Dr. Zeynep Tufekci, a sociologist who emerged as one of academia鈥檚 most prominent voices during the COVID-19 pandemic, joined Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of the University鈥檚 School of Public Health, in a virtual conversation Wednesday afternoon.
The two come from differing academic backgrounds: Jha is a physician and public health scholar by training, while Tufekci is a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill focused on technology, society and 鈥渟ystems thinking,鈥� the connection of multiple academic disciplines. But both have played predominant roles in explaining COVID-19 to the public, with Jha bouncing from one news network to another and Tufekci penning influential op-eds and articles in the New York Times and the Atlantic. Both have also been constant presences on Twitter, sharing insights on vaccines, masks and aerosol transmission, sometimes even conversing with each other online.
Their differing perspectives, combined with their shared experience explaining the pandemic, were a key subject of Wednesday鈥檚 event. The two discussed the failures of communication that have plagued public health institutions, the 鈥渄ogma鈥� that scientists refused to give up and why interdisciplinary scholars may have had a better angle on COVID-19 all along.
Tufekci鈥檚 advantage began in early 2020, Jha said 鈥� when she was among the first academics to seriously gauge the severity of what was ahead, along with being among the first advocates for mask-wearing.聽
Her knowledge of authoritarian systems and study of near-misses like SARS聽 helped her contextualize the severity of COVID-19 early on, Tufekci said. While 鈥渘ot an anxious person by nature,鈥� the sequence of events 鈥� reports of an unknown pneumonia in China, evidence of human-to-human transmission, the shutdown of the Hubei province and evidence of asymptomatic transmission 鈥� convinced her that a pandemic was coming.
She then lived through an 鈥渙ut-of-body鈥� experience for a month: filling her prescriptions, stockpiling masks and warning the public, only for her words to fall upon deaf ears. In February, she wrote an article for Scientific American laying out her predictions and linking to a list of precautions that people could take, including mask-wearing 鈥� an article that she hoped would convince her academic friends to cancel conferences they had planned for April. The scientific community, she said, pushed back hard, especially on the notions that asymptomatic civilians should wear masks.
鈥淚 remembered thinking, what am I missing?鈥� Tufekci said on Wednesday, adding that the reasons listed for not wearing masks at the time were 鈥渂unk.鈥澛�
鈥淚 thought, any moment (now), some big name is going to write an op-ed telling us to come to our senses.鈥�
The CDC and other health authorities confirmed Tufekci鈥檚 intuition when they called upon Americans to wear masks during everyday activities months later.聽
Her knack for correct predictions and intuitions, Jha said, comes from her unique lens on public health.
鈥淭his was 鈥� about connecting dots from deeply disparate fields, from understanding authoritarians to understanding information flow, systems thinking about near-misses and preventing catastrophic events,鈥� he said. Academia, he added, 鈥渄isincentivizes 鈥� dot-connecting,鈥� instead encouraging experts to stay siloed in one corner of research.
An interdisciplinary model of research works particularly well in pandemics, which Tufekci called a 鈥渟ociety-wide question.鈥� But Tufekci and Jha emphasized the difference between the idea of an 鈥渁rmchair epidemiologist鈥� 鈥� someone who only relies on outside expertise to, for example, model out the pandemic鈥檚 course 鈥� and scholars who break from their expertise while putting in work to expand their horizons. The work for Tufekci meant reading 100 academic papers for an article she wrote about aerosol transmission of COVID-19.聽
鈥淭his lane-swerving works to the degree that you鈥檙e willing to put in the legwork,鈥� Tufekci said. 鈥淚 check it with people. I have tons of conversations to say, what am I missing?鈥澛�
At one point, Tufekci said, she offered what equated to a ransom on her own articles, offering money to anyone who could disprove her arguments.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 want the finance guy who has never read an infectious disease paper to come lecture,鈥� she added. 鈥淏ut I don鈥檛 want anyone who didn鈥檛 get the right PhD to be shut out.鈥澛�
Gatekeeping qualified outsiders and elevating scientific dogma above the scientific method, Jha and Tufekci said, has limited sensible policy choices about issue like virus transmission.聽
鈥淭he science of how this virus spreads has been extremely clear,鈥� Jha said, explaining that while airborne spread appears to be a key driver of transmission, 鈥渄roplets and surfaces鈥� still dominate much of the conversation.
鈥淭here鈥檚 no other framework that can explain the world (pandemic),鈥� Tufekci added, noting with dismay that the World Health Organization still won鈥檛 use the word 鈥渁irborne.鈥澛�
The same deference to existing science, she said, likely cost hundreds of thousands of lives during the vaccine rollout. Had countries delayed the second dose of COVID-19 vaccines, she said, there would have been enough supply that the entire global population over 50 could have accessed a first dose, saving lives and potentially even preventing the proliferation of the Delta variant.
Jha agreed, adding that when he and others called for implementing聽 the first dose model, used by Canada and a number of other countries, they were called 鈥渁nti-science.鈥�
Part of this, the pair agreed, had to do with a genuine anti-science movement proliferating in the United States and globally, charged by the political right. That threat to science, Tufekci said, likely led others to feel the need to defend science. But science, Jha noted, 鈥渄oes not care if you go to bat for it.鈥�
The pandemic, the pair agreed, also represented a significant failure of communication on behalf of the government 鈥� leaving people like them to fill the gaps. In an ideal world, Tufekci said, a trusted figure would speak to the press twice a week, covering every conceivable base and synthesizing the news. And institutions, they said, have also floundered, such as state and federal agencies issuing confusing guidelines on booster shots and failing to consider the most pressing needs first 鈥� such as whether or not Johnson & Johnson vaccine recipients need a booster.
鈥淭hey鈥檙e not geared for public health; they鈥檙e geared for medical stuff,鈥� Tufekci said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 kind of crazy to me that there鈥檚 no authority that says, 鈥榳hat are we doing here?鈥欌��
The pandemic, Jha said, is a public health and societal crisis, but institutions have responded to it as a medical crisis.
鈥淭his was a stress test for a lot of our institutions,鈥� Tufekci said. 鈥淎nd our institutions are not fine.鈥�
Will Kubzansky is the 133rd editor-in-chief and president of the Brown Daily Herald. Previously, he served as a University News editor overseeing the admission & financial aid and staff & student labor beats. In his free time, he plays the guitar and soccer 鈥� both poorly.
