Covid-19: Panic and Populism
Global pandemics are nothing new. The first recorded pandemic occurred in 430 B.C.E, during the Peloponnesian War and is estimated to have killed over two thirds of the Athenian population. During the middle ages, leprosy killed at least 100 million people. Both of these and other pandemics have had significant domestic and global repercussions. In the not too distant past, polio, AIDS, Ebola and SARS have been deadly, but due to science and global cooperation, their potential devastating impact has been minimized.
The story of the coronavirus or Covid-19, has yet to be written.
Today’s best guess is that 90,000 people, the majority of whom are in China, currently have the coronavirus and over 3000 have died. Medical experts fear however, that these numbers are in fact, much larger. Experts fear that the coronavirus may be on the verge of becoming a pandemic rivaling or even larger than the 1918 global flu pandemic which killed at least 50 million people. Distrust of the numbers coming out of China is due to the fact that China is a closed authoritarian society where very little is transparent. As a result, many western medical experts do not trust either their statistics or their messaging regarding the virus. While we can only imagine what fear and foreboding the Chinese people wake up with everyday; our own fears and those of the rest of the world, should indeed be piqued as well. And needless to say, the less we know, the more frightening any growing epidemic is.
What is new about this virus, is that it is occuring at precisely the same time many countries are experiencing economic and political unrest, rampant xenophobia and populism on the right. Notably, many of these countries are in the West as opposed to “undeveloped” countries. This trend leads to increased centralization of authority, a lack of transparency, less cross border cooperation and more national isolationism than otherwise might be the case. Consequently, it is often difficult to trust public health officials and to assume that countries will be forthcoming with reliable information needed to put an end to global public health emergencies.
Unfortunately, the United States is no exception here. The rapid spread of the coronavirus, the overall distrust of government institutions and attacks on scientific legitimacy, impinge on our ability to understand and therefore impact the spread of the virus. Add to these, budget cuts to strategically important agencies and a lack of positive global cooperation; and many fear that we will be unable to successfully manage any medical emergency let alone something on the scale and magnitude of the coronavirus.
Traditionally, most Americans trust government warnings regarding public health emergencies and recommendations about quarantine, limited travel or vaccinations. Part of our willingness to do so has been the government’s role in the vanguard of scientific and medical research and their stellar track record using their expertise to assist with global disease prevention and cure.
The Trump administration may be changing all that. The administration has exhibited a clear distrust of public institutions and has often politicized scientific results. Consequently, we are witnessing increasing distrust and the erosion of public confidence in many of our institutions and their findings. Dr. Vanessa Kerry, professor at Harvard Medical School, on staff at Massachusetts General Hospital and founder of the nonprofit Seed Global Health, has suggested that this country’s preparedness for medical crises in public health policy and its ability to anticipate and grapple with the coronavirus threat and other medical emergencies is questionable.
The current political climate also encourages distrust of immigrants and outsiders. Reports are already emerging that Chinese are being singled out and physically assaulted in many western countries. Today’s focus on deregulation, defunding and depopulating federal agencies, which has included budget cuts to the CDC and other areas of public health assistance, is yet another signal that public health is not a priority. Combine this with attacks on intellectualism, basic science and its veracity; and we are witnessing an erosion of confidence in the ability of our government to tackle and eradicate public health emergencies and prepare for others. All of these indicators only heighten domestic and global fears in a medical emergency risking panic, miscommunication and potential miscalculation, not to mention deadly results.
Budgetary considerations and attacks on scientific legitimacy are only some of the domestic considerations damaging to public health security. There are also international political considerations diminishing our confidence in public health. The United States is systematically retreating from engagement in the international world with its “American first” policies. This has already resulted in less cross-national cooperation and a reluctance to work with global health related institutions. One other issue having seismic consequences on the spread of the coronavirus is the unprecedented level of tension between China and the United States. Because of this, China was refused to allow an independent United States’ delegation of CDC experts to enter the country and gain access to the “hot zone” and collect primary evidence on the coronavirus. This limits the available information needed to tackle the coronavirus at its source aiding in vaccination development and a successful prevention and eradication strategy. Instead, the US medical and research team was allowed into China, and notably, not to Wuhan province, and only with the WHO delegation, a very few days ago. In the meantime, the virus continues to spread and is now in at least 60 countries and continuing to spread across the globe. This is especially unfortunate given the fact that we are increasingly able to diagnose, cope and control viruses and epidemics before they become a global menace.
AIDS, Ebola, and SARS might have been much worse had global medicine and public health information not been shared. Historically, viruses and pandemics have punctuated and altered social and political structures and institutions forever, depending upon the length and severity of the epidemic. Each disease has impacted social, sexual and behavioral patterns while new modes of travel and communication have aided the curbing, as well as the metastases of global epidemics.
Just as we can’t control the causes of any public health crisis; we can’t predict or control its outcome. Such is the case regarding the impact on society of specific pandemics. For example, the defeat of the Athenians by the Spartans in 430 B.C.E., was largely a result of a depleted and weakened population due to the sickness caused by their debilitating virus. The pandemic of the middle ages ultimately challenged the entire European social order. Even the global flu outbreak of 1918, occurred as a result of pre war conditions and worsened the catastrophic nature of an already deadly world war.
It is too early to know the social or political consequences of the Coronavirus. The lack of transparency and dialogue regarding the source, impact and extent of the spread of virus is still unknown. Confusing messaging and a lack of preparedness and urgency has not helped the US citizenry to feel safe as of this writing.
In general, the takeaway is to move forward in the same manner as we have since the scientific enlightenment of the18th c. which revolutionized medicine and public health. Although the executive branch and some in Congress routinely question the legitimacy of our governing
institutions; as citizens, we have to insist that our scientists and researchers are not politicized, regardless of where and among whom a virus may originate or spread. As Professor Stephano said in his NYTimes op ed of Sunday, February 16, “ …the solution is to trust data-informed expertise.” It is imperative that we broaden our commitment to education, research and shared information. Global citizenry and every American must insist that the government fund public health in the areas of the environment, resource scarcity and infectious diseases. These, combined with greater transparency and transnational cooperation, will allow citizens and governments everywhere, to reliably tackle any upcoming global health emergencies with confidence. These confidence building measures are even now being undermined as the President and Vice President seek to silence the head of the CDC from briefing the public regarding the virus and quibble over testing kit design and availability.
Viruses can arise, and surprise and when we least expect them and only adequate preparation will lead to calm, trust, early intervention and global health security in the future.
Suzanne Rosenberg, M.Phil.
