Theory: Epidemiologists & public health lawyers & ethicists who focus on HIV, substance use, NCDs & other areas where “behavior change” is a focus have had a leg up over those who focus on Ebola, SARS, etc. in thinking about a sustainable long-term strategy for social distancing. https://twitter.com/jenmandelbaum/status/1263948894221852678

Social distancing is a totally different animal than command & control quarantine & isolation of individuals used for SARS & Ebola (in the US where cases were contained). Totally different from the issues raised by medical countermeasures, too.

The social-ecological model, including harm reduction = highly relevant to thinking about how to make social distancing work long-term.

Pre-COVID, public health emergency preparedness had a big blind spot re: deep analysis of long-term behavior change & need for social & financial supports). Most (including my own writing) gestured vaguely at eg, education, child care, job loss & say “That’ll be tough, huh?”

Most PH emergency preparedness work focused on initial response. When writing about long-term social distancing, I used to say “sustaining for the months or years that a pandemic could last will be... very difficult.” It was a failure of imagination on my part not to dig deeper.

As it’s played out, almost everyone adopted an all-or-nothing mentality. My view has always been that it’s important to weigh the benefits & costs (& legality) of the various types & degrees of restrictions individually & at the local level.