a concerted effort from certain powerful vested interests to dominate and transform society.
Related:
Unexpected Turns homepage
The most-read articles can be found here
At the 2021 Isle of Wight festival, The Kaiser Chiefs singer Ricky Wilson “shouted out the names of vaccine manufacturers Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca, asking fans to cheer depending on which they had received.”
Dr William Bay is but one of many
Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours, “a group of experts who advise SAGE [the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies] on social and behavioural issues”
As I understand it, there are plenty of WhatsApp messages which have still not been released
The UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies
I am not saying here that this is a good thing or a bad thing, merely pointing it out