The secret weapon against pandemics Georges C. Benjamin

David Biello: It’s now
my great honor and privilege

to introduce Dr. Georges Benjamin,

who’s the executive director
of the American Public Health Association,

who has a long and distinguished career,

both as a medical professional
and as a public health professional.

Please give a warm welcome
to Dr. Georges Benjamin.

Georges Benjamin: Hey, David, how are you?

DB: I am good, how are you, Dr. Benjamin?

GB: I’m here. (Laughs)

DB: Hanging in there. Good.

GB: Hanging in.

DB: We know that the theme of the moment
is reopening, I would say.

We just heard one possibility for that,

but obviously,

a lot of countries have already
reopened in one form or another,

and I believe, as of today,

all 50 states here in the US
have reopened in one form or another.

How do we do that smartly,
how do we do that safely?

GB: Yeah, we really do need
to reopen safely and carefully,

and it means that we have not
got to forget these public health measures

that really brought down
the curve to begin with.

And that means thing such as

covering up your nose and mouth
when you cough or sneeze,

wearing a mask, washing your hands,

physically distancing yourself
to the extent possible from others.

Thinking about everything we do,

you know, before we go to work
in the morning,

while we’re at work.

And being as careful
as many of us have been

in the last two months,

as we go into the next three months,

because this thing is not over.

DB: Right.

There is the chance of more waves,
as Uri [Alon] mentioned.

It seems like it’s kind of
incumbent on all of us then

to take public health
as kind of a second job.

Is that right?

GB: You know, I’ve been arguing a lot

that now that everybody really knows
what public health is,

that everybody should always recognize
that their second job is public health,

whether you’re picking up the garbage
or working in a grocery store,

or you are a bus driver,

or you’re, you know,
like me, doing public health,

a physician or a nurse,

everybody needs to put
the public health mantle

into what they do each and every day.

DB: What do you think –

So we’re all public health
professionals now,

what do you think
the new normal we might expect,

as countries reopen?

What is that going to look like,

or what do you hope that looks like,
as a public health professional?

GB: If I could wave a magic wand,

I would clearly recognize

that people are going to be doing
a lot more of the public health things,

in terms of handwashing

and thinking about what they do
around safety when they go out in public.

You know, it was not too long ago

when you got in your car
and you didn’t put your seat belt on.

Today we do it,

and we don’t think anything about it.

Most of us don’t smoke,

because we know that that’s bad for us.

Most of us look both ways
before we cross a street.

Most of us, you know,

do things in our house,
that are – fix trip hazards.

So as we go forward with this outbreak,

I’m hoping that people will pay
a lot more attention

to things that can cause us
to get an infection.

So you know, cleaning things,
disinfecting things.

More importantly,
not coming to work if you’re sick.

I’m hoping that employers
will put in paid sick leave for everybody,

so people can stay home.

Yeah, it’s an additional cost,

but I can tell you that we’ve now learned

that the cost of not doing
something like that

is billions and billions
and billions of dollars.

Paid sick leave is pretty cheap
when you do that.

DB: Yeah, we are, I think,
envious in the United States

of all the countries that perhaps have

a more all-encompassing
health care system than we do.

Would you agree that masks
are kind of the symbol

of adopting that “public health
professional as a second job” mindset?

GB: Well, you know, it’s funny.

Our colleagues in Asia have had a mask –

wearing masks as a culture
for many, many years.

And you know, we’ve always
kind of chuckled at that.

When I went overseas,

I would always kind of chuckle
when I saw people wearing masks.

And of course, when this first started,

you know, we only promoted masks
for people that were infected

or of course, health care workers,

who we thought were
in a higher-risk environment.

But I think that wearing masks

is probably going to be
part of our culture.

We’ve already seen it probably will not be
part of our beach culture,

although it probably should be for now.

But I do think that we’re going to see
more and more people wearing masks

in a variety of settings.

And I think that makes sense.

DB: Yeah, wear your mask
to show that you care about others.

And that you have this,
kind of, public health spirit.

So speaking of Asia,

who has done well?

Looking around the world,
you’ve been doing this for a while

and communicated with your peers,

who has done well

and what can we learn
from those good examples?

GB: Yeah, South Korea
in many ways is the role model.

You know, China actually,
at the end of the day,

did reasonably well.

But the secret to all of those countries

that have had less morbidity
and mortality than we have,

is they did lots of testing very early on,

they did contact tracing
and isolation and quarantine,

which by the way, is the bedrock
of public health practice.

They did it early, they did a lot of it,

and by the way, even though
they’re reopening their society,

and they’re beginning to see
episodic surges,

they then go back to those basic
public health practices

of testing, isolation, contact tracing

and transparency
to the public when they can,

because it’s important for the public
to understand how many cases there are,

where the disease is,

if you’re going to get
compliance from the public.

DB: So testing,
contact tracing and isolation.

That doesn’t seem like rocket science,
to use that old cliché.

Why has that been hard
for some countries to implement?

What’s holding us back,

is it electronic medical records,

is it some fancy doodad,

or is it just maybe overconfidence,

based on maybe the public health
successes of the last 100 years?

GB: You know, we are
very much a pill society.

We think there’s a pill for everything.

If we can’t give you a pill for it,

then we can give you surgery and fix it.

You know, prevention works.

And we have totally
underinvested in prevention.

We’ve totally underinvested
in a strong, robust

public health system.

If you look at the fact
that in the America today,

you can very easily know

what’s coming off the shelf
of a grocery store,

Amazon knows everything
there is to know about you,

but your doctor does not have
the same tools.

At three o’clock in the morning,

it’s still very difficult
to get a hold of your electrocardiogram,

or your medical record,
or your list of allergies

if you can’t tell
the practitioner what you have.

And we just haven’t invested
in robust systems.

One of the interesting things
about this outbreak

is that it has created an environment

in which we’re now dependent
on telemedicine,

which has been around for several years,

but we weren’t quite into it.

But now, it’s probably
going to be the new standard.

DB: But it also seems –

So, obviously,

those countries with an incredibly
robust health care system,

like Taiwan, have done well,

but it seems like even countries
that perhaps would be considered

to have a less robust health care system,
like a Ghana in Africa,

have actually done well.

