1. Been thinking a lot about the argument that we should leave pandemic "planning" to medical professionals, epidemiologists & public health experts. Everyone else, all of us actually, should stay in our respective "silos." The more I think about it, the more I think it is wrong.
2. Here's why. Pandemics have broad implications and not just for health generally (avoided doctor visits, surgeries) and mental health, but also for the economy, cities, social cohesion, politics ... and many more.
3. These actual decisions are not made by public health
experts, they are made by elected politicians who are advised by experts and all sorts of others.
experts, they are made by elected politicians who are advised by experts and all sorts of others.
4. When read histories or have talked with folks who were involved with big impactful world altering initiatives, like say the Manhattan project, every one of them notes that they were broad multidisciplinary efforts of people from a wide variety of fields and backgrounds.
5. In fact, it is often said that big breakthroughs in these kinds of projects often come when "outsiders" bring a new perspective which causes others to reframe their priors & come to new ideas, strategies & solutions.
6. This is why I feel the position of simply deferring to experts & have everybody else "stay in their lane" is mistaken. What we actually need is much more cooperation & collaboration across the board ...
6. and much bigger, broader Manhattan Project like initiatives not just to battle this virus but to prepare us for future ones ...
