Two experts explain why we need to start asking the hard questions.
 | By Alexandra Sifferlin Senior Staff Editor, Opinion |
Despite being well over a year and a half into the pandemic, the same questions and debates persist. Who should be wearing masks? And how can we keep children safe in school? |
As experts Joseph Allen and Helen Jenkins write in an essay today, much of the bewilderment stems from undefined and differing goals for Covid-19 policy. The writers ask: What are we actually trying to achieve in the United States? Is the aim no infections (which Allen and Jenkins think is not possible)? Or is it to prevent hospitalizations and deaths from the virus? Or something else? |
The question of what our goals are is not an easy one to answer. But it's important to figure out because different Covid-19 goals can lead to very different policy responses. This isn't just a high-level question for leaders in the White House, it's the kind of question schools, workplaces and local communities need to be discussing, too. Even on Twitter, it could be helpful if debating experts made clear what pandemic endgame they are arguing for. |
Allen and Jenkins use masking of children in schools as one example of where an unclear goal has led to ill-defined policy mush. Say a city or even just one school decided their goal of having kids wear masks is to prevent all infections in children or the surrounding community. That kind of goal, they argue, could result in indefinite masking. Say the goal is instead keeping children in school — in person. That could mean a different set of precautions like embracing regular rapid testing versus mass quarantining, and even accepting some infections among children. |
One way to think through this is to look to other countries. The authors cite that Britain, for example, is not requiring masks for children and it's unclear if vaccinations for young kids will be recommended. "Britain has experts like we do, and they are looking at the same scientific data we are, they most assuredly care about children's health the same way we do, and, yet, they have come to a different policy decision," Allen and Jenkins write. |
The duo are arguing for leaders and experts — including their peers in public health — to more clearly connect policy recommendations and advice to goals and specific end points. "The conflict is not about masks or boosters," they write. "It's about the often unstated objective and how a mask mandate or a 'boosters for all' approach may or may not get us there." |
Amid debate and confusion, it's also worth considering that even as individuals we are likely functioning with different goals in mind. Consensus probably won't be possible, but open discussions about what the future of the pandemic can and should look like in the U.S. need to happen now. This is not the last time we will be establishing policies to address Covid-19, but it should be the last time we do so without a clear, achievable goal in mind. |
Here's what we're focusing on today: |
Forward this newsletter to friends to share ideas and perspectives that will help inform their lives. They can sign up here. Do you have feedback? Email us at opiniontoday@nytimes.com |
Contact Us If you have questions about your Times account, delivery problems or other issues, visit our Help Page or contact The Times. |
|
