Part of the Series
Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
Two epidemiologists, writing an op-ed together in The New York Times on Wednesday, are suggesting that earlier efforts to mitigate the spread of the novel coronavirus — even implementing social distancing measures by just a week or two — could have saved tens of thousands of American lives.
Britta Jewell, a research fellow in the department of infectious disease epidemiology at Imperial College, London, and Nicholas Jewell, chair of biostatistics and epidemiology at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (and also a professor at the University of California, Berkeley), wrote in their opinion piece that earlier action could have been beneficial.
Tactics for dealing with COVID-19 and other diseases where there isn’t an effective treatment, much less a vaccine to prevent their spread, require intervention methods that “go back to the basics,” the researchers wrote, noting that social distancing measures (like limiting large gathering sizes or closing schools) must be implemented in those cases.
The researchers noted that the White House didn’t take such actions until March 16, three days after a national emergency on COVID-19 was declared. In its advisory message, the Trump administration told Americans to avoid groups of more than 10 people, stop all unnecessary travel or visits to friends’ or relatives’ homes and avoid restaurants or bars; it also urged all states to close schools within their jurisdictions.
Even with the advisory in place, the White House did not order any state or municipality to quarantine or make a blanket stay-in-place proclamation for the nation at large. A few days later, California became the first state to issue such an order, followed by 14 other states over the next five days.
Both authors stated that their research models suggest, had the Trump administration acted earlier in deeming social distancing measures necessary to prevent the spread of COVID-19, thousands of lives could have been saved.
Current models forecast over 60,000 Americans may die from COVID-19 by August. Had social distancing measures been pushed by Trump a week prior, however, the researchers concluded that the number could have been just 23,000 — nearly a 60 percent drop in current death estimates. A decision to implement those measures two weeks earlier than when the president’s recommendations were made would have dropped estimates down by 90 percent.
Noting that modeling estimates aren’t always a “crystal ball,” and that their numbers could be off, the researchers maintain that “What matters more is the relative effect of moving earlier rather than later in trying to contain the spread.”
In other words, had the Trump administration taken things more seriously, the number of Americans who are likely to die from the disease could be starkly smaller.
“Whatever the final death toll is in the United States, the cost of waiting will be enormous, a tragic consequence of the exponential spread of the virus early in the epidemic,” they added in their op-ed piece.
Indeed, the week or so prior to Trump issuing his social distancing recommendations, the president was making a number of statements suggesting he didn’t see the crisis as being all that important or that such actions were warranted. On March 9, for example, Trump sent out a tweet in which he expressed a desire to resist calls for distancing measures, comparing such actions as being out of line for what we do during flu season each year, and thus unnecessary for COVID-19.
“Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on” when flu season occurs, Trump pointed out.
Also on March 9, Trump sent out a separate tweet to his followers insinuating that fears about coronavirus were nothing more than mere partisan statements against him.
“The Fake News Media and their partner, the Democrat Party, is doing everything within its semi-considerable power (it used to be greater!) to inflame the CoronaVirus situation, far beyond what the facts would warrant,” Trump said, citing the words of Surgeon General Jerome Adams that week, who said, “The risk is low to the average American.”
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy