Advertisement
Opinion | ‘Dynamic zero’ or living with Covid-19: what’s the best strategy? ‘Soft’ science can show the way
- Biology, chemistry, epidemiology and other ‘hard’ sciences have received the bulk of attention and funding as the world tries to combat Covid-19
- Lasting success will require the kind of insight into ethics and human behaviour that only the social sciences and humanities can provide
Reading Time:3 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
7

Unsurprisingly, leaders around the world have emphasised following science as a key to facing the Covid-19 pandemic.
Last week, in response to a group of anti-vaccine truckers protesting in Ottawa, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said: “You can’t end a pandemic with blockades … You need to end it with science.”
On Sunday, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor assured the public it was the “scientific choice” to follow the government’s “dynamic zero-Covid” strategy to combat the pandemic in Hong Kong.
Advertisement
Scientific research is essential in meeting the challenges we face today and helping us understand how Covid-19 spreads and how its spread can be halted. Scientific research has led to the development of vaccines and boosters which have the power to end the pandemic, saving countless lives.
It also promises even more invaluable medical advances in the future, such as a new Covid-19 drug that can reduce hospitalisation and death among those who contract the virus’ more lethal variants.
Advertisement
But can science really tell us what to do? The answer is not so straightforward. Around the world, governments use different strategies to respond to the pandemic, from pursuing herd immunity and living with the virus to zero-Covid policies.
Advertisement
Select Voice
Choose your listening speed
Get through articles 2x faster
1.25x
250 WPM
Slow
Average
Fast
1.25x
