2019 Wants Its Pandemic Panic Back

If you thought the media were done trying to make you panic about covid -- or just want a trip down memory lane -- you can mosey on over to MSN. They're carrying a Boston Globe piece that sounds like it could have been written in late 2019 or early 2020, when we knew little about covid, and were still facing a virgin soil pandemic.

Yes, the author mentions Paxlovid and grudgingly admits that we're no longer using refrigerator trucks as makeshift morgues, but get a load of this:

Image by Edvard Munch, via Wikimedia Commons, public domain.

But jokes aside, it's been quietly harrowing. Even a "mild" case of COVID is still COVID, a virus that has killed more than 7 million people worldwide, at least 1.1 million of them in this nation alone. (And the real numbers are probably higher.) Death has never been the only consequence of this virus. Long-haulers still struggle with debilitating post-virus symptoms that can range from fatigue and chronic cough to brain fog and gastrointestinal issues.

"It's a cause of great concern," Dr. Francis S. Collins, former director of the National Institutes of Health, told The Washington Post in 2021. "Even if it's only 10 percent of people who've been infected who end up with long COVID ... [t]hat's a big public health issue."

...

COVID still kills hundreds each week. A new booster for those 65 and older was quietly rolled out in April, but only 17 percent of those eligible have gotten it. News broadcasts no longer share the latest COVID data, once a daily staple. It's as if there was an agreement that COVID would disappear if only we stopped talking and thinking about it. That means this nation has largely resigned itself to the terrible fact that thousands will die from the virus this year and perhaps for years to come.

But for some missing, readily-available context, we'd think officials were out of their gourds for declaring the pandemic over...

Yes, death remains a possible outcome of this virus, but vaccination reduces that risk by something north of 75%, even without the bivalent booster -- and prior infection is as protective in that regard as vaccination.

And as far as long covid goes -- a sometimes serious condition that is just being understood -- I doubt the risk of it being severe is anywhere near the 10% chance of a covid case leading to that collection of post-acute difficulties:

The CDC considers long COVID to be an umbrella term for "health consequences" that are present at least 4 weeks after an acute infection. This condition can be considered "a lack of return to the usual state of health following COVID," according to the CDC.

Common symptoms include fatigue, shortness of breath, exercise intolerance, "brain fog," chest pain, cough, and loss of taste/smell. Note that it's not a requirement that that symptoms be severe enough that they interfere with activities of daily living, just that they are present.

There is no diagnostic test or criteria that confirms this diagnosis. Therefore, the symptoms and definitions above are vague and make it difficult to gauge prevalence of the disease. Hence, the varying estimates that range from 5% to 30%, depending on the study. [bold added]

So, if I get covid and still cough a month later -- like I do every time I catch a cold -- I'd count as having "long covid" whether or not I had any significant lingering debility.

Oh, and vaccination lowers the risk of long covid -- which is already lower (or nonexistent) for the now-dominant omicron-based strains of the virus.

Nevertheless, the piece basically accuses anyone who isn't holed up for the apocalypse or masking in public of evasion:

COVID still kills hundreds each week. A new booster for those 65 and older was quietly rolled out in April, but only 17 percent of those eligible have gotten it. News broadcasts no longer share the latest COVID data, once a daily staple. It's as if there was an agreement that COVID would disappear if only we stopped talking and thinking about it. That means this nation has largely resigned itself to the terrible fact that thousands will die from the virus this year and perhaps for years to come. [links omitted]

Guess what else kills hundreds each week in the US? The flu.

Call me foolhardy, but my plan for covid is the same as for the flu: I'll get a jab in the fall and avoid being around people who I know have it, unless they're in my immediate family and need my care.

It is not evasion to take into account changing conditions when assessing what to do about a virus at either the governmental level or the personal level. The virus is endemic now and we have blunted its effects through vaccination and treatments we didn't have in 2019; It should be treated like the flu or any other serious respiratory disease. Since the government is no longer facing an emergency, this means that at-risk individuals have to be more vigilant than others regarding covid. Period.

(Many things the government did do were wrong. Please see this document for a blueprint for what I think would be a proper response.)

As for me? I haven't had covid yet, to my knowledge. The thought that I could die or be a long-hauler isn't pleasant at all, but I value living a normal life enough that treating this virus like the flu is a reasonable balancing of risk and reward to me.

Nothing we do -- even hiding from an illness -- is without risks or downsides, and it is ridiculous to chide others for not making the same assessments we do, esepcially when their individual situations are not the same.

-- CAV