logo
Five Years On, Ghosts of a Pandemic We Didn't Imagine Still Haunt Us

Five Years On, Ghosts of a Pandemic We Didn't Imagine Still Haunt Us

New York Times15-03-2025

Five years later, the everyday has returned to the pleasant New Jersey town of Maplewood. About the only visible trace of what was endured is the urgent plea that still adorns the caution-yellow marquee of the old movie theater.
There for the last five years, ever since the theater closed at the dawn of the dread, it says: STAY HEALTHY.
The letter L is tipped slightly, like someone staggered by a blow. That letter L might as well be us, upright but still staggering from a pandemic that killed more than seven million people worldwide, including 1.2 million in the Maplewoods and metropolises of America.
Time's passage has granted the illusion of distance. The veils of protection have dropped from faces, and crowds are once again bellying up to the bar, their conversations carrying echoes of what was being talked about at the start of 2020, as if the last five years had been excised from the calendar.
But then something noticed, something heard, unearths something buried. A message on a closed movie theater's marquee. A face mask shoved in a drawer. A silhouette of footprints on a subway platform.
The strains of a familiar John Prine song, maybe 'Angel From Montgomery,' which at first makes you smile because you love all things Prine, but then you remember that he died in 2020 of complications from Covid, and before the next chord plays your mind is back in that dystopian time.
The collective impulse to compartmentalize and forget has kicked in before. The flu pandemic of 1918 to 1920 infected nearly a fifth of the American population, yet an early chronicling of the 1920s that is now considered a classic of its kind — 'Only Yesterday,' written by the journalist Frederick Lewis Allen and published in 1931 — made only passing mention of the Great Influenza: just three dozen words for a national disaster that killed anywhere from a half-million to 850,000 people.
A century later, that impulse to suppress has returned, muddling our sense of time. The coronavirus pandemic can seem so safely submerged in the past that we sometimes have to stop and ask ourselves: Did that really happen?
It did.
Five years ago this month, the World Health Organization declared a pandemic, the federal government declared a national emergency — and the United States all but lurched to a halt. Schools, offices, stores and places of worship closed, and sheltering in place, a concept antithetical to community, became an unnatural way of life.
There was at first something sci-fi unreal about the coronavirus — an invisible enemy whose means of contagion remained mysterious. But then came the reality of death, by the thousands, the tens of thousands: so many that hospitals and funeral homes could not keep up; so many that bodies were stacked almost like cordwood in refrigerated trucks.
The pandemic disrupted the ancient and sacred rituals of mourning, denying many the primal need to say goodbye. Unable to gather, we could not recite prayers together, or share comforting hugs or even toss a parting rose upon on a casket. We watched the burials of our loved ones from a distance, often in the cocoon of cars.
Remember?
As scientists raced to develop a vaccine, we lived in the uncertain, even the absurd, as government officials under pressure struggled to land upon the best course of action. Amid this life-and-death confusion, we slathered our hands with sanitizer whenever we touched a doorknob. We stood in line to walk like zombies through the disquieting stillness of supermarkets. We cotton-swabbed our noses while sitting in our cars, shoved the packed-up sample through a pharmacy's drive-up window — and waited to see if the touch of that doorknob, or the walk through that supermarket, had risked our lives.
Nearly a year into the madness, a vaccine became widely available, and most of us, though not all, grasped how vaccinations would stem the contagion and save lives. New terms joined the Covid vernacular. In addition to waves and surges and hot spots, we had the three witches of variants: Alpha, Delta and Omicron. We asked one another a single question — Are you Pfizer or Moderna? — as we fretted whether we'd chosen the most efficacious vaccine.
Finally, in April 2023, President Joseph R. Biden Jr. signed into law a resolution to end the coronavirus national emergency declared three years earlier. The pandemic storm, it seemed, was behind us now.
Nonsense. We continue to live in its wake.
The repercussions of Covid extend beyond the hundreds of people it still kills a week, beyond the many who still suffer from long Covid, beyond the ghostly restaurants and storefronts that could not withstand the sudden and sustained plummet in business.
A cohort of adolescents and young adults missed out on the learning that occurs in and out of the classroom: the labs and proms and presentations and graduations. At the same time, many of their parents continue to work from the isolation of their homes, a virtual-first experience that frees up time at the expense of any creativity sparks from face-to-face contact.
The pandemic turned us against one another. Were we pro-mask or anti-mask? Pro- or anti-vaccination? Did we believe in the sanctity of individual rights or in suspending certain freedoms for the communal good?
The anger spurred by masks and other Covid-related rules and requirements helped to further fuel a distrust of government: a distrust embraced by those now in government. Vaccinations for the coronavirus recently saved millions of lives in this country, and yet the new head of the Department of Health and Human Services — the federal agency created to protect the health of the American public — has long been hostile to this tried-and-true method of immunization.
At times it seems the collective impulse to suppress has worked too well. As though we never heard the hum of those refrigerated trucks. As though we have forgotten just how vulnerable we were, and are.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump White House: Jill Biden should speak up about Joe Biden's mental health
Trump White House: Jill Biden should speak up about Joe Biden's mental health

