What occurred during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was a classic instance of high-stakes decisionmaking and guidance under constraints
both of certainty
and of available interventions.
When the virus first broke out, we knew very little about it, applied knowledge from prior incidents, and tried very very hard to acquire new, relevant, knowledge.
At the same time, for numerous reasons, countermeasures, mitigations, and prophylactics were limited and due to supply-chain concentration could not be rapidly ramped up.
What's staggering about the COVID-19 pandemic is that we did learn amazingly quickly, had sequenced the full genome within a few weeks, and proceeded to develop the first mRNA vaccine candidates were developed within days. It then took months to both assess those vaccines and ramp up production.[1]
The other side of pandemic response related to public health and isolation measures, which remain the most effective means to control infectious disease. Initial presumptions about low airborne transmissibility proved false and guidelines rapidly changed. Effective masks were among the prophylactics which were in limited supply, and for which caregiver and first-responder access was prioritised. As understanding, supply, and manufacturing capacity evolved, mask mandates were extended.
And yet ... public response, in numerous countries and for numerous reasons, often directly rejected or attacked these highly-effective measures. Some countries, most notably to my mind New Zealand, fared exceedingly well. Others were and remain global embarrassments.
But diligent caregivers and policy leaders around the world were making good-faith best-effort consequence-balanced guidance as to how best to respond, and changed advice rapidly given changing circumstances.
The fact that this record continues to be distorted and mistated is utterly disappointing.
________________________________
Notes:
1. Wikipedia has a good history: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_COVID-19_vaccine_de...>.