What has been the, I guess,
the secret sauce

for those kinds of countries?

GB: Yeah, it’s still pretty early
in some of their exposures,

and hopefully, they might not
have a wave that comes later,

that’s still a possibility,

but at the end of the day,

I think, to the extent you have done
good, sound public health practices,

all of the countries that have done well

have implemented that.

Now we’re a big country,
we’re a complex country.

And yes, we didn’t get
the testing right to begin with.

But we should not repeat the mistakes
that we had over the last three months,

because we’ve still got
several months to go.

And now that we know what we did wrong,

I’m encouraging us
to do it right the next time.

DB: That seems smart.

GB: And the next time is tomorrow.

DB: That’s right.

It’s already started.

I mean, it almost seems to me,

if I can use this metaphor,

that some of these countries

already had the, kind of,
antibodies in their system,

because they had experience
with maybe Ebola or the first SARS.

Is that the key, previous exposure

to these kind of public health crises?

GB: Well, this is a very different virus.

And while there may be some early evidence

that MERS and SARS one,

we may have some
early protection from that,

there’s some early,
early studies looking at that,

that’s not the solution.

The secret sauce here
is good, solid public health practice.

That’s the secret sauce here.

We should not be looking
for anything, any mysticism,

or anyone to come save us
with a special pill.

This is all about good, solid
public health practice,

because, by the way, look,

this one was a bad one,

but it’s not the last one.

And so we need to prepare
for the next really big one.

We think this one was bad,

imagine what would have happened
had Ebola been aerosolized,

or MERS had been aerosolized.

You know, pick a TV movie.

Even though this was a bad one,

we still dodged a really,
really bad one this time.

DB: Yeah, Middle East
Respiratory Syndrome is no joke,

and we should be thankful
that it doesn’t spread more easily,

like SARS-CoV.

Is this, though –

So all these diseases are zoonotic,

that means they jumped to us
from the animals that are out there.

Obviously, humanity is
kind of encroaching on nature

in an ever more, kind of, urgent way,

whether that’s climate change
or going into the forests, what have you.

Is this just the new normal,

like, we should expect
pandemics every so often?

GB: Well, they do come periodically,

so this is not, you know,
the first pandemic, right?

We’ve had several,

100 years ago, the 1918 influenza,

SARS was a significant infection,

even though it didn’t get
this bad, SARS one.

And we had the avian flu,

which was a challenge,

and the swine flu.

We had Zika.

So no, we’ve had several
new disease outbreaks.

These emerging diseases happen a lot,

and in many ways,

we’ve been fortunate

that we have been able
to identify them early

and contain them.

But we’re now in an environment

where people can, by the way,
make some of these things up.

Now, this one did not happen,
as best we can tell, it’s not man-made.

It did not probably come
out of a leak in the lab.

But we know that, when I was in school,

to grow a bug, you had to be
pretty sophisticated.

That’s not the case today.

And we need to protect ourselves
from both naturally occurring infections

and from those that are created by humans.

DB: Plus we have other,
kind of, threat multipliers,

like climate change,

that make pandemics like this
that much worse.

GB: You know, I was saying climate change
was the greatest threat human survival

before this one.

But this is rivaling climate change.

But let me tell you,

the big challenge we have now

is that we have a pandemic,

which we have still not contained,

as we enter hurricane season,

and we have climate change,

which is exacerbating the ferocity
of the hurricanes that we’re having.

So, you know, we’re in
for an interesting summer.

DB: And here’s Chris with, I think,
a question from our audience.

Chris Anderson: Many questions, actually.

People are very interested
in what you’re saying, Georges.

Here we go, here’s the first one
from Jim Young:

“How do we deal with people
who don’t believe this is serious?”

GB: You know, you just have to continue
to communicate the truth to folks.

One of the things
about this particular disease

is that it does not spare anyone.

It does not recognize political parties,

it does not recognize geography,

and we had lots of people,
particularly in rural communities,

that were not seeing it,
because it had not yet come to them,

and they didn’t believe it was real.

And now many of those communities
are being ravaged by this disease.

And so we just have to –

You know, it’s not appropriate
to say “I told you so.”

It is appropriate to say,
“Look, now that you see it,

come on board and help us
resolve these problems.”

But this is something
that’s going to be around for a while.

And if it becomes endemic,

meaning that it occurs all the time
at some low level,

everyone is going to have this experience.

CA: Thank you.

Here is one from Robert Perkowitz.

“We seem to have been ignoring
and underfunding public health,

and we were unprepared for this virus.”

Look if the question
is going to pop up there,

I think it should, by some magic.

“What should our priorities be now

to prepare for the next
public health crisis?”

GB: Well, we now need to make sure
that we’ve put in the funding,

resources, training,
staffing on the table.

And by the way,
our next public health crisis

is not 10 years from now,
it’s not 20 years from now,

it’s the potential co-occurrence

of influenza, which we know
is going to happen this fall,

because it comes every year,

with either continued COVID
or a spike in COVID.

And we’re going to have a disease process

which presents very much the same,

and we’re going to have to differentiate
COVID from influenza.

Because we have a vaccine for influenza,

we don’t yet have a vaccine for COVID.

We hope to have one in about a year.

But that still remains to be seen.

DB: So get your flu shots.

CA: Yeah.

Indeed, in fact, David Collins
asked exactly that question.

“What is the likelihood of a vaccine
before the next wave?”

GB: Well you know, the fastest vaccine
that we’ve ever developed was measles,

and that took four years.

Now, a lot of things are different, right?

We have started on a SARS-one vaccine.

So it had gone to a lot of animal trials,

it had gone to some
very, very early human trials.

As you know, we just got some announcement

that at least it does seem to work
in monkeys, in rhesus monkeys,

and there’s some evidence that at least
it may be efficacious and safe

in a very, very small number of people.

When I say very, very small
number of people,

handful of people.

So now it’s got to go to phase two
and phase three trials.

So, yeah, [David] held up two hands,

so yeah, yeah, it’s a small
number of people.

What that tells you is either
that those folks were very lucky,

or it works.

And we won’t know until we put this
into the arms of thousands of people.

