Even with that info, someone may or may not yet feel comfortable doing something and one shouldn’t feel pressured to do anything. Over time, I think people will increase their contact rates with strangers—meeting a stranger, having dinner, elevators, social gatherings, etc. 3/x
-
Show this thread
-
Many risk assessments assume that one’s risk is directly related to the COVID-19 prevalence in the general area. I think that's part of it, but believe that one’s living and working conditions define risks for COVID-19 far more than the general prevalence in the community. 4/x
2 replies 5 retweets 83 likesShow this thread -
To me, COVID-19 is a network issue—if people in your network are more likely to be essential workers (defined as people who cannot work remotely) or they are more likely to live with people who are essential workers, then your network risk is high. 5/x
2 replies 5 retweets 72 likesShow this thread -
For example, if someone has dinner with 5 people including 2 people who work at an Amazon distribution site, the risk of that gathering could be high. If someone has dinner with 10 people who all work remotely, then their risk for COVID-19 from that gathering is low. 6/x
5 replies 6 retweets 77 likesShow this thread -
So while we have focused on community prevalence, it has erased the inequities that defining COVID-19. I sometimes think of this as an “all lives matter” public health response—ie, not paying attention to pre-existing inequities that increase risk for some and not others. 7/x
2 replies 9 retweets 97 likesShow this thread -
I have always believed that COVID-19 risks are driven far more based on where people have to be (based on where they live and work) as compared to where they choose to be (social gatherings). Ultimately, as a service provider, I’m a pragmatist at heart and in practice. 8/x
3 replies 3 retweets 88 likesShow this thread -
I could tell people that they should sit home and do nothing, but all that will happen is that they will still do it but just not tell me about it. To me, harm reduction isn’t being happy or ok with a behavior, but it is about understanding it to give advice if it's sought. 9/x
1 reply 7 retweets 79 likesShow this thread -
So I would rather people be open with me in terms of what they are planning on doing rather than telling me what they think I want to hear. 10/x
6 replies 2 retweets 45 likesShow this thread -
And more importantly, I think critical that in 2021 we not let the question of social gatherings or quadruple masking take our eyes off of the socioeconomic inequities and structural racism that is such a critical driver of disparities in COVID-19. 11/x
11 replies 23 retweets 121 likesShow this thread -
Summarized some of this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE6IYHFvkME&feature=youtu.be … And then wrote about some of this recently with
@mugecevik and others here: https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n224 … Fin4 replies 7 retweets 39 likesShow this thread
That network thing, yes! Have you written that up? I’ve been explaining exactly that point to my own social network! People in it shifted from being able to work from home to some being forced back to work at work—and thus different risk considerations.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @mugecevik
Thanks and have a piece with Dr. Cevik under review, but have some pre-COVID pieces that talked about this in relation to HIV/STI, etc. We laid this out here:https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(19)30618-8/fulltext …
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @sdbaral @mugecevik
Not having network awareness incorporated into what we call one's "threat model" is a very common problem in digital security for activists/journalists, especially in authoritarian settings. A network is as strong as its weakest link.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.