I just attended a meeting on the utilization of online learning materials, as our university is about to use these to aid the continuation of our classes amid the coronavirus outbreak. For this so-called distance learning to be effective, a student will need a computer and stable internet.  

Earlier this week, the university tasked each faculty member to conduct a survey in our respective classes to assess our students’ access to virtual learning. The survey asks how many students have computers and internet access in their homes. All of my students, in 4 classes, have computers. But some of them do not have access to the internet when they go home. (READ: How Metro schools continue lessons amid coronavirus threat)

I start to wonder about other students in the country who do not have internet access, let alone computers and gadgets. What will happen to their learning when their school suspends classes? How are they going to have access to online learning materials? 

The presence of technology and digital classrooms are manifestations of a modern education system. We see that distance is being overcome. The physical presence of warm bodies is not necessary for a class to be held.  

While the presence of technology is one good story of innovation, access to them is another. This issue is rooted in the larger social problem of digital inequality. Only those who have the resources to buy gadgets and to get an internet connection in their homes are the ones who are privileged to continue their learning despite the physical distance. They are ensured that their education is not compromised at times like these.

The adjustments done by universities for continuing teaching through online resources is an impressive solution. But the situation also unearths the reality that income and social inequality breeds digital inequality. When they go back to school, the poor will have to make up for the lessons they missed, having not been able to attend the online classes. (READ: [OPINION] Let’s not forget the poor during the coronavirus pandemic)

Online classrooms, internet resources, and digital technology have been remarkable modes of closing the physical distance and making education perpetual and accessible. But we must ask, “For whom?”

Students can only go so far with their access to technology. In a world where virtual reality and digital classrooms are becoming a feature of formal education, having a personal computer and a reliable internet connection is a sure advantage. For those who do not have access, this is yet another challenge that they have to work hard to overcome.

After this pandemic, the gap between the rich and the poor will still remain. The lower classes will continue to navigate their way around the limits of their daily lives to have better access to the things they need in order to survive.

This painful reality of inequality is not just virtual. Decent food, clean water, safe shelter, quality education, affordable medicine, and secure jobs are concrete and tangible necessities. These are part of the greater gaps that we need to close if we want everyone to go the distance. – Rappler.com

Prince Kennex R. Aldama is an assistant professor of sociology at the Department of Social Sciences, UP Los Baños.

“Muoli ka?”

“Sure najud ka mouli?”

These are simple questions that have increased my anxiety in the past weeks.

I never thought, in my 28 years of existence, that I would become apprehensive about going home. I mean, who doesn't want to go home when you're an OFW? However, reading all the news on the coronavirus continuing to spread in my country – it's now even in my hometown – gave me no other option but to do the right thing.

I've been doing my best to react accordingly despite the anxiety and fear that keeps building in my head. And I tell you, it's not easy to deal with this every single day. 

With that said, I had to make the hardest decision of my life. I would not go home. Not this time.

I’ve been crying since the night I learned about the cancellation of flights to Manila. I am frustrated that I have no control of the situation. No matter how badly I want to go home, I cannot risk being a possible carrier of the virus. (READ: Metro Manila to be placed on lockdown due to coronavirus outbreak)

I'd made a promise to myself that starting this year, I would be as helpful a person as I could be to 3 people: my lola, my closest friend's dad, and my former tutee's grandfather. And this is the best thing that I can do for them at this moment.

The fact that the virus hasn't stopped spreading, and could especially kill the elderly or people who have weak immune systems, is an issue that needs to be taken seriously. What's worse is how it can affect our mental health, incuding those who won't even get infected by the virus. The virus can threaten our wellbeing, and test how we treat other people. It’s a normal reaction to panic, but it is not necessary to be selfish in this situation. (READ: [OPINION] Notes from a supermarket on the last day of freedom)

I do have high hopes that most of us will help one another by obeying the protocols given by professionals and the government. They may not be easy to follow, but they are doable. Despite the panic and fear that we are feeling right now, the best solution to the problem is to be the solution and always do the right thing. And I hope we will continue to practice washing our hands, keeping hydrated, and basically having a healthy and balanced lifestyle even if the outbreak is over. 

And even if this year didn’t start well, remember that as long as the sun still rises and sets for us, there is still hope. It will be over. Let us be patient together and encourage one another. 

If you have OFW friends and family who are having a hard time understanding the situation, please do check on them by sending a message or calling. It’s the best way to comfort them during this time.

My heart goes out to all my kababayans abroad, and my friends who had also planned to go home this summer. It's not easy to seek comfort by yourself, to need a warm hug when your loved ones are away. Know that you are not alone. I understand how you feel.

