An entire class full of conversations on if we can Eradicate Human Disease? I couldn’t wait to sign up for this class. This paper is an opinion piece on why I don’t believe we can eradicate human disease. While this class was not in anthropology, my lens takes a wide look at the history of American cultural and behavior around the nuanced idea of freedom.
Fall Semester, 2021
(9 minute read)
The Freedom to Eradicate Human Disease
I believe the freedom to swing my arm stops the moment before my arm hits someone. But the idea of freedom at the individual, community and country level can differ because the motivations and responsibilities at those levels are different. For example an individual’s desire to protect their sense of freedom may not include the health and wellbeing of their neighbor. ie: Me having the freedom to swing my arm even if it hits someone. But the health of a population may be more important than individual freedoms to a government. ie: If I choose to hit someone by exercising my freedom of choice to swing my arm then there will most likely be consequences (socially and legally).
While this idea is simplistic in its approach, the concept is sound. Choices have consequences and freedoms within the framework of society are different from the freedoms of an individual. The United States seems to draw the lines of freedom between ideologies and controlling human disease shines a bright light upon one of the most unpredictable factors – human behavior. This paper explores the effects of personal behavior on society’s ability to eradicate human disease by looking at past examples of pandemics, anti-vax mass hysteria (which is different than vaccination hesitancy), and the lack of epidemiological knowledge and standards in the general public to ultimately explore why some are willing to swing their arm regardless of who they hit.
Human Behavior
This paper will not explore the nuances of behavior and the intricate layers of personality that impact personal behavior. Exploring the desire to be right and to hold such dominion over the term freedom as to harness it to protect one’s philosophy over the health of another isn’t just wrapped up in ideological rhetoric. It is at the very heart of survival.
Our biological systems of “fight or flight” operate to inspire a response needed for survival. If the potential threat to protect an ideology feels stronger than the threat to personal health then it makes sense that someone would lean in the direction of protecting themselves from what they fear most. And while our choices, given room to pause and question the threat, can override fear to an extent, the behavior is essentially a biological coping skill (Nunez 2020, Roelofs 2017). And as such may be used to predict the behavior of any given population in the event of an emergency or crisis (Wester 2011, 213).
Behavior at the social level becomes culture and in America the framework culture behaves in is freedom – the belief in the right to choose, or not choose. And this tends to be very individually based (Muir 2012, 73-79). At an individual and social level we can explain behaviors in social systems when confronted with new information with Pierre Bourdieu’s practice theory. Bourdieu shares, where there was once an unspoken, “taken for granted” and automatic way of being (doxa), that when challenged with “why?” (becomes heterodoxy), creates a push back of “because it’s always done this way” (as an orthodoxy) (Bourdieu 1977, 167-171). That unspoken way of being then becomes something new because an awareness has been created.
The Same Side of Different Coins
Penicillin
Covid has highlighted both sides of the argument. It is also worth noting that the basis of science study is that hypotheses are asked, studied, and theories adopted until more information is studied, tested and shared. An unknown in this system is how long it takes something to be adopted, and how slow information travels through different channels. For example the exponential use of penicillin in the face of resistance was discussed in 1945 during the acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize for it’s discovery, and yet his warnings were not adopted by health professionals until the late 1990s (Rosenblatt-Farrell 2009). Even in this day of massive communication, valid information struggles to break through the noise. To understand the importance of communication and behavior, we can look to the recent past to see that eradication of a disease needs a multi-disciplined approach.
Smallpox
The poster child for eradicating disease is smallpox. Eradication in the 70’s was possible because of a very specific set of circumstances. 1) Vaccination scars show who was vaccinated, or not. 2) The vaccine was cheap and stable and could survive unrefrigerated travel to the four corners of the world and vaccinate the undeveloped world. 3) Humans are the only reservoir for smallpox, so it isn’t lying dormant in the wild waiting to jump back into the human population (Henderson 2002). But a really important reason this was possible is because of the effort and desire put behind the vaccine program. Communication and focused leadership inspired behavior that supported the importance and the goal of eradication (Seymour, 6). This is in sharp contrast to the way the 1918 flu and subsequent vaccination programs were handled.
1918 Flu
100 years ago the flu epidemic killed 675,000 (1) people in America alone. The government, already weakened by the war efforts, refused to share any “negative” information and downplayed the illness. But the quickness of the disease meant people could see death around them and knew their government was lying to them. Within six weeks the flu would tear through a community leaving masses dead. Communities could fight against the mis-information with behavior that supported non-pharmacological actions such as physical distancing and mask wearing (Barry 2005). Communication channels were very different in 2020.
Information Channels
In the time of Covid information channels run in both directions. The power to share information is in the hands of the population regardless of their knowledge or experience, and if someone is looking for information that fits a personal belief all they need to do is Google it. Unfortunately, this great power to reach the masses has come with little responsibility. The clear lack of critical thinking means opinions align with political affiliations and ideologies, not science (Mills 2021). People are making choices based on their faith, their politics, and patriotic rhetoric that often puts people at odds with each other. This is something we saw 40 years ago with HIV and AIDS.
