Our Recent Pandemic History Hurt Our Response to COVID-19

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has been, if anything, far worse than President Trump on the coronavirus front. Keep hugging and kissing! Go to restaurants! Keep the economy going! But that’s finally changed:

As virus cases have begun surging, the president and his team have shifted their message radically in recent days, urging people to stay home and to practice physical distancing — and warning of dire results if that advice is ignored.

….“Don’t go out into the street unless it is for something absolutely necessary,” López Obrador told the nation in a sober YouTube address Friday evening from the northern border city of Tijuana. “We have to be in our homes. We have to maintain a safe distance.”

….An even more dire appraisal came late Saturday from Hugo López-Gatell, undersecretary of health and the president’s coronavirus point man. “This is the last chance we have. We can’t lose it,” López-Gatell said in a somber-toned news briefing. “We are saying to everyone: ‘Stay at home.’ … It’s the only way to reduce this virus.”

In the case of people like Trump and López Obrador, their unwillingness to face up to the danger of the coronavirus pandemic is probably rooted in their personality. Still, the truth is that virtually every country responded slowly and deficiently at first, unwilling to take the virus seriously when only two or three deaths had been recorded. But why? Surely they all knew that two or three deaths meant the virus was well established already and there was no chance it would simply die out on its own? Part of the answer might be rooted in recent history.

  • In 1976 the United States reacted almost instantly to a single case of swine flu that turned out to be . . . a single case of swine flu. The response was widely judged a fiasco after the fact.
  • In 2003 SARS broke out in Asia, producing panic around the world. In the end, only 8,000 people were infected and fewer than a thousand died.
  • In 2009 we had another outbreak of swine flu. It killed about 12,000 people in the US, less than a normal flu season.
  • In 2012 MERS broke out in the Middle East. It had a high mortality rate but turned out to be hard to get. The death toll since 2012 is still under a thousand.

In other words, there have been a lot of false alarms over the past few decades, and that probably contributed to an initial reluctance to take drastic measures based on inconclusive evidence. Remember that for all the uproar about how late the US responded, just about everyone else responded late too. Even the World Health Organization took until March 11—when there were already more than 100,000 confirmed cases—to declare COVID-19 a pandemic.

Sometimes a knowledge of history is helpful. Sometimes it’s the opposite. In the case of COVID-19, all the recent episodes of relatively limited pandemics produced a sense of wait-and-see that turned out to be deadly. In this case, history was not our friend.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate