Commentary

Evslin: Pandemic Lesson #2 – Experts are too narrow to make policy

by Tom Evslin

“Lock it all down,” the epidemiologists said. They were correct that, the less people left their houses, the less the disease would spread.

“How will food get to their houses?” we can imagine leaders asking.

Tom Evslin

“There will have to be few essential exceptions,” we can imagine an epidemiologist responding.

“And those would be?” Not a question to ask the epidemiologists. Outside their area of expertise. No criticism of them; we should expect experts to be narrowly focused on their area of expertise.

If you were a mayor or a governor or a head of state who must make immediate decisions in the face of a new pandemic, you have two choices: 1) just listen to the epidemiologists – a strategy which allows you to claim that you made the expert-endorsed decisions regardless of the outcome; 2) as quickly as you can, consult as wide a variety of experts in different fields like logistics, food supply, energy, and waste removal, talk to people whose thinking (as opposed to expertise you trust) and make the best decision you can at warp speed.

The first approach gives you the political cover that you listened to THE experts and THE science. You can claim that you are “acting from an excess” of caution. You will be tempted to stick with this decision even in the face of adverse effects like lost years of schooling, an economy in tatters without unsustainable subsidies, a rising suicide rate etc. etc. China is sticking to its lockdown policy despite people starving in their homes. How can you not do what the experts in infectious disease said to do?

If you take the second approach and do the best job you can of balancing the recommendations of experts in diverse fields, you are in the short term more vulnerable to second guessing. You, the non-expert, made the final decision. You will have to monitor results and almost assuredly adjust policy as both the virus and the society react and mutate in unpredictable ways. Experts from different fields (sometimes in the same field) will continue to disagree. You will be blamed for every death. You will be blamed for the demise of every business which you did not deem essential. And you will have done what leaders are chosen to do, synthesized the best advice you can get, acted, observed, and modified your actions.

Gov. Scott (R -VT and the second most popular governor in the country) took mainly the second approach and Vermont avoided the worst results of the pandemic in terms of mortality and also avoided the worst effects of an “excess of caution” – our schools reopened relatively early. Trump actually took a third course at first – he tried to wish the pandemic away. But he shut down international travel early and was accused of xenophobia (of which he is guilty in general), then was accused of acting too late. Recent “expert opinion” is that shutting down travel always amounted to locking the barn door while the horse galloped down the street. Some governors like Newsome in California took the “epidemiologist” approach of very tight lockdowns; others like DeSantis in Florida kept their economies largely opened.

We saw surges of Covid first in the mainly blue states with strict measures. Before the partisan gloating was over, the virus surged in the red states. Now, although much less virulent, it’s been back strong on the coasts again. Florida’s age-adjusted death rate is a tiny bit better than that of California. Florida’s unlocked economy has fared better.

The danger is that we see all this through partisan lenses and don’t learn the lesson we need for the next emergency. There is no simple “the science” according to which a leader can govern. There is no one type of expert who can make overall policy from the narrow perch of his or her expertise (sorry, Dr. Fauci). We must do our best to elect competent, calm people to executive positions and hope that they encourage a clash of expertise and opinion before making decisions, then monitor the results and change course as often as necessary.

The author, an author, entrepreneur, former Vermont state cabinet officer, lives in Stowe. He founded NG Advantage, a natural gas truck delivery company. This commentary is republished with permission from his blog, Fractals of Change.

Categories: Commentary

Tagged as:

6 replies »

  1. I am going to quote the author and take exception to his words:

    Gov. Scott (R -VT and the second most popular governor in the country) took mainly the second approach< he is not the most popular, though he is in the top five apparently, and he did not take the second approach, rather he promoted Big Harma heavily and coerced Vermonters, manipulated them with both fear and guilt, rather than uphold the constitution.

    Trump did not try to 'wish the pandemic away". I don't know where this idea came from. The writer is simply looking to denigrate with barely an iota of fact. How much does the writer know about the origins and planning of the 'pandemic'. Perhaps a perusal of Dr David Martin's work exposing the patent parade pre pandemic and others is a worthy use of time for your shallow understanding of the true forces at play here.

    Scott trespassed on our constitution, and ignored early treatments that would have saved lives. He would have nothing except what Big Harm had to offer, and the harms of that are still rolling in.

    The facts are that the PCR test is and was a fraud leading to fraudulent cases, Trump did amazing things for this country, stood up to china, began to restore manufacturing, got off of foreign oil, while the damage of fracking cannot be overstated, the damage of war for oil cannot also. He remains extremely popular, one of the most popular presidents in history.

    Hunter Biden's laptop was real, and covered up, the election theft was the real resurrection, with Nancy Pelosi responsible for the capital police and likely responsible for telling them to let the protesters in, and for coordinating with the FBI and Antifa to push them in, while many of them protested these factors.

    2000 mules.com proves the election theft. Biden is an imposter bent on ruining this country. I was once a Dem. but now I see that the conservatives actually hold the values that dems say they hold but ignore. Dems are violent, rageful, liars, antidemocratic, anti science, anti constitutional and treasonistic. At least that is MY opinion, and I know plenty of former dems and pros who share it!

    DeSantis in Florida kept their economies largely opened.

    Look at the thousands of DRs who were censored, who show the policies masking, distancing, vexing etc were unscientific and unhelpful.. It truly is disgusting to see the slathering of praise where praise does not belong.

  2. Here, here, Emily! As I was reading the article I had the same feelings you did and was going to reply similarly to what you wrote, but you beat me to it. I couldn’t have said it better or more eloquently myself.

Leave a Reply