@@ 0,0 1,90 @@
+---
+layout: post
+title: On Communication around COVID-19 in Denmark
+tags: [covid19, denmark]
+---
+
+Here in Denmark the official communication around regulations and
+recommendations regarding COVID-19 has generally focused on the idea that "We're
+in this together" and "Think about the potential consequences for others before
+doing anything".
+
+For example, I've seen posters recently with the line "Vær ikke den der sender
+alle hjem" (Don't be the one that sends everybody home), which echoes this idea:
+Any action you take may have unintended consequences for others, and you should
+consider this.
+
+It is understandable that the communication takes this form for a few reasons.
+For one, it's preaching a highly social attitude which is something that Danes
+are generally quite fond of (that's my opinion), but I don't think many people
+actually practice (also my opinion). It is also easier to communicate ideals
+than orders - but I don't think this approach is very effective though.
+
+In an individualistc society (which I would argue we're living in) there's
+little focus on the general "We".
+
+#### An individualistic approach
+
+What if we argued from a point of selfishness? You should consider before you go
+out: You are exposing yourself to some extra risk and is it worth it? Do you
+_need_ to out? Do you want to accept the extra risk to yourself?
+
+The fact is that by staying home, you're not only reducing the risk to others
+but also to yourself. The more you shelter yourself, the less likely it is that
+you will contract the virus. I don't think it's unreasonable to talk about the
+risk to Yourself and Others, instead of just Others.
+
+#### Honesty and transparency
+
+There is a risk that this line of argument and communication would reduce to
+fear-mongering. This is another aspect of the communication I think the Danish
+government is doing poorly.
+
+I recently wanted to ask the question: "From time of infection, how soon can a
+COVID-19 test show positive?". This seems like an obvious question and one I
+thought would be addressed on the official Danish page on COVID-19
+[^covid-smitte]. It's not though. I ended up calling two different hotlines and
+being redirected once, before being told to write an e-mail to the Danish health
+authorities (which I did and two weeks later there's still no reply).
+
+(FYI there are generally two types of tests: A faster one that can only show if
+you carry the virus now, and another one that can show if you were infected
+because you have antibodies.)
+
+The answer seems to be that it's not really known. Some people say it's around
+24 hours after infection, others say after around four days. The honest answer
+would appear to be "we don't know". Which is fine by me, I just wish they would
+_address_ the damn question! I'm perfectly fine with being told that some things
+are unknown instead of completely omitting the question so I cannot even be told
+that we don't know.
+
+The point I want to make is that I want the health authorities to be honest and
+transparent about what is known and what is _not_ known.
+
+There are a lot of things we don't know about COVID-19 yet. Long-term
+effects from contracting the virus are still being discovered, and it seems
+pretty clear that people react differently to it. You could even compare it to a
+bad drug trip. Most people know - especially health professionals - that not
+everyone reacts the same to a given drug. This is also true of medication (and
+that's why they carry warning labels about observed side effects). Like taking
+drugs, we don't yet fully know the consequences of contracting COVID-19 and,
+like a bad trip, that is something I would imagine most people don't want to
+find out.
+
+#### Consider those you care about (including yourself)
+
+I would say, as a yardstick for conducting yourself in a world where we are
+suddenly forced into changing our thinking around social interactions, consider
+not just Others, but Yourself and Those You Care About. It's much easier to
+connect emotionally to the thought of your frail grandfather, or a sick aunt,
+and consider how much new risk has been added to their world. Conduct yourself
+to protect them. And it should also be acceptable to think about Yourself.
+Conduct yourself to protect yourself.
+
+We're all in this together - you included.
+
+(There is a limited number of sources and references because I wrote this
+off-line.)
+
+[^covid-smitte]: [https://coronasmitte.dk](https://coronasmitte.dk)
+