Read on Twitter
I am not an epidemiologist or a virologist. But it terms of people adhering to public health measures, from a behavioral science perspective it seems *really* important that policy makers articulate a clear goal re COVID. A few thoughts: 
1/5
1/5
If the goal is to completely eliminate COVID globally, which is implicit in some statements, then people will get discouraged quickly and reactance/fatalism will set in. This just does not seem realistic, and every piece of not 100% good news will be read with disappointment.2/5
If the goal is to get COVID to the point where it's mostly a bad flu, through a combination of vaccines+therapeutics, then this is very much within reach. Focus in interpreting news will shift from % infected to % severe cases.3/5
To that end, even "disappointing" news has been amazing thus far. Severe cases in every vaccine trial, against every variant, have been at *zero*. If these are the headlines (because reducing severity is goal), my sense is people will be much more willing to bear PH measures 4/5
Because the goal/end is very much in sight. 5/5
PS This thread was inspired by this tweet: https://twitter.com/eliowa/status/1354945529206222852?s=20
Reference points matter.
Reference points matter.
