This sentiment is widespread for those who have, well, pretty much everything. This statement is a luxury. It says “we have all the means to do fine, therefore we will “live our lives”.
Let me tell you about the other side…
Leana is not unique, but she is promoting her brand for everyone to follow, so we’ll use her as an example. Note she is not a public health expert and does not have an MPH. She just has a wide audience to give her unfiltered advice.
So what’s wrong with following her advice?
Let’s assume everyone decided to do what Leana advises, what then.
Well obviously many more people would get infected. Only 15-25% of DC has gotten a single booster. 45% of our city is black. Many of these are essential workers who need to use public transportation for work
So higher risk of contracting in crowded spaces. Unlikely they can work from home. They may or may not have paid time off to see a doctor if they get sick. Often it takes over a week to get an appointment, jeopardizing antiviral treatments. These folks go home to isolate
And they may not get paid while they are isolating. A large number have co-morbidities and may not be adequately vaxxed, thus may be hospitalized. Some may live with family members who are also vulnerable. Perhaps some don’t have health insurance.
So while my family, like Leanna’s, has good health, access to HC, ability to work from home or take time off, we are not making the same choices she is promoting.
We are also living our lives, but we are trying to do it in a way that accounts for others in our community.
I went to a Caps game last week and wore a mask. I am getting together with vulnerable family members tomorrow and we’ll test before, open windows and have an air purifier. We go to work and school and wear masks to protect each other and ourselves.
We might get infected, but we are trying to live our lives AND take simple steps to lower the risk of infection for ourselves which also lowers the risk of variants and infections for everyone.
It’s pretty simple and doesn’t take much to avoid throwing caution to the wind.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
“Our team advises against required masking given that hospital capacity is good.” Would they recommend against car seats give that hospital capacity is good now too? Some crashes might need hospitalizations, but the loss of limb function and life would be unnecessarily high.
This strategy seems reckless. I know of a school who is following it. In the past week, one masked child got C19. He appears to be do nw well so far, but LC risk comes later and, despite vax, is still 5-15%. So his parents, one a peds ID specialist is concerned and angry.
Another young student was at the school for a community event. It was indoors and became a mini-super spreader event. On day 9 she was up all night in agony in leg pain. The ER wait in our community is 8 hrs, so they tried to comfort her at home.
🧵Imagine an illness which had killed 850 pediatric patients in the past year; now averaging 3 deaths/day. What if this illness caused thousands of MIS-C hosp? Then imagine this illness didn't affect adults at all. Peds, welcome your input. What would we be doing?
I don't know, but my guess is we'd be freaking out. We would be scrambling to protect these children and lost would be the comparisons with adult deaths. We would realize that COVID is the #1 disease causing deaths in children and our primary focus would be to stop it.
That disease is COVID-19 and we need to protect these children. C-19 is serious in many children. MIS-C and Long COVID are going to leave many children with chronic disabilities that we have not even scratched the surface in terms of our knowledge. health.ucdavis.edu/children/news/…