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump White House: Jill Biden should speak up about Joe Biden's mental health

President Donald Trump's top spokesperson called for former first lady Jill Biden to speak up about former President Joe Biden's alleged mental decline, saying she conspired to keep her husband's health from the American people. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt's comment on May 29 - that Jill Biden should address 'when she saw and what she knew" - came in response to a reporter's question on whether the former first lady should testify to Congress about the former Democratic president's health. 'I think anybody looking again at the videos and photo evidence of Joe Biden with your own eyes and a little bit of common sense can see that this was a clear coverup,' Leavitt responded. 'And Jill Biden was certainly complicit in that coverup.' More: Robert Hur defends characterization of Biden's memory in testimony to Congress: Recap Aides close to President Biden and his wife did not immediately respond to requests for comment about the growing calls from the Trump White House. The 82-year old Democrat announced last week that he'd been diagnosed with an 'aggressive' Stage 4 prostate cancer. Questions around the president's mental capacity reached a fevered pitch when former Special Counsel Robert Hur released a report in early 2024 about Biden mishandling classified documents after his time as vice president concluded in the Obama White House. Hur concluded that a potential criminal jury would find Biden to be a 'sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory." Biden's performance during a June presidential debate with then-Republican nominee Donald Trump also raised questions about the Democrats' well-being, and he ultimately dropped out of the White House race in deference to then-Vice President Kamala Harris. The Trump White House's focus on Biden echoes criticism from House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer. The Kentucky Republican has asked several high-ranking Biden administration officials and his physician, Dr. Kevin O'Connor, to appear for transcribed interviews to 'uncover the truth' about Biden's "mental decline and potential unauthorized use of an autopen for sweeping pardons and other executive actions. Letters seeking testimony have been sent to staffers including former senior adviser to the first lady Anthony Bernal, former Domestic Policy Council Director Neera Tanden and former deputy chief of staff Annie Tomasini. Comer said during the last Congress that the Biden White House obstructed his committee's investigation into the president's mental capacity and refused to make aides available for depositions or interviews. 'The American people demand transparency and accountability now,' Comer said in a statement. According to a new book, Original Sin, written by CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios's Alex Thompson, one person familiar with workings of the administration said Biden was only one of five people running the country. During her May 29 briefing at the White House, Leavitt claimed there was documentary evidence showing Jill Biden was shielding her husband from public scrutiny. 'She's still lying to the American people. She still thinks the American public are so stupid that they're going to believe her lies," said Leavitt. "And frankly, it's insulting, and she needs to answer for it.' (This story was updated because an earlier version included an inaccuracy) This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Leavitt blasts Jill Biden over husband's health 'coverup'

Joe Biden 'optimistic' about treatment plan for Stage 4 prostate cancer
Joe Biden 'optimistic' about treatment plan for Stage 4 prostate cancer

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Joe Biden 'optimistic' about treatment plan for Stage 4 prostate cancer

Former President Joe Biden said on May 30 that he is 'optimistic' about the treatment plan for his Stage 4 prostate cancer, which involves taking a daily pill for six weeks. "We're underway and all the folks are very optimistic," Biden said. 'The expectation is we're going to be able to beat this. It's not in any (other) organ. My bones are strong, it hasn't penetrated. So I'm feeling good.' More: Biden urges Americans to support veterans on anniversary of son Beau's death Doctors found a 'small nodule' on Biden's prostate during a routine exam; the 82-year-old was diagnosed Friday, May 16, according to a statement released by his office. Speaking to reporters at a Delaware Memorial Day event for the first time since announcing his diagnosis, Biden said that he is being treated by a top doctor in the field. Biden's physician has lived through the same aggressive form of cancer as the former president. 'We're all optimistic about the diagnosis. Matter of fact, one of the leading surgeons in the world is working with me and he was diagnosed with the same exact thing 32 years ago,' Biden said. 'He's alive and well, doing very well.' Biden spoke with reporters as he left the annual Memorial Day event at Veterans Memorial Park in New Castle, Delaware, which coincided with the 10th anniversary of his son Beau Biden's death. It was also the first time Biden spoke to reporters since a book was published raising questions about his physical and mental fitness while he was president. A White House spokeswoman alleged Thursday that former first lady Jill Biden conspired to keep her husband's health from the American people. When asked to respond, Biden, who had just given a 10-minute speech and walked over to the throng of reporters, joked, "You can see that I'm mentally incompetent and I can't walk." This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Joe Biden 'optimistic' about cancer treatment, doctor, meds

