Why I Don’t Follow COVID-19 Research
As a microbiology and immunology student interested in infectious diseases COVID-19 research sounds like something that should be of interest to me. This is why it is not.
At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, when outbreaks were largely isolated to China, Iran, Italy, and a few other countries, coronavirus research started seeping into my immunology and microbiology coursework. Suddenly many student presentations, guest lectures, and entire exams focused on COVID-19.
The overwhelming feelings I and many others experienced while watching the news or checking our Twitter feeds had now entered my classroom. While it might seem like a novel infectious outbreak might be something of interest to me, I felt the complete opposite. I began to feel helpless. My friends and family began to ask me questions, like how it differed from the normal flu, how at risk they really were, if a certain activity was safe or not. The answer to most of these questions was that I really did not know. Science itself did not fully know.
As answers to these questions began to be researched and published, this overwhelming feeling did not go away. Many journals are allowing free access to COVID-19 articles, making scientific research more accessible than ever. Yet reports are constantly being published, providing conflicting advice, making everything that much more confusing. The rush to publish articles about COVID-19 meant that many research articles skipped the peer review process or are published as pre-prints, meaning they have not yet been peer-reviewed.
A prime example of misinformation within published work comes from a now-retracted Lancet article. The study, which relied on a data set from Surgisphere Corporation analyzed the effect of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine is an anti-malarial drug but has been adopted for a variety of other purposes.
The paper found the treatment of COVID-19 with hydroxychloroquine was associated with increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmia, or an abnormal heartbeat, and survival. It was later retracted by the Lancet, as questions regarding the validity of the data set were called into question. This false data caused various health organizations, including the World Health Organization, to halt hydroxychloroquine research. This means that legitimate research on a potentially life-saving drug was halted due to analysis on a flawed data set.
This is not to say that all COVID-19 research is bad or flawed. The opposite is likely true. However, in the midst of such an epidemic, conflicting evidence and research that shows detrimental results of various treatments is something that causes me more stress than comfort.
As someone who finds comfort in the knowledge, this newfound bliss derived from ignorance is strange to me. It mostly stems from my helplessness. When I am sick and look up research on my illness, that information can help me. I can make lifestyle or dietary changes that are said to benefit my condition. I can be knowledgeable on treatments recommended by my doctor, and make active decisions in my own healthcare. Yet in the case of COVID-19, knowing more will not make me better able to protect myself and my family. I already know and practice social distancing to the best of my abilities. Knowing more will not reinstate certain events that were important to me, such as my graduation and an undergraduate conference I was set to speak at. Knowing more will only heighten my anxiety, my confusion, and helplessness.
Maybe when the pandemic is over, I will find COVID-19 research fascinating, as I do for previous pandemics. But for now, I blissfully avoid all scientific literature on the topic.
