Myths that have distorted public debate about the pandemic : The Lancet

The strategy produced by Kickbusch and her colleagues ends with an appendix listing myths that have come to distort public and political debate about how to manage this pandemic. 

1. There is a trade-off between health and the economy. 

No: the fate of our wellbeing and our wider lives go hand-in-hand. 

2. We can protect vulnerable groups. Practically, given the vast numbers who are vulnerable, impossible. 

3.  COVID-19 only concerns the elderly. Even among a younger population, COVID-19 is harmful, sometimes deadly. 

4. Once infected, people are forever immune. We simply don't know, but unlikely. 

5.  Only vaccination will save us. Over time, maybe, but not in the short term. 

6.  Herd immunity can be achieved by infection. Neither a feasible nor a desirable strategy. 

7.  Closing schools is more stressful for children and families than keeping them open. What may matter more is scaled up educational and economic support. 

8.  Vaccinations will end the COVID-19 pandemic quickly. Sadly, not for some time. 

Germany is not Australia, not an island, not a totalitarian regime. Yet we should still strive to learn from the best. Learning from the best: here is one of the most puzzling aspects of the global response to this pandemic. Because there has been no global response. 

No collaborative or systematic effort among nations to learn from one another. Puzzling, certainly, but more than that—dispiriting that the human family seems to care so little for itself that we were unable to pool our experience, our understanding, and our knowledge to forge a common and coordinated response. 

By coincidence last week, on the 1-year anniversary of the first paper from China describing the clinical features of COVID-19, a Zero-COVID Coalition was launched in the UK. After more than 2 million deaths worldwide, perhaps there is an emerging agreement that the elimination of this coronavirus is not only necessary but also achievable.