Similarly, the mid-level budget officials who immediately saw through the plan, and were in agreement that there was insufficient evidence to justify the Immunization plan, did not in any way bother expressing their opinions. They knew what was happening but probably because of perceived lack of power to change or because of a sense of futility, their participation in the issue was limited to mere awareness and analysis of the events, without the slightest urge to voice out what would have been the more logical opinion.
The participants in this case are variegated but what can be said about their way of handling the case is the same. The death of the athlete happened at the most opportune moment—near the elections, when everybody seemed to be concentrated on the ramifications of every decision on one’s political ambition. As a result, although the supposed issue which is the proper way of dealing with an unconfirmed threat appeared to be taken very seriously, in actuality, it has been set aside, if not forgotten, to give way to the demands of politics.
The major issue that deserved more attention became a mere tool that was misused to effectuate that which is supposed to be a mere incidental result. In other words, the actuations of the participants in the case were motivated by self-serving interests instead of the desire to put an end to an issue that involves the lives and the economic conditions of the people.
Given the power to alter the results, I, instead of spending so much time in argumentation, and instead of focusing on the ramifications of my decision on public opinion would have spent money and energy on 1) investigating the real cause of death of the only casualty in this case; 2) determining whether there really was evidence to justify the necessity of a national immunization program. In the first case, until the end of the case, the real cause of death of the athlete is still uncertain.
What was known was the mere fact that he had a flu on the day of his death. This however, does not prove causality. As said in the report, the athlete did not heed his coach’s advise to rest until his condition has totally improved. This is aside from the fact that there were reports of the athlete using steroids, which as is generally known, could cause heart failure. If in case it could be shown that the real cause of death was not the flu, then the only ground that supported the nationwide immunization program is removed and no more debates would be necessary.
If on the other hand the fact of death could be traced exactly only to the flu, the national program would still have to be justified by the real existence and not mere supposition of a threat of a pandemic. After all, no other casualty has been reported since the first. Meaning, the virus may have already been contained or if not, at least does not necessitate a reaction of such magnitude. This would have saved everyone the time, the energy and the dollars.
Reference
Facing the Threat of a Pandemic: a Multi-dimensional Case Study. (n. d. )