As the COVID-19 pandemic shuts down the world’s economies, stock markets plummet and unemployment rises, policymakers will be forced to figure out how to contain the outbreak while preventing financial and economic collapse. Most economic proposals in developed countries focus on cash payments to people, deferred tax payments and business bailouts.
However, biomedicine is critical to saving the economy, and of the three major biomedical channels now in play, the least important medically is the one that could impede an economic Armageddon.
It is a test to check whether a person has had, recovered from and thus become immune to COVID-19. Scientists say that low-symptom and symptomless cases exceed the symptomatic. When these asymptomatic people are over the infection, they could go to work — they will not infect those with whom they come into contact. But we need to know who they are.
Imagine that we could test the low-symptom and no-symptom cases for immunity today. This is not the widely discussed (and still not widely available) test for the illness itself. That test shows whether the virus is in one’s system, not whether it came, went and conferred immunity. Testing those who have been exposed, recovered and are healthy could allow them to return to work and reopen businesses and institutions.
Initial public discussion of immunity testing — which is sparse — has focused on how understanding COVID-19 immunity could lead to a vaccine or antiviral to treat the sick, and could tell us how widely the virus has spread.
However, a major and immediate economic use of an immunity test is that it can be deployed before we have a cure or a treatment. Initial research suggests that, as with other viral diseases, recovery from COVID-19 does indeed lead to post-illness immunity. This still needs to be fully confirmed — and, equally important, confirmed to be long-lasting. Such testing is now possible and, with a push, could be widely available.
That push could be well worth the effort, especially if the virus spreads. The public health focus is on developing therapeutic drugs and a vaccine as soon as possible.
However, no widely available vaccine is expected to be available for 12 to 18 months — far longer than the world’s economies can stay shut down.
Likewise, antivirals to treat the disease will save lives and must be a priority, but the strength of their impact on the economy is uncertain. People will still get sick. Moreover, effective antivirals are expected to come in months, maybe many months, not weeks. The economy cannot wait that long.
Consider how an immunity test could be used today. My wife and I had a cold for a day last week: a light, dry cough and a little congestion. Was it a mild form of COVID-19, which our immune systems fought off without serious symptoms? Probably not, but maybe it was — and maybe we are now immune. If an immunity test were available, we would check, and if we were immune, we would go out and back to the office. However, because we do not know, we are still staying home.
I am not an epidemiologist, although an epidemiologist at my university has raised similar possibilities. Much about COVID-19 is uncertain in public discourse and, so it seems, in experts’ knowledge. For example, the economic value of the immunity test depends on how many people get the virus without being symptomatic and on the overall level of infection in the coming months, neither of which we know now with any precision.
An immunity test would have to be easy to use, because it is the asymptomatic who would have to use it. Presumably, some of the first users would be businesses that would have to close unless they could be staffed with a handful of immune employees.
Perversely, the worse the public-health situation is, the higher the economic value of the immunity test. If more people are infected, the economy is more disrupted, and the number of symptomless patients who need not stay home rises as well.
That might be a path to a low-casualty means of minimizing the pandemic’s economic: those who have recovered resume their normal routine. The numbers will increase sharply, according to some projections. The problem is finding out who they are.
An immunity test could tell us who does not need to be taken out of economic circulation, and using it well could start our economic recovery as early as next month — or impede a further decline. And if the uncertainties are overcome, it could proceed while the more complete biomedical efforts — to develop antivirals and a vaccine — percolate toward a solution in laboratories around the world.
Mark Roe is a professor at Harvard Law School. He is the author of studies of the impact of politics on corporate organization and corporate governance in the US and around the world.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS