Cargando…

Can you lock down in a slum? And who would benefit if you tried? Difficult questions about epidemiology's commitment to global health inequalities during Covid-19

The initial response to the Covid-19 pandemic was characterised by swift “lockdowns,” a cluster of measures defined by a shared goal of suppressing Covid-19 and a shared character of restricting departure from the home except for specific purposes. By mid-April 2020, most countries were implementing...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Broadbent, Alex, Streicher, Pieter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9125993/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35647518
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloepi.2022.100074
Descripción
Sumario:The initial response to the Covid-19 pandemic was characterised by swift “lockdowns,” a cluster of measures defined by a shared goal of suppressing Covid-19 and a shared character of restricting departure from the home except for specific purposes. By mid-April 2020, most countries were implementing stringent measures of this kind. This essay contends that (1) some epidemiologists played a central role in formulating and promulgating lockdown as a policy and (2) lockdowns were foreseeably harmful to the Global Poor, and foreseeably offered them little benefit, relative to less stringent measures. In view of the widespread commitment to reducing global health inequalities within the profession, this should prompt reflection within the epidemiological community and further work on pandemic response measures more appropriate for the Global Poor.