The Science and Politics of Covid-19: How Scientists Should Tackle Global Crises PDF
Preview The Science and Politics of Covid-19: How Scientists Should Tackle Global Crises
Michel Claessens The Science and Politics of Covid-19 HHooww S Scciieennttiissttss S Shhoouulldd TTaacckkllee GGlloobbaall CCrriisseess The Science and Politics of Covid-19 Michel Claessens The Science and Politics of Covid-19 How Scientists Should Tackle Global Crises Michel Claessens European Commission Bruxelles, Belgium ISBN 978-3-030-77863-7 ISBN 978-3-030-77864-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77864-4 ©The Editor(s) (if applicable) andThe Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply,eveninthe absenceof a specific statement,that such namesare exemptfrom therelevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. Thepublisher,theauthorsandtheeditorsaresafetoassumethattheadviceandinformationinthisbook are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Preface and Acknowledgments Theappearanceofasingleauthor’snameonthecoverpageismisleading:this book owes a lot to many people—scientists, experts, government representa- tives, journalists and citizens like you and me—who have contributed to this book, in particular through hundreds of exchanges and interviews, carried outofcoursebyemailorvideoconferenceintheseCovid-19times.Iwantto express my sincere and deep gratitude to all of them. A very special note goes to my wife Xuling and my son Jon, who have been confronted by a double lockdown during the last few months as I spent most of my free time, days and nights, following and analysing the spreading pandemic. I am also grateful to Kamran Abbasi, Florence Ader, Martin Bauer, Jean-Philippe Béja, Charlotte Belaïch, Leïla Belkhir, Eran Bendavid, Gilles Boëtsch, Philippe Busquin, Bruno Canard, Zachary Cooper,YvesCoppieters,PascalCrépey,AmyDahan,Jean-StéphaneDhersin, Cécile Ducourtieux, Michel Dubois, Jean Durieux, Marius Gilbert, Herman Goossens, Henri Gueguen, Deepti Gurdasani, Emma Hodcroft, Philippe Juvin, Raffi Katchadourian, Shengjie Lai, Jonathan Leake, Jean-Marc Lévy- Leblond, Laurent Mucchielli, François Ouellette, Stefano Paglia, Dominique Pécaud, Guy-André Pelouze, Andrew Pollard, Jonathan Roux, Monique Septon, Alessandro Sette, Sir Adrian Smith, Marcello Tirani, Jean-François Toussaint,MicheleVespe,PatrickVittet-Philippe,MarcWathelet,Jean-Pascal vanYpersele,JeanRalphZahar,WenhongZhangandNanshanZhong.Great thanks also go to ElizabethTrump, who turned the book to real English! v vi Preface and Acknowledgments Many thanks also go to Springer and my editor Anthony Doyle for accepting to publish a book analysing “science in politics.” Popularising a subject like the Covid-19 pandemic is a great challenge as the information is rapidly evolving and is sometimes just wrong! Even the World Health Organization(WHO)hasdifficultycopingwiththeabundantfakenewsand the proliferating mis- and disinformation. I have therefore done my best to retrieve and doublecheck the right information and present it as objectively as possible, whilst also commenting on it wherever appropriate. Alastremark:theopinionsexpressedinthisbookarepersonalanddonot inanywaybindtheEuropeanCommissionwhereIhavebeenpromotingthe dialogue between science and society or, more modestly, between scientists and citizens for many years. Should you wish to be kept informed about the evolution of this subject, kindly follow me on Twitter @M_Claessens or email me at [email protected]. Bruxelles, Belgium Michel Claessens Introduction Time cures the sick man, not the ointment Traditional Proverb Itcameoutoftheblue.OnJanuary2,2020,WHOissuedaglobalalerton the emergence of several cases of “pneumonia of unknown cause” inWuhan, China. Except in Beijing, most governments do not show any panic and merely set up daily monitoring of the incubating epidemic. Donald Trump mocks the “Chinese virus” and claims that “everything is under control.” A few weeks later, in March 2020, the coronavirus epidemic becomes a globalpandemic,takingalmosteveryonebysurprise.Thewholeplanetexpe- riences a health tsunami and a media pandemic, slowing down economic, diplomatic, educational, sport and cultural activities as well as the daily lives ofbillionsofpeopleforseveralmonths.Withpublichealthmeasuresimposed in almost every country in the world, including border closures, manda- tory teleworking and physical distancing, most capitals are now ghost towns. Masked mankind is mobilising against a coronavirus declared