CA: Here’s an important question
from a TED Fellow.

“How do we actually train people
about what public health means?

Especially in the context of folks

who don’t believe they have
a responsibility to ‘the public?'”

GB: Well, you know, I remind folks

that when public health does its best job,

nothing happens.

And of course, when nothing happens,
we don’t get credit for it.

So the reason that everyone
in this country

does not have to get up every morning
and boil their own water

is because of public health.

The reason that,
if you get into a car accident,

you know, get into
an automobile collision,

and you wear your seat belt,
and you have airbags,

and you’re not killed
from that automobile collision,

is because of public health.

The reason that the air
is safe to breathe,

the food is safe to eat,

is because of public health.

The reason that your kids
are not in clothing that ignites

is because we have
fire-retardant clothing.

And that is a requirement.

The reason that you don’t trip
walking down the stairs

is because we’ve actually looked
at how to build the stair

so that people don’t trip
when they go up or down it.

That’s actually
a public health intervention.

So the built environment,

medicines, all those kinds of things,

vaccines, those are all public health,

and that’s why public health is there,

and you may not believe
that it’s that important,

but we couldn’t live without it.

CA: Maybe one day we can all
envision a health care system in America

that actually has some incentives

that point towards public health.

That would be very nice.

David, I’ve got to just keep going
with some of these questions, if it’s OK,

because they’re pouring in.

There’s one here from Jacqueline Ashby.

Important question for every parent.

“What are your recommendations
about sending children back to school?”

GB: Yeah, I’m struggling with this one,
I’ve got three grandkids.

And the good news is that my grandkids
are more technically proficient than I am,

and right now are getting
their lessons remotely.

I think it’s going to be a challenge

as we think about sending
kids back to school.

We’re going to really need to know
how infectious kids are

and how well they do
when they get infected.

Now, right now, it seems,

except for a very small number
of children who get a very rare disease,

that they tolerate this disease very well.

But the central question is,

how many of these germs
will these kids bring back to you

and to grandma and grandpa.

So that’s going to be important.

And you know, trying to tell
an eight-year-old

not to interact with their friends,

is a real challenge.

By the way, trying to tell a 17-year-old
not to interact with their friends

is going to be a real challenge.

So, we’ve got to properly
educate these kids,

we’ve got to figure out
how we stagger their schedules.

Uri’s idea for the workforce

might be an interesting
concept for schools,

because the idea is to try to decompress
the number of kids in the classroom.

By the way, if you get smaller class size,
you get better education, anyway.

So, we’ve got to have
enough teachers, though.

So that may be the rate limiting step.

CA: Alright, last question here for now
from [Steven] Petranek.

Masks. Advice on masks –

I switched that off, here we go.

Advice on masks seems to have shifted.

“Would most Americans
who live and work in cities

be better off wearing masks

to also help reduce
the air pollution particles

they encounter every day?”

GB: It may help some, absolutely.

But let me tell you
what I would prefer we stopped doing:

burning fossil fuels.

And doing all those terrible things

that we are doing to destroy our climate.

You know, everyone’s talking
about the fact

that we’ve had this amazing reduction

in CO2 because we’re not driving cars.

I’ve got to tell you,

that is the best evidence
that climate change is man-made.

All those climate change skeptics

who don’t think
climate change is man-made,

we have just had a worldwide demonstration

on what people do
to create climate change.

And so what we need to do is stop

and move to a green economy.

DB: Here, here.

CA: Thank you so much for those,

I’ll dip back in at the end
with maybe a couple more.

Thank you for this.

DB: So we’re waving the flag for masks.

But also, one of the things

that has become clear from this

is that COVID-19 is not the great leveler
that maybe some had hoped it was.

Some communities
are experiencing much worse,

significantly worse outcomes than others.

Why is that?

GB: We’re talking principally
about the African American

and Latino communities

that seem to be disproportionately
impacted if they get the disease.

And it’s because of exposure, primarily.

Those populations
have more public-facing jobs.

So, you know, bus drivers,

grocery clerks,

working in long-term care facilities,

nursing homes,

in meatpacking facilities, chicken farms.

So that’s why they’re much more –
going to be exposed to the disease.

Susceptibility.

Lots of chronic disease.

So we know that particularly
African Americans

have disproportionate amounts
of diabetes, heart disease,

lung disease,

and because of those chronic diseases,

we found early on that that virus

is more detrimental to those populations
that have those diseases.

And so that’s the big issue here.

That is what’s causing
those differentiations

and it’s really a challenge,

because in many ways,

those are many of the people

that we have decided
are essential employees

and have to go to work.

DB: That’s right.

So what is, in your view,
the public health intervention

to protect these essential workers,

if you have ideas on that front?

GB: I absolutely do.

We started this by a testing strategy
based on symptoms.

And now that we have enough tests,

we need to make sure that not only people
get those tests for clinical reasons,

and people who have symptoms,

but also begin to prioritize people
who are public-facing,

who are essential workers.

So, certainly people working
in nursing homes, hospitals, etc.,

but bus drivers, security guards,

grocery store clerks.

They need to be tested,

and they need to have testing
with the periodicity

that will secure them, their families,

and give everyone the trust

that they’re not going to be infected

and we’re not going to infect them.

People who work in meatpacking plants,

as an example.

And we’ve seen the real tragedy

of what’s going on
in the meatpacking plants,

because they are working in an environment
where they’re shoulder to shoulder.

There are some other things
they need to do

in terms of figuring out how to give them
physical distancing on the assembly line,

that’s going to be important.

But again, Uri’s idea is not a bad idea

for this nation to consider,

for many of those industries
to think about.

DB: Yeah, we have to make sure
that these truly are folks

who are treated as essential workers,
not sacrificial workers, it seems to me.

And obviously, this is not
just confined to the US.

GB: Oh, absolutely.

We’re seeing these disparities
not just in the United States,

but in other countries as well.

And they have a lot to do
with race and class

and the types of jobs that you do,

the occupations that you do.

And quite frankly,

we should have thought about this
when we saw the first data

that showed that in China

people with chronic diseases
were much more at risk

and had worse health outcomes.

