Thread by @elisaperego78

I've concerns about the way Tony Fauci frames our fight with Covid | a bit of a long thread. First, there is a big difference between pursuing eradication, and surrender to the virus through "living with/mass infection" policies. Which is what we, actually, have now

https://twitter.com/CoronaHeadsUp/status/1670389990021296128

Second, I'm not saying that SARS-CoV-2 can be eradicated in the current sociopolitical context. But, the virus has been eliminated multiple times in multiple countries, or came close to. This pointed to elimination or hard containment being possible

The decision not to pursue eradication (global elimination) or (local) elimination has been dictated, in my opinion, more by socio-economic than public health concerns. I'm not saying eradication was necessarily possible.

I'm saying those in charge didn't pursue eradication or elimination for the benefits of a few's socio-economic interests, or because they lost control of the pandemic. SARS-COV was also eliminated; I acknowledge SARS may not be identical to SARS-CoV-2, but the lessons were there

In addition, Fauci would frame elimination/eradication as impossible because we have only eradicated 1 pathogen which infects humans (smallpox). This is true. But he doesn't say many other pathogens have been close to eradication, and are still strong candidates for it

Also I note: abject surrender to infectious diseases isn't the norm, ideologically, for public health in recent decades. We might not eradicate a disease, but we try. We aren't told we have to "live with AIDS and gonorrhea" | A thread I curated on this

https://twitter.com/elisaperego78/status/1535972772110794752?t=TRJ3S6ppAELjKVMVl41o0g&s=19

Fauci would also add the in long-term, "It'll be low enough that it doesn't really disturb the social order," because of immunity levels among the general population from vaccination, boosting and infection." Long-term how, when? "Hybrid immunity" is failing so many

Fauci would also add that unless we get a "new variant" we should live with "a low level of control". I strongly disagree with this. SARS-CoV-2 is too dangerous to "live with it" little control. This sounds to me like priming people to accept high levels of death and disability

I developed my thread as based on what Fauci is reported to have said in the article. He might have added more than it wasn't reported. In any case, my concerns about current policies around SARS-CoV-2 remain intact. And the article above isn't helpful in this regard

Our plans for control, like new vaccination, antivirals, surveillance, treatment of Long Covid and prevention of infection are nebulous at best. Many will die and will suffer chronic illness because of this

I developed some of these points about elimination, eradication, #LongCovid and control of SARS-CoV-2 more at length in an interview with @EvanBlake17 (thanks!) almost one year ago, if of interest

wsws.org/en/articles/20…