public enemy numberoneandembarksonasilentworldwaragainstaninvisibleaggressor. Well, a small war actually as Covid-19 has caused today1 around ten million deaths—0.15% of the world’s population—ten times as much as all road accidents combined: a dramatic toll, of course, but numerically much more 1Unless explicitly mentioned, the data provided in this book refers to June 21, 2021, when I gave the final green light to the printer. vii viii Introduction modest than other recent epidemics.The impact is nevertheless terrible from an economic, social and human point of view. In the United States, one in three Americans has lost someone to the coronavirus. This story is about a collective failure. As Rudolf Virchow, the great nine- teenth century father of pathological anatomy, liked to say: “An epidemic is a social phenomenon that has some medical aspects.” Hesitating between collective immunity and individual restrictions, most governments turned out to be helpless and indecisive. What was so special about the twenty-first century’s worst pandemic—so far—that we lost our confidence and gave in to fear? And who is responsible for this? Governments, who failed to appre- ciatetheriskwhichwasgrowingfromtheendof2019?Scientists,whofailed to sound the alarm and bring us to our senses? Doctors, some of whom are todaymeremerchantsoftraditionalremedies2?Orallofusgiventhatwewere still mocking the small “flu” in those early months? Is it our technoscientific culture that drives us to always adhere to the myth of zero risk? The fact is that our institutions have failed tremendously. And this collec- tive failure is not just limited to the fight against the virus. The lockdown ideology imposed social distancing with all its painful ramifications, and for many of us the crashing economy is having the same effect. The scien- tific evidence shows that Covid-19 is stressful for people, increases fear and anxiety, and causes a deterioration in mental health. How did we get there? Most governments have appointed top-level scien- tists and world-renowned doctors to advise them. Lots of expert committees have been set up to strengthen the “evidence-based” character of decisions. Indeed, political leaders have repeatedly said that their decisions are based on science. This seemed to be the best approach, given the novelty of the virus, the complexity of the situation and the need to take into account the latest virological and epidemiological knowledge. Thus, science and media stars performed almost every evening on TV shows and on social media to explain the progression of the virus and also, by the way, the progress of ourignorance.Theforecastscirculatingingovernmentcirclesandthelessons learnt from China, which was acting as a guinea-pig, could have been useful. However, supported by billions of dollars, the research community quickly embarked on the quest for the Holy Grail—a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. It is true that no one would have expected a technological society like ours to give up in the face of a “natural” and microscopic enemy. However, the success did not come.What happened?What went wrong? 2In this book, I consider medical doctors and physicians as scientists, although in most cases they represent different professions and jobs. Introduction ix Meeting the challenge seemed to be child’s play, given the level of our technoscientificknowledgeandthepowerofthepharmaceuticalindustry.We were wrong: a new virus can turn off the entire world economy. Supported byscientificprogress,wehaveconvincedourselvesthatsciencecanpushback all frontiers and all diseases, and that rich countries have definitely rid them- selves of infectious and contagious diseases.This was the first mistake. And a clear message to the research community: scientific information must target boththeachievementsofknowledgeandthelimitsofscience.Thefactisthat coronaviruses are not at the top of scientists’ research priorities. Thus, during the first months of 2020, science plunged into politics. And scientists found themselves at the heart of—as well as an actor in—a health crisis that brought into the spotlight these improbable pairs of scientists and politicians. Anthony Fauci and Donald Trump in the United States, Chris Whitty and Boris Johnson in the United Kingdom, Jean-François Delfraissy andEmmanuelMacroninFrance,NanshanZhongandXiJinpinginChina: how did these impossible couples manage and survive the crisis? How did scientists and decision-makers live under the same