We would have sped up
our actions right away,

because, look, that’s happened
with every new disease

that’s come into the country.

DB: So it seems like a lot of this
goes back to that potential –

it’s not an oxymoron,

public health is everybody’s job,

and we need to adopt that.

What does, in your view,

a robust public health
infrastructure look like?

What would that look like?

GB: Well, you know,

anytime a new health threat
enters our community,

we ought to be able
to rapidly identify it,

contain it,

and if we can mitigate it, for sure,
and eliminate it if possible,

and then put in
all the protective measures

that we had before.

So that means having a well-staffed,

well-trained governmental
public health entity,

just like we have for police, fire, EMS.

It means that they’ve got to be well-paid,

it means that they’ve got
to be well-resourced.

You know, we still have
some of our contact tracers

out there using pen and pads.

And sending things to Excel Spreadsheets.

No, we need the same kind
of robust technology

that the folks at, you know,

any of the online retailers are using,
whether it’s Amazon, etc.

We’re still looking at data
that’s two years in the rear

to make data-driven decisions.

We need to be able
to make immediate decisions.

By the way, Taiwan,

you mentioned them earlier,

I remember being in Taiwan

watching data come
from infectious diseases, real time,

from their electronic
medical record system.

So, you know, we can do this,
the technology exists.

DB: Imagine that.

Wow, real time health information,

what a difference that would make.

Do you think that technology
can help us here,

whether that’s the Google-Apple
collaboration or whatever else?

GB: Technology can help us,

but it’s not going to replace us.

We’re nowhere near where we can sit back

and have our electronic avatar
do our work for us.

But the technology can outstrip our work.

It can give us situational awareness.

It can give us real time information.

It allows us to send information
from point A to point B

for data analysis.

It allows us to do second thinking,

so we’re doing all this modeling,

it allows others to check
our numbers right away.

So it could speed up research.

But we have to invest in it,

and we have to continue it,

because obsolescence is always
the evil part of technology.

DB: And it looks like
Chris is back with more questions.

CA: Yeah, I guess we’re getting
close to the end,

but the questions keep coming in.

There’s one here from Neelay Bhatt.

“What role do you see parks,
trails and open space play

in assisting larger public health goals?”

GB: You know, green space
is absolutely essential,

and the ability to get out
and walk and exercise,

having sidewalks, so that you can have
communities that are walkable,

bikeable and green
for utilization of all ages,

it’s good for our mental health,
it’s good for our physical health.

And I always tell folks, you know,

it’s a great place to go
when someone’s gotten on your last nerve.

CA: Indeed.

Here we have one anonymous question.

Where possible don’t go anonymous,

because we’re all friends here
when all said and done.

Probably someone … Anyway.

Let’s see, but it’s a good question.

“There are many who are highly suspicious
of what the real experts are saying.

What have you found to be effective
in helping the highly suspicious

be less suspicious and more trusting?”

GB: Tell the truth.

If you make a mistake, acknowledge it
and correct it right away.

Be consistent.

And don’t say stupid stuff.

And far too often that happens.

And you know, one
of the interesting things,

we’ve already been through this
with the mask discussion.

You know, traditional wisdom was
that we only had people wear the mask

if they were infectious,

or you’re in a health care environment

where there was a high risk
of getting the disease.

And then we said,

no, it’s OK for everybody to wear a mask.

And that’s because we learned eventually,

and became much more believable,

in the science that we had
asymptomatic spreading.

But we did not communicate it very well.

We said, oh, no, no,
we’re changing our minds,

everybody can wear a mask,

after telling people not to wear a mask.

And then we didn’t spend enough time
explaining to people why.

So we lost trust.

So we need to do a better job of that.

And then our leaders

need to be very careful
what they say when you have a bullhorn.

And by the way, I’ve made mistakes,

I’ve said things on TV
that were just wrong,

because I was wrong.

And I’ve tried very hard
to try to correct those

as quickly as I can.

All of us do that,

but you have to be strong enough

and have a strong enough personality
to say when you’re wrong

and then correct it.

Because at the end of the day,
once you’ve lost trust,

you’ve lost everything.

CA: Well if I might say so,

just the way in which
you’re communicating right now,

I mean, to me, that is
a means of communication

that engenders trust.

I don’t know what magic sauce
you have going there,

but it’s very, very compelling
listening to you.

Thank you so much for this.

David, do you have any other last cues?

GB: I’ve made lots of mistakes.

DB: Yeah, no, but it really
has been a real pleasure

to have you join us,
and thank you for that.

Just one final question if I may.

You’ve been doing this for a while,

what gives you hope looking forward?

GB: You know, let me tell you something.

The one thing that gives me hope

is when I see people taking care
of their friends and family members.

I mean, drive-by birthday parties.

I saw that on the news today.

People who are calling their friends.

I’ve heard from people
that I haven’t talked to in years,

who are just calling me to say,

“I haven’t talked to you
for a long time. Are you OK?”

So do more of that.

And the trust we’ve had in one another,

and the love we’ve shown,
it’s just been absolutely amazing,

so that gives me hope.

DB: Humanity for the win in the end.

GB: Yeah.

DB: Well, thank you so much, Dr. Benjamin,

for joining us
and for sharing your wisdom.

GB: Glad to be here.

CA: Yes, thank you.

GB: You guys be safe.

Your families be safe.

DB: Thank you, you too.

David Biello:现在
我非常荣幸和荣幸

地介绍

美国公共卫生协会的执行董事 Georges Benjamin 博士

,他作为一名医学专业人士
和公共卫生专业人士有着悠久而杰出的职业生涯。

请热烈
欢迎乔治·本杰明博士。

乔治·本杰明:嘿,大卫,你好吗?

DB:我很好,你好吗,本杰明博士?

GB:我来了。 (笑)

DB:挂在那里。 好的。

GB:坚持下去。

DB:我想说,我们知道当下的主题
是重新开放。

我们刚刚听到了一种可能性,

但很明显

,很多国家已经
以一种或另一种形式重新开放

,我相信,截至今天,

美国所有 50 个州
都以一种或另一种形式重新开放。

我们如何巧妙地
做到这一点,我们如何安全地做到这一点?

GB:是的,我们确实需要
安全、谨慎地重新开放

,这意味着我们不能
忘记这些

从一开始就真正降低曲线的公共卫生措施。

这意味着诸如

在咳嗽或打喷嚏时遮住鼻子和嘴巴、

戴口罩、洗手、

尽可能与他人保持身体距离等事情。

想想我们所做的一切,

你知道的,在我们
早上上班之前,

在我们工作的时候。

就像
我们中的许多人

在过去两个月里一样小心,

就像我们进入接下来的三个月一样,

因为这件事还没有结束。

DB:对。

正如 Uri [Alon] 所提到的,有可能出现更多的波浪。

似乎
我们所有人都有责任

将公共卫生
作为第二份工作。

是对的吗?

GB:你知道,我一直在争论

,现在每个人都真正知道
什么是公共卫生

,每个人都应该始终认识
到他们的第二份工作是公共卫生,

无论你是捡垃圾
还是在杂货店工作 ,

或者您是公共汽车司机,

或者您是,您知道,
像我一样,从事公共卫生

,医生或护士,

每个人都需要
将公共卫生披风

融入他们每天所做的事情中。

DB:你怎么看——

所以我们现在都是公共卫生
专业人士,

你认为随着国家重新开放
,我们可能期待的新常态

是什么? 作为一名公共卫生专业人士,这

会是什么样子,

或者你希望是什么样子

GB:如果我能挥动一根魔杖,

我会清楚地认识

到人们会
做更多的公共卫生事务

,比如洗手


在公共场合外出时考虑安全问题。

你知道,就在不久前

,你上
车还没有系好安全带。

今天我们这样做了

,我们什么都不考虑。

我们大多数人都不吸烟,

因为我们知道那对我们有害。

我们大多数人
在过马路之前会左右看。

我们大多数人,你知道,

在我们家做的事情
,就是——修复绊倒的危险。

因此,随着我们继续应对这次疫情,

我希望人们会
更加关注

可能
导致我们感染的事情。

所以你知道,清洁东西,
消毒东西。

更重要的是,
如果你生病了,就不要来上班。

我希望雇主
会为每个人提供带薪病假,

这样人们就可以待在家里。

是的,这是额外的成本,

但我可以告诉你,我们现在已经了解到

,不做这样的事情的成本

是数
十亿美元。

当你这样做时,带薪病假相当便宜。

DB:是的,我认为,
在美国,我们羡慕

所有可能拥有

比我们更全面的
医疗保健系统的国家。

您是否同意口罩
是一种

采用“公共卫生
专业人员作为第二份工作”心态的象征?

GB:嗯,你知道,这很有趣。

我们在亚洲的同事一直戴着口罩——多年来,

戴口罩作为一种文化

你知道,我们总是对此
嗤之以鼻。

当我出国时,看到人们戴着口罩,

我总是会笑

当然,当这刚开始时,

你知道,我们只
为被感染的人推广口罩

,当然还有

我们认为
处于高风险环境中的医护人员。

但我认为戴

口罩可能会
成为我们文化的一部分。

我们已经看到它可能不会
成为我们海滩文化的一部分,

尽管它现在可能应该是。

但我确实认为,我们将看到
越来越多的人

在各种环境中佩戴口罩。

我认为这是有道理的。

DB:是的,戴上你的
面具表明你关心别人。

而且你有这种,
那种,公共卫生精神。

那么说到亚洲,

谁做得好呢?

环顾世界,
你已经这样做了一段时间,

并与你的同行交流,

谁做得好

,我们可以
从这些好的例子中学到什么?

GB:是的,韩国
在很多方面都是榜样。

你知道,中国实际上
在一天结束时

做得相当不错。

但是,所有那些

发病率和死亡率都比我们低的国家的秘诀

是,他们很早就进行了大量检测,

他们进行了接触者追踪
、隔离和检疫

,顺便说一句,这
是公共卫生实践的基石 .

他们很早就做到了,他们做了很多

,顺便说一句,即使
他们正在重新开放他们的社会,

并且他们开始看到
偶发性的激增,

然后他们又回到了那些基本的
公共卫生实践

,即检测、隔离 ,尽可能对公众进行接触者追踪

和透明度
,因为如果您要获得公众的遵守,

公众了解有多少病例,

疾病

在哪里很重要

DB:所以测试、
接触者追踪和隔离。 用那句老话来说

,这似乎不像火箭科学

为什么
有些国家很难实施?

是什么阻碍了我们,

是电子病历,

是一些花哨的小玩意儿

,还是只是

基于
过去 100 年的公共卫生成功而过度自信?

GB:你知道,我们在
很大程度上是一个药丸社会。

我们认为万能药丸。

如果我们不能给你药丸,

那么我们可以给你手术并修复它。

你知道,预防是有效的。

我们
在预防方面的投资完全不足。

我们
对一个强大的

公共卫生系统的投资完全不足。

如果你看看
今天的美国,

你可以很容易地知道

杂货店货架上有

什么东西,亚马逊
知道关于你的一切,

但你的医生
没有相同的工具。

凌晨三点,

如果你不能告诉医生你有什么,你仍然
很难拿到你的心电图,

或者你的病历,
或者你的过敏清单

而且我们只是没有投资
于强大的系统。 这次爆发的

一个有趣的事情

是,它创造了一个

我们现在
依赖远程医疗的环境,

这种环境已经存在了好几年,

但我们并没有完全投入其中。

但现在,它可能
会成为新标准。

DB:但看起来——

所以,很明显,像台湾这样

拥有非常
强大的医疗体系的国家

做得很好,

但似乎即使
是那些可能被

认为医疗体系不那么健全的国家,
比如 一个加纳在非洲

,其实做得很好。

我猜,

这些国家的秘诀是什么?

GB:是的,他们的一些曝光还处于早期阶段

,希望他们可能不会
有后来的浪潮,

这仍然有可能,

但归根结底,

我认为,就你做得好的程度而言
,良好的公共卫生实践,

所有做得好的国家都

已经实施了。

现在我们是一个大国,
我们是一个复杂的国家。

是的,我们一开始就没有得到
正确的测试。

但我们不应该重蹈
过去三个月的覆辙,

因为我们还有
几个月的时间。

现在我们知道我们做错了什么,

我鼓励
我们下次做对。

DB:这似乎很聪明。

GB:下一次是明天。

DB:没错。

它已经开始了。

我的意思是,在我看来,

如果我可以使用这个比喻的话,

这些国家中的一些国家

已经
在他们的系统中拥有了那种抗体,

因为他们
可能经历过埃博拉病毒或第一次非典。

这是以前接触

过这类公共卫生危机的关键吗?

GB:嗯,这是一种非常不同的病毒。

虽然可能有一些早期证据

表明 MERS 和 SARS 是一种疾病,

但我们可能对此有一些
早期保护,

但有一些早期的
早期研究正在研究这一点

,但这不是解决方案。

这里的秘诀
是良好、扎实的公共卫生实践。

这就是这里的秘诀。

我们不应该
寻找任何东西,任何神秘主义,

或任何人来
用特殊的药丸来拯救我们。

这都是关于良好、扎实的
公共卫生实践

,因为顺便说一句,看,

这是一个糟糕的,

但不是最后一个。

所以我们需要
为下一个真正的大事件做准备。

我们认为这很糟糕,

想象一下如果
埃博拉病毒被雾化

或 MERS 被雾化会发生什么。

你知道,选择一部电视电影。

尽管这是一场糟糕的比赛,但这次

我们仍然躲过了一个非常
非常糟糕的比赛。

DB:是的,中东
呼吸综合征不是开玩笑

,我们应该
庆幸它没有

像 SARS-CoV 那样更容易传播。

不过,这是不是——

所以所有这些疾病都是人畜共患病的,


意味着它们是从外面的动物身上跳到我们身上的。

显然,人类正在

以一种越来越、一种、紧迫的方式侵犯自然,

无论是气候变化
还是进入森林,你有什么。

这只是新常态吗,

就像我们应该经常预料到
流行病一样?

GB:嗯,它们确实会定期出现

,所以这不是
第一次大流行,对吧? 100 年前

,我们经历过几次

1918 年的流感,

SARS 是一种严重的感染,

尽管它并没有像
SARS 那样严重。

我们有禽流感,

这是一个挑战,

还有猪流感。

我们有寨卡病毒。

所以不,我们已经爆发了几次
新的疾病爆发。

这些新出现的疾病经常发生,

而且在许多方面,

我们很幸运

能够
及早发现

并控制它们。

但我们现在所处的环境

,顺便说一句,人们可以
编造一些这样的事情。

现在,这件事没有发生,
据我们所知,这不是人为的。

它可能不是
来自实验室的泄漏。

但是我们知道,当我在学校的时候,

要培养一个虫子,你必须
非常老练。

今天不是这样。

我们需要保护自己
免受自然感染

和人类造成的感染。

DB:此外,我们还有其他
某种威胁倍增器,

例如气候变化,

它们会使这种流行病
变得更糟。

GB:你知道,我是说在此之前气候变化
是人类生存的最大威胁

但这与气候变化不相上下。

但是让我告诉你,

我们现在面临的最大挑战

是,

随着我们进入飓风季节,

我们还没有遏制住这种流行病,而且我们遇到了气候变化,

这加剧了飓风的凶猛
程度。 有。

所以,你知道,我们正在
度过一个有趣的夏天。

DB:我认为,Chris 有
一个来自观众的问题。

克里斯安德森:实际上有很多问题。

人们
对你所说的很感兴趣,乔治。

我们开始了,这是 Jim Young 的第一个

“我们如何处理
那些不相信这很严重的人?”

GB:你知道,你只需要继续
向人们传达真相。

关于这种特殊疾病的一件事

是它不会放过任何人。

它不承认政党,

不承认地理

,我们有很多人,
特别是在农村社区

,没有看到它,
因为它还没有出现在他们身上

,他们不相信它是真实的。

现在,这些社区
中的许多人正受到这种疾病的蹂躏。

所以我们只需要-

你知道,
说“我告诉过你”是不合适的。


“看,既然你看到了,

就加入进来帮助我们
解决这些问题”是恰当的。

但这是
会存在一段时间的事情。

如果它成为地方病,

意味着它一直
在某个低水平发生,

每个人都会有这种经历。

CA:谢谢。

这是罗伯特·珀科维茨(Robert Perkowitz)的一篇。

“我们似乎一直忽视
公共卫生,资金不足

,我们对这种病毒毫无准备。”

看看问题
是否会在那里弹出,

我认为它应该通过某种魔法。

“我们现在的首要任务应该是

为下一次
公共卫生危机做准备吗?”

GB:嗯,我们现在需要
确保我们已经在桌面上投入资金、

资源、培训和
人员配置。

顺便说一句,
我们的下一次公共卫生危机

不是 10 年后
,也不是 20 年后,

它是流感的潜在共同发生

,我们知道
这将在今年秋天发生,

因为它每年都会

发生 要么是持续的 COVID,
要么是 COVID 的飙升。

而且我们将有一个

表现非常相似的疾病过程

,我们将不得不将
COVID 与流感区分开来。

因为我们有流感疫苗,所以

我们还没有 COVID 疫苗。

我们希望在大约一年内有一个。

但这仍有待观察。

DB:那就去打流感疫苗吧。

CA:是的。

事实上,事实上,大卫柯林斯
正是问了这个问题。

“在下一波浪潮之前出现疫苗的可能性有多大
?”

GB:嗯,你知道,我们开发的最快的疫苗
是麻疹疫苗

,花了四年时间。

现在,很多事情都不同了,对吧?

我们已经开始研制一种 SARS-one 疫苗。

所以它已经进行了很多动物试验,

它已经进行了一些
非常非常早期的人体试验。

如你所知,我们刚刚得到一些公告

,至少它似乎确实
在猴子身上起作用,在恒河猴身上,

而且有一些证据表明,至少
它对极少数人可能是有效和

安全的。

当我说非常非常
少的人时,

少数人。

所以现在它必须进入第二阶段
和第三阶段的试验。

所以,是的,[大卫]举了两只手

,所以是的,是的,这是
少数人。

这告诉你要么
是那些人很幸运,

要么是有效的。

直到我们把它
放在成千上万人的怀抱中,我们才会知道。

CA:这
是 TED 研究员提出的一个重要问题。

“我们如何实际培训人们
了解公共卫生意味着什么?

