How not to contain a virus

IT is a good thing indeed that the A(H1N1) virus that hit the Philippines is not deadly. As of last Sunday, the Department of Health (DOH) has reported 428 A(H1N1) cases in the country. Not one of those so far infected has died, thankfully, because the A(H1N1) cases that were transported and readily transmitted here is, according to Health Secretary Francisco Duque 3rd, are just mild, consistent with most other A(H1N1) cases in other countries.

But what if it were a different case? What if the A(H1N1) virus that hit us was deadly or what if it mutated into something of a human killer, like the one in Mexico which claimed 113 lives so far (granting that Mexico is not underreporting or undercounting their fatalities)?

I am no scientist but I do know from experience that viruses behave in different and often unpredictable ways. A relatively harmless one can become deadlier and vice versa, depending on the environment and the population in which it is transmitted, and whether it mixes with other flu bugs.

Would we have been ready for a killer virus?

Let’s just put it this way, we certainly thank the good Lord that we were spared of one. The past weeks have shown the government and the country aren’t ready. As the DOH was swamped with cases of A(H1N1), its strategy quickly shifted from containment to mitigation, admitting that it could no longer do contact tracing and quarantine, at least effectively. There were just too many new cases sprouting. It is no use playing the blame game now but the Health department should learn its lesson.

Early on, it was actually doing quite well in its stringent policies vs. the virus. Duque correctly advised Filipinos to practice social distancing to slow the spread, if not prevent altogether the spread of any A(H1N1) infection. If you recall there was even this big hullabaloo when Duque asked Manny Pacquiao to postpone his celebratory motorcade and return to the country after his huge victory over Ricky Hatton, so the Filipino icon could go into self-quarantine in the US.

A lot of people said the Health Secretary was being “O.A.,” but I always think it is better to err on the side of caution, especially since we didn’t know then what kind of virus we were dealing with. All measures then were warranted to prevent a community level outbreak, much more a pandemic. Duque, I thought, was doing the right thing. He should have kept erring on the side of caution. I was particularly puzzled why he did not ask the secretary of Education to postpone the start of classes, like the Commission on Higher Education ordered for colleges and universities when there were already confirmed cases of A(H1N1) in schools.

The DOH could have ordered the postponement of classes for public schools, and recommended it to private schools as well, if not asked for the President to order it. Had the government been “O.A.,” I certainly believe we would not have 428 cases of A(H1N1) infection now, a fact that has repercussions for tourism, job productivity and other aspects of the economy, besides the health sector.

At the time when there were only a couple of infections, yes, there was no need to panic, as Duque correctly advised, but there was more than enough reason to be extra vigilant and pragmatic. What happened to the advise on social distancing? Hundreds of thousands of students congregating in schools for classes certainly was not social distancing. Indeed, most of the cases of infection came from schools.

The Health department belatedly issued guidelines that said schools should suspend classes for 10 days once it has a confirmed case of A(H1N1). By that time though, one infected student would have come into contact and possibly infected several others. If we were after containment, that is not the way to go about it.

In the private sector, a lot companies kept on sending their employees abroad for various reasons instead of canceling trips. They put these employees at risk of contamination, and who knows if some of them did go home infected. Employers also should have relaxed their sick leave rules in order to encourage staff to stay home if they develop flu-like symptoms, as the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) recommended.

Employers should discourage staff who manifest flu-like symptoms from reporting for work, even if this means temporarily raising their sick leave allowances. Due to overly strict sick leave rules, and because in the real world many laborers desperately need the day’s pay to cope with the cost of living, some of them are forced to go to work, even if they know or suspect that they already have flu-like symptoms.

Social distancing also called for the cancellation of non-essential large gatherings, including flag-raising ceremonies and similar assemblies in offices, lessening human traffic in crowded areas such as office cafeterias by encouraging workers to bring their own food and eat in their work stations.

These are just some suggestions. Hopefully, we have learned more valuable lessons in the event a more virulent virus reaches our shores. We pray this never happens. But we have to be a lot readier when it does.–Ernesto F. Herrera

ernestboyherrera@yahoo.com