roof even though every- thingelseseparatesthem?Betweenthelongtermofscienceandthetooshort term of politics, between scientific rigor and political judgment, between the questions of researchers and the responses of decision-makers is there an opportunityforcooperation—andevenformutualunderstanding?Theques- tion is not new and gets asked with each major crisis. Researchers struggle to getthefactsandtheirpartofthetruthheard,whilepoliticiansdonotalways succeed in sharing their reasoning. Of course, this unique pandemic is now a textbook case, both by the number of countries concerned and by the scale of the measures taken as more than half of humanity was on total lockdown in March 2020. So, what did we learn? Iworkedwithdozensofscientists,doctorsandgovernmentofficialsonthe following question: how can the scientific community better interact with the political world to guide decisions without losing its integrity and giving up its raison d’être? My contacts, in particular in France, China, the United Kingdom and the United States, allowed me to better understand how these countries have handled the crisis—and hence managed the related uncer- tainties and fears. One of the most striking characteristics of this pandemic is how little knowledge and certainty we had—and still have. So how can the science community adequately advise decision-makers without being in possessionofthefullfactsthemselves?Ironically,governmentswhichclaimed to seek and rely on scientific advice, such as France, the United Kingdom and the United States, did not perform any better than other countries—on x Introduction the contrary even. After so much time spent in crisis, have experts and poli- cymakers succeeded in rationalising politics and politicising science in the best possible ways? Science in the crisis or science in crisis: what lessons can be drawn from this pandemic, a unique period of history which showcases science policy on a global scale? Unfortunately, if major successes have been achieved, science apparently failed.There is no specific antiviral remedy yet and even if vaccines are now available, there is still no assurance that a long-lasting immunity will be conferred to the world’s population—this will take months or potentially years to answer. Furthermore, many hiccoughs happened in the scientific community: downplaying of the outbreak, wrong vaccine predictions, peer- reviewed publications retracted after a few days, short-circuiting of clinical trials, research supported for political reasons, scientific vagaries, spectacular announcements in the media, etc. We have seen the best as well as the worst in recent months and the public discovered “science by press release.” More worryingly,expertsthemselvesacknowledgethattheydidnotrisetothechal- lenge.Those who advised governments failed to have a decisive influence on the timing and the direction of political decisions. Could this be down to a lackoffirmnessorconfidenceontheirpart?Isitbecausescientistsareknown to be reserved and place great importance on fact-checking? Or is it because, having seen that politics is what it is, they seemingly resigned themselves to havinglittleimpact?Wewilltrytoanswerthesequestions.Inanycase,inthe four countries analysed here, the scientific advisers failed to appreciate the risks and the urgency. Apart from China, all these governments wasted time before going into lockdown in early 2020 although this was at that time the only possible option to slow down the pandemic. Admittedly, in order to respond to the multiple pressures and challenges, the research community has been squeezed and pushed to its limits. The public has been watching, almost live, both the advances and the sluggish- ness of research, together with the progress of both our knowledge and igno- rance in the area of epidemiology and infectious diseases.The layperson was introduced to the backstage of research, discovering the behind-the-scenes machinery of science. In this book, we will discover this “hidden side of science” and see how scientists are working, struggling and even fighting to get professional recog- nition.Todaymorethanever,knowledgeispower!Thisunofficialand“unau- thorised” presentation of science in the making is a unique opportunity to discover the multiple influences, often complex, sometimes ridiculous, actu- ally very human, which determine the destiny of scientific ideas. It also confirms that, for better or worse, science today is a political business.
The list of books you might like