California petitions FDA to undo RFK Jr.'s new limits on abortion pill mifepristone
California petitions FDA to undo RFK Jr.'s new limits on abortion pill mifepristone

Yahoo

time34 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

California petitions FDA to undo RFK Jr.'s new limits on abortion pill mifepristone

California and three other states petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Thursday to ease its new restrictions on the abortion pill mifepristone, citing the drug's proven safety record and arguing the new limits are unnecessary. "The medication is a lifeline for millions of women who need access to time-sensitive, critical healthcare — especially low-income women and those who live in rural and underserved areas," said California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, who filed the petition alongside the attorneys general of Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey. The petition cites Senate testimony by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. last month, in which Kennedy said he had ordered FDA administrator Martin Makary to conduct a "complete review" of mifepristone and its labeling requirements. The drug, which can be received by mail, has been on the U.S. market for 25 years and taken safely by millions of Americans, according to experts. It is the most common method of terminating a pregnancy in the U.S., with its use surging after the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade in 2022. The Supreme Court upheld access to the drug for early pregnancies under previous FDA regulations last year, but it has remained a target of anti-abortion conservatives. The Trump administration has given Kennedy broad rein to shake up American medicine under his "Make America Healthy Again" banner, and Kennedy has swiftly rankled medical experts by using dubious science — and even fake citations — to question vaccine regimens and research and other longstanding public health measures. Read more: Hiltzik: MAHA report's misrepresentations will harm public health and hit consumers' pocketbooks At the Senate hearing, Kennedy cited "new data" from a flawed report pushed by anti-abortion groups — and not published in any peer-reviewed journal — to question the safety of mifepristone, calling the report "alarming." "Clearly, it indicates that, at very least, the label should be changed," Kennedy said. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) on Monday posted a letter from Makary to X, in which Makary wrote that he was "committed to conducting a review of mifepristone" alongside "the professional career scientists" at the FDA. Makary said he could not provide additional information given ongoing litigation around the drug. The states, in their 54-page petition, wrote that "no new scientific data has emerged since the FDA's last regulatory actions that would alter the conclusion that mifepristone remains exceptionally safe and effective," and that studies "that have frequently been cited to undermine mifepristone's extensive safety record have been widely criticized, retracted, or both." Democrats have derided Kennedy's efforts to reclassify mifepristone as politically motivated and baseless. "This is yet another attack on women's reproductive freedom and scientifically-reviewed health care," Gov. Gavin Newsom said the day after Kennedy's Senate testimony. "California will continue to protect every person's right to make their own medical decisions and help ensure that Mifepristone is available to those who need it." Bonta said Thursday that mifepristone's placement under the FDA's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy program for drugs with known, serious side effects — or REMS — was "medically unjustified," unduly burdened patient access and placed "undue strain on the nation's entire health system." He said mifepristone "allows people to get reproductive care as early as possible when it is safest, least expensive, and least invasive," is "so safe that it presents lower risks of serious complications than taking Tylenol," and that its long safety record "is backed by science and cannot be erased at the whim of the Trump Administration." Read more: Q&A: The FDA says the abortion pill mifepristone is safe. Here's the evidence The FDA has previously said that fewer than 0.5% of women who take the drug experience 'serious adverse reactions,' and deaths are exceedingly rare. The REMS program requires prescribers to add their names to national and local abortion provider lists, which can be a deterrent for doctors given safety threats, and pharmacies to comply with complex tracking, shipping and reporting requirements, which can be a deterrent to carrying the drug, Bonta said. It also requires patients to sign forms in which they attest to wanting to "end [their] pregnancy," which Bonta said can be a deterrent for women using the drug after a miscarriage — one of its common uses — or for those in states pursuing criminal penalties for women seeking certain abortion care. Under federal law, REMS requirements must address a specific risk posed by a drug and cannot be "unduly burdensome" on patients, and the new application to mifepristone "fails to meet that standard," Bonta said. The states' petition is not a lawsuit, but a regulatory request for the FDA to reverse course, the states said. If the FDA will not do so nationwide, the four petitioning states asked that it "exercise its discretion to not enforce the requirements" in their states, which Bonta's office said already have "robust state laws that ensure safe prescribing, rigorous informed consent, and professional accountability." Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store