On Covid-19
Vikram Patel's "India’s Tryst With Covid-19" (17 April 2020) is an excellent and incisive article. Its analysis should guide our policy discourse and action.
In spite of agreeing with Vikram Patel on his basic analysis, it is obvious that these wishful and positive suggestions are not easy to translate into implementation. If anyone knows Dharavi, he or she would not use the Kerala model or any other model as it is.
I work with the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation and the Government of Maharashtra as a Technical Advisor and know the ground realities.
Where were Vikram Patel’s recommendations when India was struggling with insufficient data to make major decisions? This was a situation where the government would be damned if they did and damned if they didn’t!
Why can’t you find more constructive articles to publish?
It is a very long but detailed comprehensive comment which makes sense. It should be forwarded to the prime minister and all those who formulate policy.
It is valid that herd immunity and a vaccine are the ultimate solutions. The point is: do you want this to happen at the cost of losing precious lives?
It is a multipronged approach that controls this dreaded disease. Lockdown is the first step to prevent contact.
I agree with Anup Agarwal and Yogesh Jain ("India Cannot Fight Coronavirus Without Taking Into Account its Class and Caste Divisions", 3 April 2020) that the coronavirus-induced crisis management in India has distinct social dimensions.
The metaphor of war being used to create awareness has the danger of giving birth to a new paradigm of authoritarian public-health management.
It would be far more productive and useful if authors like Thomas Abraham ("Covid-19 in India", 3 April 2020) use their experience and knowledge to advise on future course of action, so as to inform a wider dialogue, or even better, guide public policy.
A solution-based, constructive approach is the dire need of the hour, not convenient hindsight criticism.