Scientists speak facts — sometimes that’s hard to hear
Lives are more important than political careers so we should rely on facts and defer to the experts, argues Prof Luke O’Neill
IT’S so embarrassing. Tony Fauci, world famous immunologist, member of the Trump administration’s coronavirus taskforce, has to attend regular press conferences with a gobs***e. Mr
Trump, this is an Irish term meaning ‘a stupid, foolish or incompetent person’. A very dangerous gobs***e.
Fauci was at one point listed 13th in the world out of 2.5 million scientists. We immunologists feel admiration, concern and sympathy for our friend (#savefauci). Playing out before our eyes, at this most dangerous of times, is the worst example of the clash that can happen between politics and science.
When Trump said about hydroxychloroquine, a possible treatment for Covid-19: “Take it. What have you got to lose?” Fauci said: “In terms of science, I don’t think we can definitively say it works.”
Patrice Harris, president of the American Medical Association, was more pointed in her reply:
“Your Life.” she said. “Hydroxychloroquine might have damaging side-effects in Covid-19 patients so trials are proceeding with caution.”
At the start of the outbreak, an editorial in
The Economist stated that this virus will test every government it comes up against. Governments turned to scientists for advice. Immunology and vaccines are to Covid-19 what physics and the atom bomb were to World War
II. The key challenge is a scientist may only have
50pc of the information concerning Covid-19, but a politician has to make a 100pc decision. The politician presses the scientist into giving an opinion without all the data. This immediately leads to attacks from other scientists who disagree because of the uncertainties. Scientists often start an answer with “We’re not fully sure but...”. and then try to answer as best they can. It’s not so much ‘Show me the money’ (Trump) as ‘Show me the data’ (Fauci). Politicians often either disregard scientists, pay lip service to them or contradict them.
China’s scientists have won acclaim for how they responded. In January, a team led by Yong-Zhen Zhang, of the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre & School of Public Health, released key information on the virus, in the fastest time ever for a new virus. Chinese doctors also quickly reported the disease now known as Covid-19. That’s what scientists do, because they know that two heads are better than one when it comes to complex scientific problems.
Chinese politicians have been accused of prevarication. Like children, they put their fingers in their ears and hoped it would go away. The noise got so loud they had to respond. China’s delay may have cost many thousands of lives. It most likely cost the life of Li Wenliang, a Wuhan doctor, who shared information on Covid-19 on January 3. He was forced to sign an official letter promising to cease spreading ‘false rumours regarding the coronavirus’. Dr Li contracted Covid-19 from a patient he treated, and died on February 7. If it turns out that the virus originated in a government lab near the seafood market in Wuhan because of an accident (this remains a rumour), this will tell us why the Chinese government was so secretive early in the outbreak. Fear of reputational damage.
After the virus began to spread outside China, and once the scale of the impending crisis became clear, scientists everywhere began to sound the alarm.
Trump publicly minimised the risk. In May 2018, against scientific advice, he disbanded a team working on future pandemics. On April 1 this year, he denied this: “We didn’t do that,” he said, claiming that it was “a false story”. Yet again, fear of reputational damage. With thousands of deaths, and clear evidence that the virus was highly contagious, Trump said: “We want to get [US business] open very soon... I’d love to have it open by Easter.” There was no scientific basis for this, and all the evidence said this would be disastrous. Like a child, Trump put his fingers in his ears and looked forward to the Easter Bunny.
US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: “We respect science, science, science. And for those who say we choose prayer over science, I say science is an answer to our prayers.”
Trump was mainly talking to his political base. Republicans (and conservatives elsewhere) usually agree on issues like abortion, immigration and gun control. But they are also more likely to think that Covid-19 might be a hoax (which Trump himself said on February 28), that it’s “just like the flu”, denying the scientific evidence.
They think scientists are opinionated elitists. Trump claims to like science because of his ‘super genius’ uncle saying: “Maybe I have a natural ability.” This is a man who, despite warnings, stared directly at the sun during an eclipse. Dr Fauci has had to publicly deny that he is being manipulated by Trump: “Everything I do is voluntary,” he said. “Please don’t even imply that.”
Trump actively prevented government scientists from recommending that anyone over 60 remain inside their homes. Again, fingers in the ears and more deaths.
Meanwhile in the UK, on March 2 British scientists predicted 500,000 deaths. The next day, Prime Minister Boris Johnson joked that he was still shaking hands with everyone, including at a hospital treating coronavirus patients.
In February and March, British officials missed eight conference calls about Covid-19 between EU heads of state or health ministers. Maybe they were all at Cheltenham.
Johnson held out against stringent measures. Then on March 12, Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer, moved the threat from “moderate” to “high”. On March 16 came a report by epidemiologist Neil Ferguson. It predicted 250,000 deaths. Eleven days later the UK government triggered a full lockdown. Tens if not hundreds of thousands of people became infected in those 11 days. The delay in responding most likely killed many of the citizens they are supposed to protect. A spokesman for the government’s chief scientific adviser, Patrick Vallance, said: “Scientific advisers provide advice, while ministers and the government make decisions.”
Nature magazine (the world’s leading science magazine) has accused governments of reaching critical decisions in secret, making announcements before giving the evidence on which their decisions are based. Neither the US nor UK governments have explained why they did not follow the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) advice to test, test, test. The WHO has huge cumulative experience when it comes to pandemics. Trump has attacked it when we need it most, throwing his toys out of the pram. Its directorgeneral Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus made it simple for Trump, saying: “You can’t fight a virus if you don’t know where it is.”
When the US banned flights from China (which Trump says saved the US), no evidence was presented for how this might slow the spread of a virus that is already circulating widely in a country. Show us the data.
That leaves us with Ireland. How have we done? The government set up expert panels to advise them. We should see the data they’re using.
Chief Medical Officer Dr Tony Holohan provides a calming influence, which is important. The Government hopefully has an expert group advising it on the re-opening of our country, which will need a huge increase in testing. Science should have the primacy.
A clear plan based on science will reassure the public, which is essential.
And so, we now wait. Tolerate pandemic fatigue and lockdown lethargy. Wait to be released.
Politicians, heed the advice of the scientists. Make the unpopular decisions if you have to. You might lose your seat, but you will have saved lives. Which is more important?
‘You can’t fight a virus if you don’t know where it is’