In Japan, starting from May 8th, 2023, the classification of COVID-19 as a Category 5 infectious disease means that the administrative response will shift to “no guard” status. However, this does not necessarily mean that the underlying situation has improved.
The Evolution of the Virus
Ultimately, the coronavirus has fully entrenched itself worldwide, remaining an infectious disease that results in death in a certain percentage of cases. In the early stages of 2020, there was hope that the new virus would weaken over time due to mutation, but this claim quickly faded, and deaths continue to occur to this day.
This was somewhat predictable, as biases towards weakening are less likely to occur in viruses that do not cause their hosts to die quickly, such as Ebola. COVID-19 had the ability to spread at the fastest pace in history from the outset, so it is believed that it was flat in terms of toxicity mutation.
Rather, diseases that were initially non-life-threatening in children in 2020 have now mutated into diseases that can also result in child deaths, and it appears to have become somewhat more toxic. One conclusion is that the simple view of strong and weak was powerless.
Another concern is that many people have completely forgotten the logic that “the virus has not weakened” and mistakenly believe that the danger has disappeared.
Vaccines were effective, but not permanent
Vaccinations have been effective in preventing severe illness that leads to death. However, the establishment of a global pandemic has created a foundation for mutations, and the effectiveness of vaccines has become limited. There is also a limit due to the natural decrease in antibodies.
The game of cat and mouse between the virus and vaccines will be advantageous to the virus. There is no knowledge of the need for continuous vaccination. It was appropriate for the WHO to issue warning messages about repeated vaccinations.
Personally, I believe that I have received the booster for a single antibody within the known range, and I stopped after the second shot, considering the pressure on public finances. Even if another round of pandemic occurs in the future, it may be impossible to assume vaccinations as a premise.
Infection routes are still unknown
The transmission route is still unknown While the variations of the coronavirus gene have been closely tracked, there is still no conclusion on the most probable model for the transmission route. Three years have passed, but the rationale for the forced closure of restaurants and the effectiveness of the masks distributed by Prime Minister Abe are still unclear.
Considering that it is not understood, after three years, it is speculated that contact with aerosols is a likely route of transmission. For example, if some people with greasy exhalations spread the virus encapsulated, the infection model becomes an uneven channel.
Although infection can occur just by being on public transportation such as buses and trains, it is impossible to distinguish whether or not there are such super-spreaders in these situations.
Although masks have little effect in preventing infections, they can reduce the amount of droplets released by spreaders. Therefore, there is a possibility that infections will visibly increase through public transportation in the future.
Concerns about brain fog
Currently, the definitive effects of “Long COVID” sequelae are not known, but many reports indicate that COVID is not a disease of illness and cure, but rather transitions into a latent symbiotic state after infection.
Symptoms that interfere with daily life also exist, and from an individual’s perspective, the impact of infection cannot be predicted. In addition, brain fog, which affects the brain, is recognized as a symptom, and there is a sense that it is already affecting business activities.
From the perspective of a company’s going concern, the need for thorough activity evaluation and personnel replacement is increasing. However, if the top executives of a company experience brain fog, it is difficult to imagine a smooth change of personnel.
The Inconvenient Truth About Air Travel
The theory that the coronavirus may have been a biological weapon is still being discussed and investigated, but regardless of its origins, the reason for the pandemic is globalization. Air travel in particular has played a major role in its spread.
In Japan, the luxury cruise ship Diamond Princess was kept isolated at sea in the early stages of the outbreak, but even with strict quarantine measures in place, it was impossible to prevent the virus from spreading. With the prevalence of air travel, it is natural that many people no longer have the opportunity to travel by ship.
In the future, air travel will likely remain the most efficient way to transport new viruses around the world. From takeoff to landing, passengers are packed into a closed, sealed space, allowing the virus to replicate and spread effectively through transit.
COVID-19 has been a wake-up call that “pandemics are not tolerable”. In order to effectively control pandemics, security holes in the air travel system must be addressed.
The problem may have arisen from an excessive focus on speed, and additional slowdowns, such as 24-hour quarantine measures, may need to be implemented.
Incorporating robustness may be lost
Like air travel, companies have been slow to adopt remote work policies. Despite regulations being relaxed, there is a trend to return to physical offices. In the United States, technology companies are increasingly mandating employees to return to the office, and dysfunction in remote work is a common occurrence.
The productivity of remote work varies depending on individual circumstances. There may be cases where companies that strictly measure performance have found that remote work has reduced output, while others may have benefited from reduced rental costs by vacating office space.
What can be said across the board is that remote work is an option for risk management, but it is not necessarily the most productive. In relation to the pandemic, remote work can increase the option of business continuity by avoiding infection through public transportation and office spaces.
Now that regulatory restrictions have been lifted, risks are likely to increase. As the responsibility for ensuring robustness shifts to individuals, there is a need for individuals to design their own risk management strategies.
