Public Health Messaging Relating to COVID-19 is A Disaster. Here’s Why
By: Nathan Clark
Tags: Covid 19 Crisis, Public Health, Covid 19

We are nearly 10 months into the COVID-19 pandemic. A pandemic that will likely continue to drag on through at least the third quarter of 2021. The current public health messaging, and the public health messaging of the last few months isn’t sustainable. Public health officials have been saying for months not to gather with others outside your household and to leave the house as little as possible. They make it sound easy, and some are scorned if they dare to fulfill the human need to see other people. Meeting with others on zoom isn’t the same as meeting with people face-to-face. In order for humans to live, and not simply exist, we have to see other people. Therefore, public health officials shouldn’t act shocked when people are meeting with others during holidays like Thanksgiving and Christmas. The current public health messaging revolves around the concept of “risk elimination.” Eliminate nearly all risk and take drastic draconian measures to prevent COVID infection. This doesn’t work long term. In fact, as detailed by this Los Angeles Times Article, the “risk elimination” strategy is being ignored by many in California. The risk elimination technique is counter intuitive to human nature. Sure, maybe it works for a short period of time, but there comes a point where humans need to be human. Instead of public health officials promoting risk elimination, how about they start preaching risk reduction? Risk reduction is a proven public health technique. Risk elimination? A failure.

What’s Risk Reduction?

Just recently, the Los Angeles Mayor urged residents to “cancel everything.” If only it were that easy. Canceling everything seems like quite a drastic measure to take. According to that message, I can’t go to a hypothetical planned gathering with my friends at the park. The park is an extremely low risk environment and there hasn’t been a single incidence of COVID spread at parks. All the “cancel everything” message does is turn people off and make them even more cavalier with respect to COVID exposure. In fact, in Los Angeles County, outdoor playgrounds are closed but retail is open. So, cancel everything except a trip to the local mall. I am not anti-science, in fact I am pro-science. Closing playgrounds and keeping retail open is anti-science. This messaging from officials is what makes people irate. People still want to do things, and they will continue doing things as that’s human nature. We need to realize that the majority of people will not stay home for months on end, so we need to adjust our messaging to the reality on the ground. We can still respect the public health message by implementing risk reduction. Risk reduction is a theory that one will get more buy-in with regards to public health when one simply advocates for a way to do an activity safely rather than telling people to cancel everything. An example of risk reduction is teaching teenagers about birth control and safe sex. In many European countries where safe sex is taught, the teenage pregnancy rate is far lower than the United States. The “risk elimination” message of abstinence only sex-ed taught in many public schools is an abject failure, as many teenagers will have sex anyway while never learning how to do it safely.

How Can We Implement Risk Reduction In COVID Messaging?

Instead of telling people to “cancel everything” and “stay home until vaccine” we can suggest people to have gatherings outside. We can also urge people to keep their gatherings small, as large gatherings have been proven to drive COVID surges. A gathering with five people is probably fine with respect to covid risk, as we need to balance our mental health with our physical health obviously. We can also urge people to form “COVID bubbles” where they meet with only a few families to socialize. We can reduce covid risk, while having a balanced public health message. Also, the risk reduction technique will also improve everyone’s mental health, as staying home for long periods of time in isolation is detrimental to one’s mental health. People don’t like being told that they can’t do something, so instead of telling them “no” we must have a message that encourages simply reducing risk. For example, instead of banning driving due to the thousands of deaths car accidents cause, we make driving safer. We have designed roads in a way that make driving inherently less risky. We have required seat belts. We have created air bags which has drastically reduced car accident fatality. The list goes on and on and on. In order to fight back against the growing pandemic fatigue, we need to tell people that they can do certain things while giving them some advice on how to reduce risk.

In Conclusion

The COVID health messages from the March/April era of the pandemic don’t work anymore, and it’s long past time to change it. We can reduce covid risk while also reducing pandemic fatigue. If we focus on risk reduction rather than risk elimination, we can have more buy-in with public health measures which will ensure that we get through this faster. There is a better way, and I hope we pursue this messaging strategy.

Happy Holidays

-Nathan Clark