Journal of Global Infectious DiseasesOfficial Publishing of INDUSEM and OPUS 12 Foundation, Inc. Users online:438  
Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size     
Home About us Editors Ahead of Print Current Issue Archives Search Instructions Subscribe Advertise Login 
 


 
   Table of Contents     
LETTER TO EDITOR  
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 62-63
Rigorizing COVID-19 blind-spotting for competent political leadership and public health cognizance


Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Submission11-Feb-2021
Date of Decision12-Feb-2021
Date of Acceptance12-Feb-2021
Date of Web Publication26-Feb-2021
 

How to cite this article:
Johnson JC, Johnson PA. Rigorizing COVID-19 blind-spotting for competent political leadership and public health cognizance. J Global Infect Dis 2021;13:62-3

How to cite this URL:
Johnson JC, Johnson PA. Rigorizing COVID-19 blind-spotting for competent political leadership and public health cognizance. J Global Infect Dis [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 Apr 11];13:62-3. Available from: https://www.jgid.org/text.asp?2021/13/1/62/310328


Sir,

The Multidisciplinary American College of Academic International MedicineWorld Academic Council of Emergency Medicine Multidisciplinary (ACAIM-WACEM) COVID-19 Consensus Group have synthesized and summarized complex pharmaceutical, economic, and public threats brought about by COVID-19 using a 14-point list of “blind spots.[1]” The consensus paper posits how ulterior political motives can skew and effectively, blindside the dissemination of evidence-based medical knowledge. Yet, the list of recommendations can be enhanced for policy-making audiences through improved focus and operational refinement of these themes.

First, the “blind spots” appear somewhat arbitrary but could be improved by rearranging them and grouping them by target demographic. For example, generalizing the “scientific community” can be challenging when research and development are being undertaken from the level of private vaccine companies to livestock cultivators.[2] Instead, specific policy directives for corporations, educational institutions, and independent groups could be useful.

Second, the element of surprise during the first wave spotlighted the holes in the current public health system preparedness and resilience.[3] It may be rational to ground these recommendations in a re-examination of existing pandemic protocols and standards under the International Health Regulations (2005) set by the World Health Organization. If the blind spots can be matched with the standards-in-place, it allows governing bodies to translate and transfer updatable points as they prepare for subsequent waves.

Finally, it might be valuable to bring up some solutions that are not commonly seen in mainstream media. For instance, Blind Spot number three (Ignoring simple and effective nonpharmacological measures) is especially pertinent but the emphasis on social distancing and contact tracing has vastly undercut messaging toward perhaps equally useful preventative strategies such as exercise. The effects of exercise on COVID-19 have been proven to improve the immune function and prevent infection.[4]

To conclude, pitfalls exist in using nonspecific language, using context-devoid regulations, and neglect of deceptively obvious messaging. Nevertheless, the value of blind-spotting remains incredibly useful, especially when so many of these considerations remain out of sight.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
Papadimos T, Soghoian S, Nanayakkara P, Singh S, Miller A, Venkataramanaiah S, et al. COVID-19 blind spots: A consensus statement on the importance of competent political leadership and the need for public health cognizance. J Glob Infect Dis. 2020; 12:167-190 [doi: 10.4103/jgid.jgid_397_20].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Marchant-Forde JN, Boyle LA. COVID-19 effects on livestock production: A one welfare issue. Front Vet Sci. 2020; 7:585787. Frontiers Media S.A.[doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.585787].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Wang Z, Duan Y, Jin Y, Zheng ZJ. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: How countries should build more resilient health systems for preparedness and response. Glob Health J. 2020; 4:139-45.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Xu Z, Chen Y, Yu D, Mao D, Wang T, Feng D, et al. The effects of exercise on COVID-19 therapeutics: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2020;99:e22345.  Back to cited text no. 4
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Mr. John C Johnson
M.Sc Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, 116 St and 85 Ave, T6G 2R3, Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jgid.jgid_447_20

Rights and Permissions




 

Top
  
 
  Search
 
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed204    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

Sitemap | What's New | Feedback | Copyright and Disclaimer | Contact Us
2008 Journal of Global Infectious Diseases | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 10th December, 2008