Very interesting piece in terms of how you highlight how societal behaviour is the issue. But without adequately looking at the main mechanisms that influence societal behaviour. Political pressure and a dominant right wing media are the majority factors that also influenced the thinking of public health. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Per…
Very interesting piece in terms of how you highlight how societal behaviour is the issue. But without adequately looking at the main mechanisms that influence societal behaviour. Political pressure and a dominant right wing media are the majority factors that also influenced the thinking of public health. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Perfect example of this: I'm pretty sure that one of the reasons why in the UK that they didn't advocate for use of ffp 2 and ffp3 masks, and instead encourage people to wear 'face coverings' - this was due to knowledge that if the public tried to buy high quality masks, it would have impacted the lack of supply into hospitals and healthcare. Most likely they made that decision initially because of a supply chain problem but also a cost problem because for an airborne virus for those of low income or no income, it is the states responsibility to provide protective equipment to enable the economy to still function. It's obvious to me that the airborne angle was not pushed partly due to political reasons linked to economic reasons which fed back into the group think of public health. So it's not a 'societal' mechanism, it's incompetence and an inability to admit responsibility for serious and grave errors.
Very interesting piece in terms of how you highlight how societal behaviour is the issue. But without adequately looking at the main mechanisms that influence societal behaviour. Political pressure and a dominant right wing media are the majority factors that also influenced the thinking of public health. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Perfect example of this: I'm pretty sure that one of the reasons why in the UK that they didn't advocate for use of ffp 2 and ffp3 masks, and instead encourage people to wear 'face coverings' - this was due to knowledge that if the public tried to buy high quality masks, it would have impacted the lack of supply into hospitals and healthcare. Most likely they made that decision initially because of a supply chain problem but also a cost problem because for an airborne virus for those of low income or no income, it is the states responsibility to provide protective equipment to enable the economy to still function. It's obvious to me that the airborne angle was not pushed partly due to political reasons linked to economic reasons which fed back into the group think of public health. So it's not a 'societal' mechanism, it's incompetence and an inability to admit responsibility for serious and grave errors.