On November 26, 2021, the WHO alerted the world to Omicron, a Sars-CoV-2 variant that has since changed the way we view the pandemic. This fast-spreading virus comes along with dozens of mutations and now accounts for around 58% of the country’s reported Covid-19 cases. The bewildering speed at which Omicron has spread has left researchers worldwide racing to better understand its global trajectory.
Perhaps the most identifying aspect of Omicron is it’s transmissibility. Omicron is two to three times as likely to spread as Delta, and 3.2 times as likely to cause a household infection as Delta was. This data simply represents the virus’s ability to replicate within human cells, as well as to move between people.“It depends on all sorts of biological processes,” explains Jeffrey Shaman, an infectious disease modeler at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health during an interview for the Scientific American. “Does it bind more easily to receptors in people’s lungs? Do you shed it more efficiently and spew more of it out so you can infect more people?”
Something else that defines Omicron is its ability to evade human immune systems. A study, conducted by researchers at University of Copenhagen, Statistics Denmark and Statens Serum Institut (SSI), suggests the virus is mainly spreading more rapidly because it is better at evading immunity obtained from vaccines. “Our findings confirm that the rapid spread of the Omicron (variant) primarily can be ascribed to the immune evasiveness rather than an inherent increase in the basic transmissibility,” the researchers said.
It is important to note that, while more transmissible, the study also found that Omicron seemed to induce less serious disease. SSI’s technical director, Tyra Grove Krause, reported to local media that “While Omicron will still be able to put pressure on our healthcare system, everything indicates that it is milder than the Delta variant”. These findings echo data by the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), which showed an individual with Omicron was estimated to be between 31% and 45% less likely to attend hospital compared to someone with Delta, and 50 to 70% less likely to be admitted.
While more research is being developed on this dizzying variant, the top three Omicron variant symptoms to look out for are a runny nose, stuffy nose, and sore throat. These symptoms are different from traditional Covid-19 symptoms, which include cough, fatigue, and congestion. On the optimistic side, as we learned earlier on in the pandemic, behavior can curb transmission, if not completely stopping it. Things like social distancing, wearing a N95 mask properly, and getting vaccinated still can make a difference.
However, they are more players to this startling story than may have been originally understood. The field of journalism brings into account the ethical question: What is the ethical responsibility of science reporters when discussing something like the COVID-19 pandemic? In this argument, we will need to think about setting aside political biases and viewpoints and only reporting true information .Journalism involves two-headed problems, as it is fueled by money, political connections/associations, payments of money to get favors, and a desire to attract a target audience. It may be having to do with right and wrong, allowing r news outlets to withhold incomplete information if the net damage of possible confusion is assumed to go beyond that of delaying the release of information. Newspapers, websites, and TV provides a role to the public by reporting an explanation/statement of opinions of the operation of government and the views and alternate policies. These activities depend on access to information, therefore newspapers, websites, and TV outlets could work with the government related to when to make this available to the public. The risks created by the spreading around of some announcements could give a good reason for the hiding of the information. The government could work together with media outlets to control the announcing and teaching of important public health information. Scientific data is often very confusing to ordinary people, and, as a result, easily misinterpreted. Therefore, scientific media outlets are having to do with right and wrong obligated to describe and gloss information for public spreading around.
However, it is the duty of professional writers/news outlets to report all information. To make something as small as possible judging things based on opinions and preferences instead of facts, all the facts can be presented and the public can choose to understand that in the way they choose.
According to a deontological solid basic structure on which bigger things can be built, government restrictions on the release of information by independent media outlets are having to do with right and wrong not allowed because the freedom of the press is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Also, who would decide how to withhold the information? This does something important that will serve as a guide for the future that could lead to too much censorship.
- Sriya Tallapragada ’25
Recent Comments