2. The relationship between government and public health is often seen as follows: governments taking advice from independent scientists and then following it. However, public health agencies are far from independent - they are nested within governmental structures.
3. As such, public health agencies are, by definition, political in nature. They are not independent. But, this political character of public health is not straightforward (in the sense of government leadership telling them what to say). Rather, it is a subtle relationship.
4. This subtle relationship is often characterised by 'informal' conversations that steer the narrative (many years ago, I spent months researching how epistemic communities function in these types of situations).
5. The end result of this is that senior figures in government come to believe the recommendations of public health agencies without recognising the extent to which these recommendations *were originally steered by government*. This becomes more cemented as time passes.
6. The media gets information predominantly from official public health sources (which, as described, are actually political in nature). However, many journalists don't realise this, thinking that the information they receive to be apolitical and independent.
7. This is also the case for many healthcare professionals, who see official guidance as coming from a completely apolitical source. The result of this is that what was originally a *political* decision becomes seen as, effectively, 'following the best science available'.
8. This effect also applies to the politicians themselves.
In short, this creates a deadly feedback loop between government, public health, the media, and healthcare professionals *all based on the false assumption that policies on Covid-19 are apolitical*.
9. Second, most governments are aware - institutionally at least - that they made a number of significant mistakes regarding Covid-19. To admit mistakes is to admit culpability.
10. Third, governments and the media fully understand that the general public now associates the word, 'Covid' with lockdowns and other non-pharmaceutical interventions. These were - understandably - unpopular measures, so mentioning Covid at all risks losing electoral support.
11. If the government isn't mentioning it, it isn't news.
All of the above has created a powerful societal agreement to not talk about Covid. This then filters back up to policymakers, who respond by doing the same.
12. It is a top-down and bottom-up social structure that erases Covid-19 from both policy and general discourse, and, as such, is a structure that reinforces itself.
As the virus continues to mutate, transmit, disable, and kill.
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. Outstanding and hard-hitting piece from Tess Finch-Lees:
'Unless the HSE is testing all patients on admission, as well as staff, reinstating universal masking throughout healthcare, improving ventilation and filtration, expanding boosters for all...
2. ... informing the public that we’re in the midst of a surge and how to protect ourselves, the claim it is doing everything to stop the virus spreading is unsubstantiated'.
Please click the pay walled link in the first tweet to let the Irish Independent know this is important.
3. Non-paywalled link here:
Huge thanks to Tess for writing this, and the Irish Independent for publishing.
1. When I wrote this - nearly a year ago now - I had no idea that only nine months later I would be asked whether commercial pasteurisation inactivates H5N1 in milk (thankfully, it appears to). My point is that this virus is behaving in an extraordinarily unpredictable fashion.
2. As such, we should *expect* highly atypical and unpredictable behaviour from this pathogen; nothing should be a surprise at this point.
The ongoing ability of this virus to infect both humans and a very wide range of animals, causing radically different levels of disease...
3... is deeply concerning to me.
As such, it would be prudent to accelerate both the development and adoption of rapid testing technology for H5N1 and to ramp up vaccine production for this pathogen globally.
1. Many commentators on this platform have (rightfully) drawn attention to the Covid safety measures in place at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum:
2. However, it is worth noting that this degree of Covid safety is absolutely not representative of other high-level international events, economic or otherwise. Once again, I assure you that political and economic elites are generally as careless about Covid as everyone else.
3. St. Petersburg is an exception rather than a rule. Why? Remembering that Putin is due to give the plenary session on June 7th, this article - from *last year* is worth reading:
1. Dr. Levinson is quite correct here. In common with the development of societal resilience to the threat of any natural disaster, the key, of course, is preparedness. Sadly, the response to Covid-19 in many countries has rendered us *less* prepared for another pandemic.
2. Although rapid development of effective vaccines for Covid-19 had to be the first priority in response, we neglected to accelerate and deploy technology on a widespread basis that could mitigate the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other future pandemic-potential pathogens.
3. As many of you know, current air filtration / disinfection technology deployed in all public spaces would significantly reduce the transmission of airborne pathogens. We have had three years to do this. The technology is unobtrusive, relatively inexpensive, and passive.
In my professional role I advise both commercial entities and individuals on the current and future risks posed by pathogens, including, but not limited to, SARS-CoV-2. This predominantly takes the form of bespoke analysis,..
2... forecasting / horizon scanning, and the identification of positive risks / market opportunities.
I consider it vital that we reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 globally. As such, I am primarily concerned with the acceleration and adoption of technologies to...
3. ...make our global future resilient against SARS-CoV-2 and any other future pandemic, including, but not limited to, threat-agnostic biosensors, rapid and accurate testing, Far-UVC, air filtration, and novel vaccines and therapeutics (for both acute disease and sequelae).
1. Thank you for your good wishes, Dr. Stephens. Your comment has made me reflect on the effects of how I've altered my life since March 2020 have been so far. The alteration in question has essentially been this: wearing a respirator (FFP2 minimum) in all public indoor spaces.
2. Note I say, 'public', because I don't wear a respirator amongst people when everyone I'm sharing air with has tested. I also almost never wear a respirator outdoors. The most pertinent effect is that - to the best of my knowledge - I've never had Covid-19.
3. I've also not been sick with any infectious disease since 2019. Secondary effects - primarily caused by avoiding public transport if possible - centre around a significant increase in cardiovascular fitness. At 52, I am now the same weight as I was at 18, with a BMI of 22.