Covid-19

COVID-19 has made epidemiologists and virologists of us all! Actually, there are two main reason that I have resisted adding my two pence’s worth. Firstly, there is so much information out there about it that I feel like I would be just needlessly adding to it. Secondly, does anyone care what I think?

Now from my perspective as someone trained in molecular biology, I feel I should know more about this than the average person, but I realise I know a lot less someone specifically trained for this. But is there anyone who has trained for this?

I think that is one of the problems. Some scientists will have studied viruses how they replicate, others will be specialists in healthcare system responses, and other still will be experts in modelling the effects in populations.

Now in an ideal world we would get all these people together in a room, they would hash out the best course of action and we would just follow that. We would, as they say, “follow the science”.

Surely the biggest question at that point is: who do we put in that room?

Firstly, of course we need virologists because it is a virus. Hang on a second, coivd-19 is so new that no-one can be a specialist in this particular virus. Let’s get the next best thing and stick someone in that was studying something close to covid-19. Great. Sorted.

On to epidemiologists. You have epidemiologists that study the spread of disease through populations. They may not have enough data on covid-19 yet and have slightly different modeling data but surely even having inaccurate models is better than having no models at all. In they go.

Doctors, nurses, healthcare professionals; surely, we need them! Hopefully with some experience in infectious disease. Or do we want the bureaucrat that might be able to organise the response of the whole health care system. Yep, never mind let’s put them all in.

Now this room is getting a little crowded. We might struggle to socially distance with all these people in the room.

But hang on a second aren’t they going to all say the best way to solve the spread of a virus is isolation, so if we all spend a couple of weeks in a pod, take in as much food as you need then we are sorted. Except, as they all well know, that is never going to happen, so they have to moderate their advice to take into consideration other factors. However, now they are straying out of their expertise, so shouldn’t we widen the net?

Perhaps we should include psychologists. They might be able to tell us how to lessen the impact on mental health or improve adherence to the guidelines? What about social workers? Are they not import to protect the vulnerable in society? When you bring mental health into it then many people worry about money and job security. So is there space for an economist?

Now I am not saying that every voice should have an equal weight but it just feels like every time I read the news I am sitting in the crossfire of this very conversation.

The big debate over here is: should we wear face masks in public spaces? How much does it stop the spread? Do people want to do it from a physiological point of view? Certainly, doing something feels much better than doing nothing. Although, If I am wearing a face mask will I be as careful about staying 2 meters away? Will I get laxed with hand washing because I feel I am already safe?

Now only one of that list of questions was about the hard science behind it all.

So while “Follow the Science” seems to be the buzz word of the moment we may want to take a moment to consider that the problem is larger a couple of people in lab coats can sort out.

Although this may sound very bleak, it isn’t as bleak as you may think. Scientists talking to each other, talking across disciplines is exactly the way science works, how ideas are built upon. Only two things have changed, one is that people want the answers straight away so they can make informed decisions, and the other is that you are privy to the conversation. And trust me this conversation is going to last for years. People will be studying the COVID-19 pandemic from every angle and only thing that might change is that you no-longer hear the conversation. The conversation may recede into academic circles and conferences out of your ear shot, but rest assured it will still be happening. Then by the time the knowledge needed again for the next global pandemic, hopefully, the science will have improved and the answer may be clearer. Although the best of all worlds would be you never knowing it was needed. That the next pandemic was stopped before it even became one.

Never fear I am going to be retreating to much safer ground with a planned series on virus and the immune system so we can all be armchair commentators so keep an eye out for updates.

If you would like to read more about covid-19 I recommend the New Scientist as a good source of information.