Well, OK, I see some folks posting about doom and gloom and if anyone posted what we SHOULD be doing differently NOW I missed it.
Ok... So here goes.
First thing is that "we" as a formal legislative nation (or republic of legislative states) probably don't need to do much differently. I would like to see coast-to-coast mask mandates. I think restrictions on large gatherings (concerts, sporting events, etc) is probably still good policy. If I were a governor or member of a state legislature, I would NOT reopen large gatherings. Occupancy limits that enforce distancing on indoor dining/bars, etc, are still IMHO good policy. SChools that reopent should make sure they can meet physical distancing guidelines and require masks. If my 11 yo autistic son can wear a mask all day, Karen's little snowflakes can do it. These are easy things that we can do, without completely shuttering the economy, that IMHO are going to help keep R0 down.
The second thing, however, is messaging. The basic ideas of social distancing, encouraging WFH for any industry/job that can do it, of trying to primarily only congregate with your own household, are important and need to be consistently highlighted AND explained. Where I think we're failing is that people think "reopening" means the danger has passed, but that's far from true. We need to go beyond just saying what is open or closed, and move to explain to people what they should be doing and why.
So I'd try to actively message the following:
-The key of all this behavior modification is to
reduce the spread, not necessarily to change the risk of any given individual from contracting the virus. Too many young people are cavalier about their behavior because they're not in an age group that they're afraid of poor outcomes from the virus. Too many people are refusing to wear masks because they don't think they need to protect themselves. The whole idea is to reduce R0, and that comes from everyone taking basic precautions to reduce the spread, not to avoid getting infected themselves.
-The best way to reduce the spread is to WFH, to stay home with the exception of essential business, and to only congregate with your own household. However that's known to be unrealistic, both for huge portions of the population who can't do it (i.e. can't WFH), and for the emotional/mental health aspects of isolation. But people should think about that as the "baseline goal" to work from.
-If you need--or want--to move up from the baseline, there are ways to do so more responsibly:
- I've heard of families with kids basically setting up a quarantine family that they spend time with. The idea is that they can socialize, their kids can socialize, but that outside of the socialization between the two families, they try to isolate as much as possible.
- Close friends who are attempting to isolate in general might hang out with their usual friends, but try to AVOID any interaction outside of a certain social circle. What you DON'T want to do is go out 3 nights a week with 3 different groups of people and hit the bar or restaurant unmasked. It's much more responsible to try to stay with the same people, so that at least if there is someone who contracts the virus, you keep infections within that one group.
- If you have a larger event that you MUST attend (wedding, birthday party, other event etc), try to isolate and be as careful as possible for the 7-10 days leading up to that event, to try to avoid bringing the virus to the event with you. After the event, try to isolate and be as careful as possible (especially in any interaction with someone from a vulnerable group) for 7-10 days to ensure that you have not contracted the virus and are contagious.
- Above all, when it's possible to make simple modifications to an event, do so. Instead of greeting with hugs or handshakes, greet with a fist bump. If possible, keep visits outside as much as possible.
-The key of all these modifications is to be cognizant that you may not be able to 100% avoid the virus in life, but that we ALL need to work together to reduce R0. That doesn't mean "stay at home in fear of the world", but that means that reopening is not "back to normal".
The other thing about ALL working together? It means that can't rely only on sheltering vulnerable populations, because we can't always do that. Too many of them have to interact with the world, whether it be for work or otherwise. Thus it means that those of us that have the MOST freedom and capability to avoid engaging in activities which spread it should be extra careful, so that WE don't hurt those in vulnerable populations.
The goal here is to get through with the least loss of life we can until a vaccine is available. There is a lot of promising work on that, such that I think widespread vaccine availability late in the first half of 2021 is possible. So thinking about every action you take, not just in the arena of "what is my risk of contracting the virus if I do X?" should be modified to be "what is my likelihood of spreading the virus to someone vulnerable if I get it?" instead.
That's my $0.02. We focus all of our effort on what's open or closed. We don't focus on the messaging of what leads to spread of the virus and how people can engage with the world in less risky ways than just going back to normal.
