Why everyone was wrong
The coronavirus is slowly retreating. What actually happened in the past few weeks? The experts have missed basic connections. The immune response against the virus is much stronger than we thought.
This is not an accusation, but a ruthless taking stock [of the current situation]. I could slap myself, because I looked at Sars-CoV2 - way too long with panic. I am also somewhat annoyed with many of my immunology colleagues who so far have left the discussion about Covid-19 to virologist and epidemiologist. I feel it is time to criticise some of the main and completely wrong public statements about this virus.
Firstly, it was wrong to claim that this virus was novel. Secondly, It was even more wrong to claim that the population would not already have some immunity against this virus. Thirdly, it was the crowning of stupidity to claim that someone could have Covid-19 without any symptoms at all or even to pass the disease along without showing any symptoms whatsoever.
2 comments:
This whole process seems to have been about sifting through a number of different and competing hypotheses and accounts of what the virus actually does in a population. The studies get done, the data comes in, and the truth is gradually winkled out. I get the impression that finally we will arrive at a "good enough" account, and that will settle and become the basis for large-scale interventions and for folk-wisdom such as we hear in queues and over garden fences. (We have to listen more carefully, these days, what with the masks and the extra distance...)
That's how science works in an ideal world. Our problem has been that from early this year, people started acting on the basis of incomplete knowledge. That meant that there have been all manner of odd distortions and new problems caused. Governments want to be seen to adopt the right strategy early on. And local pundits (I like his phrase "facebook virologists"!) want to gain status by being right.
This might be one of those situations which are mucked up because there is too much incoming information. I've heard this can happen with police enquiries; sometimes there is so much information from the public that it overwhelms the plod's ability to sift and grade it and put it to good use.
If Boris had this bloke on his team in March, we might have been a lot better off. But it's all a matter of luck as to what specialists are on tap, and how their advice is processed. Either way, my hair is looking very scruffy and the rigmarole at the recently re-opened barbers puts me off bothering...
Sam - it seems to be partly a matter of luck as to what specialists are on tap, but too many specialist advisors seem to be there for reasons other than ability. As we know too well, a willingness to give unambiguous answers can serve people well on the greasy pole if they are also able to sideline uncertainties and offer boundless confidence.
Of course other agendas are probably in play too. Green agendas for example.
Post a Comment