There is a standard thread that connects us. Epidemiological experience In the last 700 years. From the Black Death within the 14th century to COVID within the twenty first, public health authorities have implemented emergency measures akin to isolation and quarantine to forestall the spread of infectious diseases.
As we all know from COVID, these measures extend lives in an effort to save lots of them. In each Recent And Distant past They have also given rise to collective unrest, confusion and resistance.
So in any case this time, what can we learn about how public health communication plays a job in helping people understand and take preventive measures in a crisis? And more importantly, in an age of misinformation and mistrust, how can we improve public health messages for any future pandemics?
Last yr, we published one Cochrane Review Exploring global public health evidence during outbreaks of Covid and other infectious diseases including SARS, MERS, influenza and Ebola. Here's a snapshot of what we found.
Importance of public trust
A key theme emerging from evaluation of the worldwide COVID pandemic is public trust – or lack thereof – in governments, public institutions and science.
A growing body of evidence suggests. Level of trust in government were Directly proportional Fewer COVID infections and better vaccination rates worldwide. This was a key consider people's willingness to follow public health guidelines, and is now a key focus for future pandemic preparedness.
Here in Australia, public trust in governments and health authorities has steadily eroded over time.
Early information from governments and health authorities concerning the emerging COVID crisis, personal risk and mandatory safety measures was generally clear and consistent across the country. Establishment of National Cabinet 2020 signaled a commitment to consensus-based policy and public health messaging by state, territory and federal governments.
During this early phase of relational integration, Australians reported high levels of attachment and trust in government.
Mick Tsikas/AAP
But because the pandemic unfolded, public trust and confidence faltered on the back of conflicting state-federal pandemic strategies, accusations, and a confusing patchwork of public health messaging. The difference between Lockdown policies and public health messaging Adopted by Victoria and New South Wales There is one example, but there are numerous others.
When state, territory and federal governments have conflicting policies on safety measures, individuals are easily confused, lose trust and find it difficult to interact or persuade. Many individuals are out of partisan politics. Adherence to mandatory public health measures falls.
Our research found that clarity and consistency of knowledge are key features of effective public health communication throughout the COVID pandemic.
We also found that public health communication is best when officials work in partnership with different goal audiences. A case was brought against the state government in Victoria. End the public housing tower lockdown. There is a cautionary tale that underscores how necessary is perceived, appropriate, and two-way communication with diverse communities.
Countering misinformation
There is flawed information. Not a new problembut has been supercharged by the appearance of social media.
A highly regarded “miracle” drug ivermectin The phenomenal traction achieved locally and globally indicates an unproven treatment. Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic drug, with no evidence of a virus like COVID.
Australia's drug regulator was forced to. Ban ivermectin prescriptions. After a for anything aside from its intended use Rapid growth There was a national shortage of individuals in search of drugs. Hospitals also reported patients. Overdosing on ivermectin And cocktails of COVID “cures” were promoted online.
gave The Lancet Commission Lessons from the COVID pandemic have called for a coordinated international response to combat misinformation.
As a part of this, it calls for more accessible, accurate information and investment in scientific literacy to guard against misinformation, including information shared on social media platforms. The World Health Organization is developing resources and suggestions for health authorities to deal with this.Informative“
National efforts to directly address misinformation are vital, together with concerted efforts to extend health literacy. It is held by the Australian Medical Association. A demand from the federal government Investing in long-term internet marketing to combat health misinformation and promote health literacy.
People of all ages must be prepared to think critically about who and where their health information comes from. With the rise of AI, that is an increasingly urgent priority.
Alina Crook/Shutterstock
Looking ahead.
Australia's health ministers recently He reiterated his commitment. to the brand new Australian Center for Disease Control (CDC).
From a science communication perspective, the Australian CDC can provide an independent voice of evidence- and consensus-based information. This is precisely what is required during a pandemic. But full details concerning the CDC's funding and delivery have been the topic of controversy. Some guesses.
Many of us Key findings There is nothing recent or surprising about effective public health communication during COVID. They reinforce what we all know works across different places and times from previous outbreaks of disease: relevant, timely, clear, consistent and accurate information.
The rapid growth, reach and influence of misinformation and mistrust in public authorities brings a brand new level of complexity to the image. Confronting each must be central to all public health crisis communications now and in the long run.