Key Considerations Regarding the COVID-19 Pandemic and its Implications for Future Initiatives

By Serena Lee

Over the past year of the COVID-19 pandemic, I was fortunate enough to participate in insightful discussions with public health figures from WHO, NIH, the NYC government, and more, regarding the pandemic’s effects and implications on future initiatives. From these conversations, I noticed some key themes that arose in various aspects of the pandemic:

1)  We need more funding for various aspects of public health.

There needs to be greater support for research and education into public health and infectious diseases alongside information distribution. We need more resource allocation for vaccine distribution, for infrastructure itself, and for public health reform and focus groups.

2)  There needs to exist a stronger, centralized information system for the public to use as a trusted source.

The Golden Rule of public health is to provide clear evidence-based messages for the public from scientific officials outlining what we know, what we do not know, and what the public role is. The right message, the right messenger, and the right communication channel are the three components of effective information distribution and communication. Preparedness initiatives are difficult to implement and design; greater recognition of their importance must be implemented to further support such initiatives.

3)  We must recognize the environmental factors and social networks that are present in this pandemic for future preparation.

Human pathogens come from our interactions with environmental factors and animals and these connections have already been well-established. The more environmental problems and denser communities of our society lead to more risks. Social determinants and different communities also impact the effects of the pandemic. Future actions include surveillance of animals for research as a critical component of interventions.

4)  Social science is an inherent part of health crises in attending to the public.

Greater emphasis on this field is required. Learning effective management of dispelling common myths and misinformation should be highlighted. Social science and qualitative research for information distribution (wording, facts and stats, anecdata) are critical in public engagement and understanding. For instance, learning how to approach the complex topic of vaccine hesitancy requires understanding and acknowledgement alongside clear information. Importantly, health policy is only possible with the symbiotic relationship with the public response, requiring social science to be effective.

5)  We must recognize the inequities within healthcare and health policy to prevent further exacerbation of health crises.

Healthcare inequalities exist as seen through the stark differences in the various effects of COVID-19 on different socioeconomic groups. The socioeconomic gradient of health was clearly demonstrated through this pandemic. COVID-19 should serve as the catalyst of healthcare reform, specifically by reforming the monetized system of healthcare.

6)  This pandemic is just one of many potential, future ones.

We must be prepared with more effective interventions. Recognizing the cycle/pattern present in public health of the lack of preparedness is the first step in change. We must understand that there exists a fallibility of policy and health infrastructure and work towards changing such structural systems. Using COVID-19 as the catalyst for change in the healthcare system, public health initiatives, and preparedness interventions is a necessary and effective action to take.