RESUMEN

Many policies were put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States to manage the negative impact of the coronavirus. Limiting severe illness and death was one important objective of these policies, but it is widely acknowledged by public health ethicists that pandemic policies needed to consider other factors. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 38 people across 17 states who participated in the state-level COVID-19 pandemic policy process, we examine how those actors recounted their engagement with four different objectives over the course of the pandemic: protecting public health with respect to COVID-19 (which we refer to as pathogen-focused disease prevention), protecting the economy, promoting the public's broader health and wellbeing, and preserving and restoring individual freedoms. We describe the different ways that pathogen-focused disease prevention was thought to have conflicted with, or to have been coherent with, the other three policy objectives over the course of the pandemic. In tracing the shifting relationships between objectives, we highlight four reasons put forward by the participants for why policy changes occurred throughout the pandemic: a change on the part of decisionmaker(s) regarding the perceived acceptability of the negative effects of a policy on one or more policy objectives; a change in the epistemic context; a change in the 'tools in the toolbox'; and a change in the public's attitudes that affected the feasibility of a policy. We conclude by considering the ethical implications of the shifting relationships that were described between objectives over the course of the pandemic.

Asunto(s)

COVID-19 , Política de Salud , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/psicología , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Pandemias , Salud Pública/ética , SARS-CoV-2 , Investigación Cualitativa

RESUMEN

The state-level COVID-19 response in the United States necessitated collaboration between governor' offices, health departments and numerous other departments and outside experts. To gain insight into how health officials and experts contributed to advising on COVID-19 policies, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 individuals with a health specialisation who were involved in COVID-19 policymaking, taking place between February and December 2022. We found two diverging understandings of the role of health officials and experts in COVID-19 policymaking: the role of 'staying in the lane' of public health in terms of the information that they collected, their advocacy for policies and their area of expertise and the role of engaging in the balancing of multiple considerations, such as public health, feasibility and competing objectives (such as the economy) in the crafting of pandemic policy. We draw on the concept of boundary-work to examine how these roles were constructed. We conclude by considering the appropriateness as well as the ethical implications of these two approaches to public health policymaking.

Asunto(s)

COVID-19 , Política de Salud , Formulación de Políticas , Salud Pública , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estados Unidos , SARS-CoV-2 , Entrevistas como Asunto , Gobierno Estatal , Pandemias

RESUMEN

Schizophrenia is often a severe and debilitating mental illness, frequently associated with impairments in social cognition that hinder individuals' abilities to relate to others and integrate effectively in society. Oxytocin has emerged as a putative therapeutic agent for treating social deficits in schizophrenia, but the mode of action remains unclear. This placebo-controlled crossover study aimed to elucidate the neural underpinnings of oxytocin administration in patients with schizophrenia. 20 patients with schizophrenia were examined using functional magnetic resonance imaging under oxytocin (40 IU) or placebo nasal spray. Participants performed a stochastically rewarded decision-making task that incorporated elements of social valence provided by different facial expressions, i.e. happy, angry and neutral. Oxytocin attenuated the normal bias in selecting the happy face accompanied by reduced activation in a network of brain regions that support mentalising, processing of facial emotion, salience, aversion, uncertainty and ambiguity in social stimuli, including amygdala, temporo-parietal junction, posterior cingulate cortex, precuneus and insula. These pro-social effects may contribute to the facilitation of social engagement and social interactions in patients with schizophrenia and warrant further investigation in future clinical trials for social cognitive impairments in schizophrenia.