Why do we permit President Trump and party affiliations to divert the attention of politicians and other leaders when they should be focused on strengthening their ability to manage the pandemic? We can’t afford it! Balancing health, economic and social interests to optimize the welfare of populations during the pandemic does not need to reflect Republican and Democratic labels.
Many of us seem to think that we can leave the current control measures, including school, business and other closures, in place until the virus has disappeared. Others appear to believe that we should release all controls now. Realistically, neither perspective is realistic. First, the virus is likely to be with us for a long time. Scientists have told us that unless a previously approved vaccine or therapy (for example, the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin favored by the president) is found to be effective against COVID-19, a highly unlikely scenario, that we will probably not have a newly-developed agent for at least a year. The steps necessary to prove safety and effectiveness are simply too complex and time-consuming to permit a shorter time horizon. Second, the experience in Singapore where the virus was controlled, only to return after controls were relaxed, is highly likely here in the U.S.. We are likely to have multiple highs and lows, reflecting the global scope of the pandemic as well as the implementation of progressively tighter and subsequently looser controls.
Medical and public health science have given us important information. We are confident that the virus is extremely infectious across age and gender on a global scale, that mortality risks are greater among the elderly and those with comorbidities, and that transmission can be reduced by physical distancing as well as other barriers (masks, gloves, plastic shields, etc.). That same science has left us with questions. For example, we still do not know if individuals previously infected by this “novel” virus will be immune in the future. Nor do we know if there will be additional waves, and if yes, how many? We also do not yet have sufficiently accurate and reliable tests to determine either the presence of the virus, or antibodies. These tests are required to successively and progressively bring the virus under control.
We do not have to look far to feel the pain generated by our response to the virus in most states. The pandemic itself, as well as government-initiated shut-downs, have led to over 26 million individuals filing for unemployment benefits. Long lines have already formed at food pantries. Few among us do not know one or more people who can personify this statistic, people who have been seriously affected and who face an uncertain future. I am thinking of a young neighbor of mine, a widow with 3 young children who has just been laid off and who will not find a new job under the current conditions.
It is now time for the president to prioritize the development and sufficient procurement of accurate and reliable testing technology, and for our governors as well as other local leaders (of government, business, and non-profit organizations) to prepare for a complex future, a period marked by repeated loosening and tightening of control measures until COVID-19 can be eliminated. This is a difficult and complicated challenge that will not be over until the virus has been wiped off our planet. We must be ready for this reality. We do not have time to spare for political distractions or fighting.
Paul Campbell is a retired faculty member of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He lives in Harpswell.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
