Public health takes it on the chin again

Whether it be face masks, school closures or the incessant contact tracing during the COVID-19 pandemic, public health officials really lost a lot of credibility, something they once were pretty well known for.

Perhaps the person behind this loss of public health credibility more than anyone else is Dr. Anthony Fauci. And Fauci did it again a couple of weeks ago in front of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

One of the things Anthony “Attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science” Fauci said in his testimony was about social distancing.

I remember this insanity quite vividly--walking down taped off aisles at Publix in 2020 with people going in opposite directions (God forbid you went the wrong way down the aisle, you would have a hysterically COVID-19 fearful man or woman screaming at you), standing on spaced out spots at the bank or plastic dividers all over your workplace. I remember thinking, I can't be alone in believing this is useless and nuts.

Well the truth came out in Fauci's testimony: Dr. Fauci claimed that the “6 feet apart” social distancing recommendation promoted by federal health officials was likely not based on any data. He characterized the development of the guidance by stating “it sort of just appeared.”

It's interesting that a truly very accomplished public health officials said much wiser things concerning disease mitigation measures, albeit about pandemic influenza.

In 2006, the eradicator of smallpox, DA Henderson wrote with two of his colleagues concerning social distancing:

It has been recommended that individuals maintain a distance of 3 feet or more during a pandemic so as to diminish the number of contacts with people who may be infected. The efficacy of this measure is unknown. It is typically assumed that transmission of droplet-spread diseases, such as influenza, is limited to “close contacts”—that is, being within 3–6 feet of an infected person. Keeping a space of 3 feet between individuals might be possible in some work environments, but it is difficult to imagine how bus, rail, or air travelers could stay 3 feet apart from each other throughout an epidemic. And such a recommendation would greatly complicate normal daily tasks like grocery shopping, banking, and the like.

More importantly, it was the clarity that the late-great Henderson brought to the bigger picture, something that Fauci and others like him-- Peter Hotez, Eric Ding and others could never fathom while growing fanbases on social media.

Henderson said:

There has been interest in a range of disease mitigation measures. Possible measures that have been proposed include: isolation of sick people in hospital or at home, use of antiviral medications, handwashing and respiratory etiquette, large-scale or home quarantine of people believed to have been exposed, travel restrictions, prohibition of social gatherings, school closures, maintaining personal distance, and the use of masks. Thus, we must ask whether any or all of the proposed measures are epidemiologically sound, logistically feasible, and politically viable. It is also critically important to consider possible secondary social and economic impacts of various mitigation measures.

They didn't care about people jobs, our kid's education and the general destruction of many businesses. They doesn't fit into their authoritative public health world view.

Instead of viewing public health during a outbreak/pandemic as educating communities about these diseases, such as how they are spread, who is most at risk, and what steps to take to reduce the risk of catching these diseases, it became a destruction of society. 

As Dr. Henderson wrote, Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted. Strong political and public health leadership to provide reassurance and to ensure that needed medical care services are provided are critical elements. If either is seen to be less than optimal, a manageable epidemic could move toward catastrophe.

So you wonder why the backlash against public health? Fauci, Hotez and Ding totally ignored the wise words of DA Henderson, who looked at public health through a very different lens.

So much for science...