And to those who are currently in the Philippines during the quarantine, I may not know how it feels like to be isolated because of the virus, but please don't feel so bad about it. Hang in there a little longer. Things will get better. Let’s continue to believe that they will. – Rappler.com

Marie Claire Balase is a professional teacher and overseas Filipino worker in Thailand.

They say we are paranoid.

They say we are OA.

They say we are praning.

True, we are paranoid, OA, and praning.

When the president announced last Monday night that classes in Metro Manila in all levels will be suspended from March 10 to 14 because of the novel coronavirus, we thought, "They must know something that the public is not yet informed of."

So, the next day, I did not allow my husband Roel to go to work.

We asked our daughter, who insisted on staying in her rented place near her med school until she completed all her online academic requirements, to lock herself in.

We asked our oldest son, who works in Alabang, to take stringent precautionary measures.

We asked our second son, a fitness buff, to refrain from going to the gym.

We asked my husband's nephrologist for medical advice, and she then issued a medical certificate "strongly" recommending that Roel be allowed to work from home.

Then when the president announced last Thursday night that NCR would be placed under community quarantine or lockdown from March 15 to April 12, we got more paranoid. More OA. More praning. (READ: LOOK: Scenes across Metro Manila as Luzon lockdown begins)

We immediately fetched our daughter from QC and took her home to Malolos.

We asked our oldest son to limit his activities within two areas only, their office and his dorm, and discouraged him from going home.

We told our second son that he would be allowed to visit his girlfriend, but they should not leave the girl's house.

We canceled our planned trip to Bataan for my father’s 75th birthday.

We stocked up on Roel's medicines.

So why are we paranoid, OA, and praning?

For those who don't understand – or obstinately refuse to understand – my husband's health condition, let me explain this in the simplest way I can manage.

As a kidney transplant patient, my husband has to take anti-rejection drugs. These drugs weaken my husband’s immune system, because if his immune system is in tip-top condition (like that of those people who are physically healthy), his body will sense and reject his transplanted kidney. (It’s our body’s knee-jerk reaction.)

And since his immune system is weak, he is considered immunocompromised. He has a greatly reduced ability to fight infections and other diseases. He may also lack the ability to respond appropriately to vaccination. (Aside from organ transplant patients, others who are immunocompromised are the elderly; those with HIV/AIDS, cancer, diabetes, malnutrition, and certain genetic disorders; and those who are taking certain medicines or undergoing certain treatments, such as anticancer drugs, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, steroids, and stem cell transplants.)

It is easy to dismiss a group of people you don’t know much about. It is easy to claim that they are merely making excuses to receive "special treatment." Sometimes, it is even easy to discredit a professional's medical recommendation.

My husband, and other immunocompromised people like him, may look strong and healthy. They may be doing the same things that perfectly fit people are doing – things that could inadvertently put them at risk. They may even be crossing the line by engaging in activities considered to be risky, yet they feel the need to do so because a particular situation calls for it.

Shouldn't we be happy for them because, instead of sulking in a corner and wallowing in self-pity, they are trying to beat the odds? By trying to appear normal. By carrying their own weight. By being productive members of society.

And today that the world is worried sick, is afraid, and is even panicking over the threats posed by the coronavirus, let us pause for a while and put ourselves in the shoes of the people who are immunocompromised – they who know that they are the most likely to die if they contract the virus.

Only then can we fully understand them and their families' fears.

Only then can we be truly capable of that thing called compassion.

And only then can we possibly win this fight against the virus. – Rappler.com 

Lorelei Aquino is a freelance writer whose blog article, The 44-year-old Kolehiyala, became viral when she graduated from the University of the Philippines in 2018, alongside her two cum laude children. She is an active member of Team Pilipinas.

The Philippines is the most susceptible country in the world to climate change hazards and ranks third highest in exposure to disaster risks, according to the Global Peace Index 2019 and the World Risk Report 2018, respectively. This isn’t hard to imagine given the recent eruption of Taal Volcano, the successive destructive earthquakes in Mindanao, and the frequent onslaught of typhoons that trigger floods and landslides.  

Disasters are not new to us, but what many fail to realize is that women are worse off during disasters compared to men. In fact, a report by Plan International in 2013 found that women and children are 14 times more likely to die in a disaster compared to men, and prevailing traditional gender roles seem to be the culprit. (READ: How disasters affect women)

Women and girls are traditionally in charge of care work such as cooking, cleaning, and doing the laundry, which places them inside the house for the majority of the time. When landslides, earthquakes, and floods strike, women and girls are put at risk of being trapped inside the house. 

Generally, in many Asian societies, boys are taught life-saving skills such as swimming more than girls. This significantly raises boys’ chances of survival when there is a flood or tsunami, just like what happened during the Asian Tsunami in 2004. (READ: Advocates call for women empowerment in disaster response)

Evacuation centers, a stage for inequality

Disasters exacerbate existing gender inequalities as women and girls have less access to rights, power, and resources. This is illustrated in the setting of evacuation centers, where men are the ones who line up to receive relief goods as heads-of-the-household and women would have to negotiate for their needs.

