Did we forget the mask & What is the best option?
After more than two years of experience with the epidemic, it turns out that the vital options for maneuvering with it are no more than three: closure, strict adherence to safety procedures and widespread pollination. Failure to implement any of these options means a rise in injuries and deaths, and overstretched hospitals and health capabilities, which means a national disaster.
The worst option is to close. There is a wealth of literature that traces its economic, social and psychological effects. But what justifies resorting to this option - in case the other two options fail and injuries rise - is that human life is more valuable than any money, and most people will say that they will give up everything material in order to save the lives of family and loved ones, and it is likely that the position against the closure will change if he or someone is exposed dear ones, to a severe injury that puts him at risk of death.
Opposition to the closure would be justified if the other two options were available, but rather mismanaged. As for the option to adhere to well-known safety measures - wearing masks, physical distancing and avoiding gatherings - the application is related to government decisions and mechanisms as well as to individuals' attitudes, motives and behavioral choices.
It will suffice for a percentage of citizens to disobey and act irresponsibly to destroy any plans to contain the epidemic. Even if the laws to control violators are strict, their application in the event of a large number of non-compliants may require the allocation of a policeman to every shop, house or citizen and in most of the world - except for some well-known Asians - Reliance on this option failed and governments were forced to resort to closure.
The best choice
The best option to avoid closure and get rid of the negatives of relying on individual commitment is undoubtedly vaccines to obtain the largest amount of doses to immunize the largest possible number of citizens to approach community immunity.
But this option is limited by the conditions of the international influence of the country concerned, the availability of funds, bargaining skills, diplomacy, and diversification of sources. After that, the logistical factors related to the capabilities of delivering the vaccine to citizens, and the strict justice in distributing vaccines to them according to the priority of entitlement only, according to known standards, and governments deserve all the blame if they show an unjustified failure in any of the matters related to the provision and delivery of vaccines.
After all, the only criterion for reconciling the management of these three options remains the direction of the epidemiological curve at the moment in question. If the numbers at that moment indicate a continuation of the escalation of injuries in a way that may lead to a loss of control, this means the failure to rely on the commitment to prevention and its management mechanisms. And in the event that the vaccine option is disrupted due to scarcity of quantities or lack of capabilities, the only option that is available is closure - in the least possible form of damage to the economy.
There are forms that have become known to reduce unnecessary mixing and gatherings and activities that are not economically productive. Limited closures will be less painful than a comprehensive ban for a long period, which will have to strain the capabilities of hospitals and the medical system.
What does the citizen want?
Merchants and business owners will want any restrictions on their business lifted, because every closing hour makes a difference. Workers everywhere are affected by salary deductions, layoffs, and forced leave.
But many do not help the option of relying on commitment. Merchants do not abide by the procedures and do not obligate their customers to follow them.
People do not help, so they enter the shops without masks, crump up, and may leave in protest if they are asked to distance themselves and to tighten their masks over their noses. And office workers do not comply. Many adhere only temporarily, if they learn of the approach of a supervisory authority, and dissolve as soon as it leaves. As for going to gathering places such as weddings, funerals, banquets and meetings, there is nothing wrong with it.
The result is the escalation of the epidemiological curve and the choice, in the absence of commitment and the scarcity of vaccines, is the tightening of the closure, which will lead to more economic, social and psychological damage. People's underestimation of prevention helps drive the choice they are protesting against. And it would be absurd to repeat the talk about commitment when it does not exist - even if the non-compliants are counted as few - if the result is high casualties, frustrating the work of the committed and exposing them to danger.
Previous Articles:
Is intolerance always associated with the negative?
What I Read About Energy Does It Really Captivate Us?
Passion and proper upbringing between "Yes" and "No"
Luck Favors the Prepared Mind
