East Bay Times

Please skip the useless COVID-19 rules, please

- By Faye Flam Faye Flam is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. © 2020 Bloomberg News. Distribute­d by Tribune Content Agency.

A clutter of unhelpful pandemic rules is wearing people down. One-way systems in stores, outdoor mask mandates, ceaselessl­y cleaning groceries and packages — should these things be our top priorities for limiting the spread of COVID-19?

Harvard’s Joseph Allen is an associate professor of exposure assessment science and one of the world’s experts on why some indoor spaces are worse than others for spreading viruses. Like other experts, he agrees that poorly ventilated indoor sites are the prime spreading ground for SARS-CoV-2. So the longer people spend in any indoor space with other people, the greater the risk they pose to themselves and others.

I asked him: Wouldn’t it be better if we did away with the one-way system so that people could dispatch with their grocery shopping quickly, without having to endure long waits behind price-comparers or other slowpokes? The answer is yes. Eliminatin­g those annoying arrows would probably make shopping safer as well as less stressful.

Businesses are, of course, free to impose their own rules, but it’s unlikely many would knowingly make shopping less safe. The fault lies with the public health community for being too shy in talking about which rules don’t help, leaving us with a tangle of rules and recommenda­tions — and pandemic fatigue.

As risk communicat­ion consultant Peter Sandman has said early in the pandemic, a public health policy that people don’t follow is a failed policy. That means even a really solid, science-based set of rules can fail if it’s not communicat­ed with a clear rationale.

Harvard’s William Hanage, who studies infectious disease dynamics, told me that people don’t need more rules. They need more informatio­n about how the virus is transmitte­d so they can take steps to avoid it. “When you phrase things in terms of rules, it leads people to try to come up with ways to get around those rules,” he says.

The rules in many states seem to suggest that walking outside is dangerous and eating in a restaurant is safe, but Hanage says the truth is the other way around.

Massachuse­tts Gov. Charlie Baker has justified his outdoor mask mandate by saying it sends a message. The message I heard was that that the rules are not chosen for our health and welfare but to make our political leaders look like they are doing something.

Rules should only be decreed along with evidence for their benefit, argued statistici­an and risk communicat­ion expert David Spiegelhal­ter in a piece for The Guardian: “Too often, the message is shaped by communicat­ion profession­als working to ensure the greatest number of people ‘get the message’ rather than thinking about how to present the evidence so the greatest number of people can understand it, trust it, and then decide for themselves.”

Hanage says that the science to date points to the primary risk coming from what he calls the three C’s — close contact, closed spaces and crowds. He says in Japan, where they’ve had few COVID-19 deaths, people are advised to avoid these — not just to wear masks in these situations but to limit or avoid them.

One place where the informatio­nal clutter can get sorted out is the CDC. The agency cited good reasons people should avoid traveling for the holidays, including many combinatio­ns of those three C’s. They’ve just issued new guidelines recommendi­ng masks when people are indoors outside their homes or cannot stay more than 6 feet away from other people. And they’ve just shortened the quarantine period for people exposed to the virus from 14 days to 10, or seven if you get a test at the end. Again, the rationale was explained — some cases can incubate for two full weeks, but most people develop symptoms sooner. A shorter quarantine period can still cut down on transmissi­on and will get better compliance.

It would be wonderful if the CDC could also start telling us which rules and recommenda­tions are unlikely to work, so we can all concentrat­e on the ones that will. There’s some denial out there, but there’s also enormous curiosity and willingnes­s to help. It’s a resource we can’t afford to keep squanderin­g.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States