There are plenty of viruses that kill, so why are we declaring total war on this one?

I work for the military, an institution that has historically privileged traditional state-based threats such as wars. Recently, the discourse of war – risk and strategy, combat and campaign – has effectively been usurped by health-care professionals and governments. Health threats, whether grave or minor, global or local, have been “securitized,” with their potentially destabilizing effects magnified by the media. In September, The Globe and Mail published a series of alarming articles on the risk of increased sodium intake in Canadian diets, suggesting that “urgent action” was needed to “combat” the problem. And now it is with fascination and horror that I have been following coverage of the H1N1 pandemic, which has increasingly side-lined common sense in favour of fear and sensationalism.

It is extremely tragic that healthy and vulnerable Canadians alike have lost their lives because of H1N1, and I do not want to make light of this unfortunate fact. At the same time, this has been true of regular, run-of-the-mill seasonal influenza for decades. Tuberculosis, malaria, and AIDS have killed millions in the developing world in the last century, and continue to do so, year after year. I sincerely wish more front page ink was devoted to these deaths and the underlying social, economic, and political instability they generate. So forgive me for thinking that until there is new information about an imminent and dangerous mutation in the H1N1 virus, it’s time to adjust perspective, tone down the hysteria, and ask some tough questions.

As a parent, I have been told repeatedly since September that I should not send my daughter to school if she is ill or has a fever. But when was this ever a good idea? We have also been told that we should all wash our hands regularly and thoroughly with hot water and soap. Excuse me? This preventative measure has been recommended since the germ theory of medicine was firmly established.

I refuse to participate in the panic, and for the moment am boycotting hand sanitizer and the socially-sanctioned enrichment of their manufacturers. I’ll continue to wash my hands aggressively and often – which, by the way, I have always done, and have taught my daughter to do as well.

As a citizen, I don’t want to be either encouraged or discouraged from standing in line for a vaccination for hours because my views correspond with those of my favourite celebrity. And please don’t infantilize my judgment by telling me that H1N1 is “new … different, and it spreads quickly” as the full-page advertisements published this past weekend in newspapers by the Ontario government did. Tell me the facts instead and allow me to weigh the medical risks involved versus the benefits conferred.

As an academic, it is with the gentlest irony that I must remind the public health planners of the “campaign” against H1N1 of a few things about military engagements. In military campaigns throughout history, strategic and operational plans usually haven't survived first contact with the "enemy." Second and third-order effects of battle are often more costly and unpredictable than the original casus belli. The production processes required for the smooth conduct of war have to be carefully planned, with as little interruption in the chain of supply and demand as possible (attention: GlaxoSmithKine!). And finally, the public, especially in a democracy, will punish you for an increasing death count, which can and will be interpreted as mission failure.