尤其是在

那些不相信自己
对‘公众’负有责任的人的背景下?”

GB:嗯,你知道,我提醒人们

,当公共卫生确实如此时 它最好的工作,

没有任何反应。

当然,当什么都没有发生时,
我们不会因此而受到赞扬。

所以这个国家的每个人都

不必每天早上起床
自己烧水,这

是因为公共卫生。

如果你发生车祸,

你知道,
发生车祸

,你系好安全带
,你有安全气囊

,你没有
死于车祸,这

是因为公共健康。

空气
可以安全呼吸

,食物可以安全食用,

是因为公共卫生。

您的
孩子没有穿着会点燃的衣服的原因

是因为我们有
阻燃的衣服。

这是一个要求。 下楼梯

不会绊倒的原因

是因为我们实际上已经研究
了如何建造楼梯,

这样人们
在上下楼梯时就不会绊倒。

这实际上是
一项公共卫生干预措施。

所以建筑环境,

药物,所有这些东西,

疫苗,这些都是公共卫生

,这就是公共卫生存在的原因

,你可能不
相信它有那么重要,

但我们不能没有它。

CA:也许有一天我们都可以
设想美国的医疗保健系统

实际上有一些

针对公共卫生的激励措施。

那肯定很不错。

大卫
,如果可以的话,我必须继续回答其中一些问题,

因为他们正在涌入。

这里有一个来自杰奎琳·阿什比的问题。

每个父母的重要问题。

“你
对送孩子回学校有什么建议?”

GB:是的,我正在努力解决这个问题,
我有三个孙子。

好消息是我的孙子
们在技术上比我更精通

,现在
正在远程上课。

我认为

当我们考虑送
孩子回学校时,这将是一个挑战。

我们真的需要知道
孩子们的传染性

如何,以及
他们被感染时的表现如何。

现在,现在看来,

除了
极少数患有非常罕见疾病的儿童外

,他们对这种疾病的耐受性很好。

但核心问题是,

这些孩子会带回多少细菌给你

和爷爷奶奶。

所以这很重要。

你知道,试图告诉
一个八岁的孩子

不要与他们的朋友互动,

是一个真正的挑战。

顺便说一句,试图告诉一个 17 岁的孩子
不要与他们的朋友互动

将是一个真正的挑战。

所以,我们必须正确地
教育这些孩子,

我们必须
弄清楚我们如何错开他们的日程安排。

Uri 关于劳动力的想法对学校来说

可能是一个有趣的
概念,

因为这个想法是为了减少
教室里孩子的数量。

顺便说一句,如果你的班级规模更小,
你会得到更好的教育,无论如何。

所以,我们必须有
足够的老师。

所以这可能是速率限制步骤。

CA:好的,
[Steven] Petranek 的最后一个问题。

面具。 关于口罩的建议——

我把它关掉了,我们开始吧。

关于口罩的建议似乎发生了变化。

“大多数
在城市生活和工作的美国人是否

会更好地戴上口罩,

以帮助减少他们每天遇到
的空气污染颗粒

?”

GB:这绝对可以帮助一些人。

但让我告诉
你我希望我们停止做的事情:

燃烧化石燃料。

做我们正在做的所有可怕的事情

来破坏我们的气候。

你知道,每个人都在

谈论我们已经惊人地减少

了二氧化碳,因为我们不开车。

我必须告诉你,


是气候变化是人为的最好证据。

所有

那些不认为
气候变化是人为的气候变化怀疑论者,

我们刚刚在全球范围内展示

了人们
为造成气候变化所做的事情。

因此,我们需要做的是停止

并转向绿色经济。

DB:这里,这里。

CA:非常感谢你,

我会在最后再
加入一些。

这次真是万分感谢。

DB:所以我们正在挥舞面具的旗帜。

但是

,从中可以清楚地看到的一件事

是,COVID-19 并不是某些人所希望的出色的矫平机

一些社区
正在经历比其他社区更糟糕、

更糟糕的结果。

这是为什么?

GB:我们主要
谈论的是非裔美国人

和拉丁裔社区


如果他们感染了这种疾病,他们似乎会受到不成比例的影响。

这主要是因为曝光。

这些人
有更多面向公众的工作。

所以,你知道,公交车司机、

杂货店店员、

在长期护理机构、

疗养院

、肉类加工厂、养鸡场工作。

所以这就是为什么他们会
更多地接触到这种疾病。

易感性。

很多慢性病。

所以我们知道,尤其是
非裔美国人

患有糖尿病、心脏病、

肺病的比例不成比例,

而且由于这些慢性病,

我们很早就发现这种

病毒对
那些患有这些疾病的人群更有害。

这就是这里的大问题。

这就是造成
这些差异的原因

,这确实是一个挑战,

因为在很多方面,我们认为

这些人

是必不可少的员工

,必须去上班。

DB:没错。

那么,在您看来,

保护这些重要工作人员的公共卫生干预措施是什么,

如果您对此有想法的话?

GB:我绝对愿意。

我们从基于症状的测试策略开始

既然我们有足够的测试,

我们需要确保不仅人们
出于临床原因

和有症状的人接受这些测试,

而且还开始优先考虑
面向公众的人,

他们是必不可少的工作人员。

所以,当然是
在疗养院、医院等工作的人,

还有公交车司机、保安、

杂货店店员。

他们需要接受检测

,他们需要定期进行检测

,以确保他们和他们的家人安全

,让每个人

相信他们不会被感染

,我们也不会感染他们。 例如

,在肉类加工厂工作

的人。

我们已经看到了肉类加工厂所发生的真正悲剧

因为他们在一个并肩工作的环境
中工作。

他们还需要做一些其他的事情

来弄清楚如何在装配线上让他们保持
物理距离,

这很重要。

但同样,乌里的想法对于这个国家来说并不是一个坏主意

对于许多
行业来说也是如此。

DB:是的,在我看来,我们必须
确保这些人

真正被视为基本工人
,而不是牺牲工人。

显然,这
不仅限于美国。

GB:哦,当然。

我们
不仅在美国,

而且在其他国家也看到了这些差异。

它们
与种族和阶级

以及您从事的工作类型

、您从事的职业有很大关系。

坦率地说,

当我们看到第一批数据

显示中国

患有慢性病的
人面临更大风险

并且健康状况更差时,我们应该考虑到这一点。

我们会立即
加快行动,

因为,看
,每一种

进入该国的新疾病都会发生这种情况。

DB:所以看起来很多事情
都可以追溯到那个潜力——

这不是矛盾的说法,

公共卫生是每个人的工作

,我们需要接受这一点。

在您看来

,强大的公共卫生
基础设施是什么样的?

