The paragraph opening with “A disconnect between what I experienced on the ground and the narrative I was hearing” struck me, too, though from a slightly different vantage point. In our household, attending the same small indoor gathering of older women in the 2022 holiday season, one person who didn’t know she had covid resulted in all …
The paragraph opening with “A disconnect between what I experienced on the ground and the narrative I was hearing” struck me, too, though from a slightly different vantage point. In our household, attending the same small indoor gathering of older women in the 2022 holiday season, one person who didn’t know she had covid resulted in all of us contracting it. A couple of us got very sick, taking several weeks to recover, while others had slight cold symptoms. We to this day have no real idea why this variance, as, with one exception, our risk factors were about the same. In consequence, though, as one in our household was among those who got very sick, we feel it essential to remain very careful, constricting though it is.
Friends of ours, even those who are aware this happened, let alone neighbors in our building, sometimes look in askance (though usually stay politely silent) when they see us masked in close indoor spaces or on learning that we “still” do not do any indoor dining. So, I do think it is common that people who have not directly experienced severe bouts of COVID (or worse), tend to default to easing up.
This is a place where I would like to see clearer communication from public health authorities to help people understand and respect that some have had worse experiences than others, and that may not be visible. So, if you see someone, eg, with a mask on, respect that it is necessary, even if the reason is not visible to you, and act with courtesy (which might include, for example, donning your own mask while around that person and turning away and covering your nose and mouth if you need to sneeze).
It would help also, that such communications do not use buzz words like “the elderly,” which suggest a “sitting at home, out of society” cohort, which most of us definitely are not. The same holds for people I know who are immunocompromised—the issue is often not visible.
I suspect that it is impossible to make a consistent and sensible policy for something as eccentric as COVID. Like you say, among multiple people with similar risk factors, some got really sick, some had mild symptoms, and (possibly) some were infected but had no symptoms at all, and no one knows how to predict what will happen in any individual case. Eccentricity is the bane of planning and policy.
Something we’re learning, though, is that the long-term effects of even mild infection may have significant lasting effects on multiple organ systems. We don’t yet know if these will really be long-term or transient, nor if transient, for how long. We’re still learning about the effects of the virus.
Absolutely. This makes it all the more important that public facing communications are as clear as possible, while acknowledging that some things are still unknown and others may change. Dr. Jetelina is peerless in demonstrating how this can be done.
On the specific issue I noted, it strikes me that what is needed is a “courtesy” campaign, like that the NYC subway uses for subway etiquette, using shory phrases and and eye-catching graphics to drive the points home. One I remember is of a person sitting on a seat with a row of luggage next to her. The accompanying phrase is “Seats are for butts, not bags.” Basic stuff like that.
The paragraph opening with “A disconnect between what I experienced on the ground and the narrative I was hearing” struck me, too, though from a slightly different vantage point. In our household, attending the same small indoor gathering of older women in the 2022 holiday season, one person who didn’t know she had covid resulted in all of us contracting it. A couple of us got very sick, taking several weeks to recover, while others had slight cold symptoms. We to this day have no real idea why this variance, as, with one exception, our risk factors were about the same. In consequence, though, as one in our household was among those who got very sick, we feel it essential to remain very careful, constricting though it is.
Friends of ours, even those who are aware this happened, let alone neighbors in our building, sometimes look in askance (though usually stay politely silent) when they see us masked in close indoor spaces or on learning that we “still” do not do any indoor dining. So, I do think it is common that people who have not directly experienced severe bouts of COVID (or worse), tend to default to easing up.
This is a place where I would like to see clearer communication from public health authorities to help people understand and respect that some have had worse experiences than others, and that may not be visible. So, if you see someone, eg, with a mask on, respect that it is necessary, even if the reason is not visible to you, and act with courtesy (which might include, for example, donning your own mask while around that person and turning away and covering your nose and mouth if you need to sneeze).
It would help also, that such communications do not use buzz words like “the elderly,” which suggest a “sitting at home, out of society” cohort, which most of us definitely are not. The same holds for people I know who are immunocompromised—the issue is often not visible.
Yes, it seems common for people think "It was mild for me so it must be for everyone."
I suspect that it is impossible to make a consistent and sensible policy for something as eccentric as COVID. Like you say, among multiple people with similar risk factors, some got really sick, some had mild symptoms, and (possibly) some were infected but had no symptoms at all, and no one knows how to predict what will happen in any individual case. Eccentricity is the bane of planning and policy.
Something we’re learning, though, is that the long-term effects of even mild infection may have significant lasting effects on multiple organ systems. We don’t yet know if these will really be long-term or transient, nor if transient, for how long. We’re still learning about the effects of the virus.
Absolutely. This makes it all the more important that public facing communications are as clear as possible, while acknowledging that some things are still unknown and others may change. Dr. Jetelina is peerless in demonstrating how this can be done.
On the specific issue I noted, it strikes me that what is needed is a “courtesy” campaign, like that the NYC subway uses for subway etiquette, using shory phrases and and eye-catching graphics to drive the points home. One I remember is of a person sitting on a seat with a row of luggage next to her. The accompanying phrase is “Seats are for butts, not bags.” Basic stuff like that.