In the early 80’s with the AIDs epidemic political and religious ads were placed in newspapers that promoted mis-information, created fear, and in the process continued to create an “other” as the enemy. (2) The fight to control the narrative and the science cost lives, as it has with Covid. And the willful non action from the elected officials during any crisis involving the death of their citizens is appalling (Halkitis 2014, 3 and 192).
Decision Making and Power
This is at the heart of why I believe we will never eradicate disease, because the epic undertaking of managing human behavior when we are still fighting each other over ideological philosophy and the hypocrisy of personal choice and freedom is a distraction. Beyond the ideas of freedom and choice and a lack of critical thinking, there is also a convenient lack of awareness with epidemiological knowledge and history. For example, while politicians create laws to thwart science, especially in the state of Georgia, where they create situations that lack choice.
GSU and every public college in the state “has their hands tied” by the board of regents. (3) So even if the school wanted to mandate masks and vaccinations they are unable too. Even as many other established vaccination mandates are in place such as the MMR. (4,5) And they have certainly enforced the need for the MMR which I was required to have before I could attend classes on campus. I sit in a classroom that could have someone unvaccinated from Covid and not required to wear a mask. No alternative options where given. Even with a precedent in Georgia for laws that protect citizens from disease. For example someone testing positive for TB and refuses treatment can be detained and quarantined until they comply. (6)
Language, Belief, and Freedom
Author Meghan L. Dowling beautifully said that “In our culture, inequality is the architecture and language is the blueprint. By examining the language we use, we can see why our culture is constructed the way it is”. (7) Behavior doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It aligns with our culture. It’s our way of being in the world and it’s a product of how we process or fail to process information.
I can understand behavior at a biological level. I struggle to understand it at an ideological level. For example, I find it difficult to understand why someone would not get a vaccine with proven technology, but would be okay taking a horse dewormer with no scientific studies to support claims of benefit, or get an infusion that is new technology and costs thousands of dollars more than the vaccine. (8) Or have a problem with non-pharmaceutical protocols such as hand washing, social distancing and mask wearing known to reduce the spread (Ueki et al 2020).
I don’t believe the explanation for this is something new to America. Mass Hysteria seems to be as deadly an epidemic as the pathogens that cause disease. It thrives on belief systems and ideologies that leave no room for critical thinking. In a culture of “freedom” where some choose to swing their arms and die on their swords, what hope do we have of ever eradicating disease?
Works Cited
Barry, John M. 2005. The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History, Penguin Group.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977 [1972]. Outline of a Theory of Practice, Richard Nice, trans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Halkitis, Perry N. 2014. The AIDS Generation : Stories of Survival and Resilience, Oxford University Press.
Henderson, D.A. 2002. “Considerations for Viral Disease Eradication: Lessons Learned and Future Strategies: Workshop Summary on Small Pox.” National Academies Press.
Mills, M. Anthony. 2021. Unmasking Scientific Expertise: COVID-19 Teaches Us That ‘Follow the Science’ Is a Prescription for Divisive Politics.” Issues in Science & Technology 37 (4): 84–88.
Muir, William. 2012. Freedom in America, DC: CQ Press.
Nunez, Kristen. 2020. “Fight, Flight, Freeze: What the Response Means”, Healthline.com
Roelofs, Karin. 2017. “Freeze for Action: Neurobiological Mechanisms in Animal and Human Freezing.” Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences, 372 (1718)
Rosenblatt-Farrell, Noah. 2009. “The Landscape of Antibiotic Resistance.” Environmental Health Perspectives, 117(6), A244-A250.
Seymour, Jane. “Case 1: Eradicating Smallpox.” Center for Global Development website
Ueki, Hiroshi, Yuri Furusawa, Kiyoko Iwatsuki-Horimoto, Masaki Imai, Hiroki Kabata, Hidekazu Nishimura, and Yoshihiro Kawaoka. 2020. “Effectiveness of Face Masks in Preventing Airborne Transmission of SARS-CoV-2.” MSphere 5 (5).
Wester, Misse. 2011. “Fight, Flight or Freeze: Assumed Reactions of the Public During a Crisis.” Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 19 (4): 207-214
NOTES
- As reported on the CDC website
- Image from “Moral Majority Report”
- GSU faculty lack of mask mandate protest as reported in the AJC
- GSU Requirements
- Board of Regents Policy Manual regarding immunizations
- Georgia Tuberculosis Policy and Procedure Manual 2016
- Meghan L Dowling shares an example of this framework in a tiktok post
- Monoclonal Antibody Treatment costs $1,250 – $2,100 per infusion, vs $20 vaccine re: Healthline