那会是什么样子?

GB:嗯,你知道,

任何时候新的健康威胁
进入我们的社区,

我们都应该
能够迅速识别它,

控制它

,如果我们能减轻它,当然,
如果可能的话,消除它,

然后把
所有

我们之前的防护措施。

因此,这意味着拥有一个人手

充足、训练有素的政府
公共卫生实体,

就像我们为警察、消防、紧急医疗服务所拥有的那样。

这意味着他们必须获得高薪,

这意味着他们必须拥有
充足的资源。

你知道,我们仍然有
一些

使用笔和垫子的接触追踪器。

并将内容发送到 Excel 电子表格。

不,我们需要与任何在线零售商正在使用的相同类型

的强大技术,

无论是亚马逊等。

我们仍在研究
两年后的

数据以进行数据驱动 决定。

我们需要能够
立即做出决定。

顺便说一句,台湾,

你之前提到过他们,

我记得我在台湾

看着
来自传染病的数据,实时的,

来自他们的电子
病历系统。

所以,你知道,我们可以做到这一点
,技术是存在的。

DB:想象一下。

哇,实时的健康信息

,会有多大的不同。

你认为技术
可以帮助我们吗,

无论是谷歌和苹果的
合作还是其他什么?

GB:技术可以帮助我们,

但它不会取代我们。

我们离我们可以坐下

来让我们的电子化身
为我们工作的地方还差得很远。

但这项技术可以超越我们的工作。

它可以给我们态势感知。

它可以为我们提供实时信息。

它允许我们将信息
从 A 点发送到 B 点以

进行数据分析。

它允许我们重新思考,

所以我们正在做所有这些建模,

它允许其他人立即检查
我们的数字。

所以它可以加速研究。

但是我们必须投资它

,我们必须继续它,

因为过时总是
技术的邪恶部分。

DB:看起来
克里斯带着更多问题回来了。

CA:是的,我想我们已经
接近尾声了,

但问题不断出现。

这里有一个来自 Neelay Bhatt 的问题。

“您认为公园、
步道和开放空间

在帮助实现更大的公共卫生目标方面发挥了什么作用?”

GB:你知道,绿色空间
是绝对必要的

,能够
出去散步和锻炼,

有人行道,这样你就可以拥有
适合所有年龄段的可步行、

可骑自行车和绿色
的社区,

这对我们的心理健康有好处 ,
对我们的身体健康有好处。

而且我总是告诉人们,你知道的,

当有人让你动弹不得时,这是一个很好的去处。

CA:确实。

在这里,我们有一个匿名问题。

尽可能不要匿名,

因为我们都是这里的朋友

可能有人……无论如何。

让我们看看,但这是一个很好的问题。

“有很多人
对真正的专家所说的话高度怀疑。

你发现什么可以有效
地帮助高度怀疑的

人减少怀疑和增加信任?”

GB:说实话。

如果您犯了错误,请承认
并立即纠正。

始终如一。

并且不要说愚蠢的话。

这种情况经常发生。

你知道,其中
一件有趣的事情,

我们已经通过面具讨论完成了这个

你知道,传统观念是
,我们只有在人们

具有传染性的情况下才让人们戴上口罩,

或者你处于感染这种疾病

的高风险环境中

然后我们说,

不,每个人都可以戴口罩。

那是因为我们最终学会了,

并且变得更加可信

,我们有
无症状传播的科学。

但是我们没有很好地沟通。

我们说,哦,不,不,
我们正在改变主意

在告诉人们不要戴口罩之后,每个人都可以戴口罩。

然后我们没有花足够的时间
向人们解释原因。

所以我们失去了信任。

所以我们需要在这方面做得更好。

然后,

当你有扩音器时,我们的领导人需要非常小心他们所说的话。

顺便说一句,我犯了错误,

我在电视
上说过一些错误的话,

因为我错了。

我已经非常努力
地尝试尽快纠正这些

问题。

我们所有人都这样做,

但你必须足够坚强

,有足够坚强的
个性,在你错了的时候说出来

,然后改正。

因为归根结底,
一旦你失去了信任,

你就失去了一切。

CA:好吧,如果我可以这么说,

就像
你现在的沟通方式,

我的意思是,对我来说,这是
一种产生信任的沟通方式

我不知道
你去那里有什么神奇的酱汁,

但听你的话非常非常吸引人

非常感谢你做的这些。

大卫,你还有其他最后的线索吗?

GB:我犯了很多错误。

DB:是的,不,但很

高兴你能加入我们,
并为此感谢你。

如果可以的话,只是最后一个问题。

您已经这样做了一段时间,

是什么让您对未来充满希望?

GB:你知道,让我告诉你一些事情。

给我希望的一件事

是当我看到人们
照顾他们的朋友和家人时。

我的意思是,开车经过的生日派对。

我今天在新闻上看到了。

给朋友打电话的人。

我从
多年未联系的人那里听到,

他们只是打电话给我说,

“我很久没和你说话了
。你还好吗?”

所以做更多的事情。

我们彼此之间的信任,

以及我们所表现出的爱,
真是太棒了,

所以这给了我希望。

DB:人性是为了最终的胜利。

GB:是的。

DB:非常感谢本杰明

博士加入我们
并分享您的智慧。

GB:很高兴来到这里。

CA:是的,谢谢。

GB:你们是安全的。

你的家人是安全的。

DB:谢谢,你也一样。