Moreover, since women and girls handle the care work, they need water more than men and boys. Water shortages that typically happen in evacuation centers put additional burden on women and girls who are pressured by limited water supply. 

During evacuation, the lack of provision for reproductive health services, sanitary napkins, medicine, and baby’s milk are often overlooked or severely delayed. (READ: Women's 'dignity kits' now mandatory during disasters)

Evacuation centers also see a rise in gender-based violence. A 2013 study commissioned by the World Bank revealed that domestic and sexual violence have increased after a disaster. Even women workers and volunteers have become targets of harassment. (READ: How disasters make women and children vulnerable to abuse)

In long-term recovery, girls compared to boys are less likely to return to school. According to the report by Plan International in 2013, adolescent girls had higher dropout rates compared to adolescent boys post-disaster in the Philippines, Burkina Faso, Niger, South Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Pakistan. If they had to choose, parents preferred to withdraw their daughters from school primarily to save money but also for fear of their daughters’ safety.

Windows of opportunity

But all is not lost. While disasters disrupt social order, normal functions, and routines, they present windows of opportunity to facilitate new norms that promote gender equality.

Local government, civil society organizations, and humanitarian agencies could conduct capacity-building programs on gender awareness especially in evacuation centers where there is a captive audience.

Fathers and sons could be emboldened to share in the responsibility of care work such as washing clothes, cooking, and cleaning. Women and girls could be given livelihood opportunities such as “cash for work” to be able to provide for their families and enjoy some financial independence. 

Women could be given larger stakes in decision-making for their households as well.

Maximizing these windows of opportunity could help women be more confident, assertive, and take on more leadership roles within their community. But follow-through is crucial to ensure that the changes are lasting especially in recovery and rehabilitation.

Full integration in policies and plans

There is much more we can do at the policy level. The Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (RA 10121) does acknowledge women’s vulnerability as a group, but 10 years since its passage, we have yet to seriously put our money where our mouth is. 

Our current National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (2011-2028) is practically mum on this, except when it says that our national framework “conveys a paradigm shift…wherein men and women have increased their awareness and understanding of DRRM.” Of its 14 objectives, 24 outcomes, 56 outputs, and 93 activities, there is nothing that is aimed at tackling the particular plight of women in times of disasters. The ongoing midterm review of the NDRRMP hopefully addresses this gap.  

Our National Disaster Preparedness Plan (2015-2028) is more responsive in this respect, as it behooves LGUs to identify people with special needs, including pregnant women, for preparedness, monitoring, and evaluation purposes. The same is true for our local DRRM and contingency plans, assuming that we follow our national guidelines. 

These efforts put in black and white what has been integral to many of our civil society-led community-based disaster risk reduction efforts long before RA 10121.  However, the crux lies in how we use this information when disaster strikes. 

The fate of women completely disappears in our post-disaster damage and needs assessment. In situation reports submitted to and consolidated by the Office of Civil Defense, we do not see any data specific to women. 

As women and girls become invisible in our disaster reporting mechanisms, how then can we include them not only in our response efforts, but more importantly, in our medium- to long-term recovery plans? With no data to speak of, how can we push for evidence-based policies and programs that would be truly gender-responsive?

Differentiating the effects of disasters

We need to keep in mind, disasters affect men and women differently. In analyzing risk, the vulnerabilities of men and women must be differentiated so that their distinct needs could be identified and met. The same is true for analyzing their capacities, given that men and women possess knowledge, skills, and resources they can contribute to their communities in all phases of disasters.

Disasters also affect different women differently. Thus, we need to start adopting an intersectional approach that will look into the different social and political aspects that shape an individual such as age, class, race, ethnicity, education, religion, sexuality, among others. 

It is highly important to consider context. For instance, the risks faced by Filipino women in highly urbanized cities are different from those faced by indigenous women in remote, rural areas. DRRM practitioners in government, civil society, and even the private sector, must recognize and consider the different vulnerabilities and capacities of women. That is why the more representative the voices that are participating in consultations, programs, and activities, the better. 

DRRM practitioners should also be careful and critical of their own gender biases that they may subconsciously be acting upon. For instance, there is a common tendency to promote “search and rescue” training among men more than women, and likewise seeking out women participants for health seminars over men. DRRM entails a “whole-of-society” approach and it is crucial for all Filipino men and women to be on board.

Gender should not simply be a feature or add-on to DRRM but must be internalized as a natural part of development and integrated in all DRRM plans, practices, and resilience work. Otherwise, we fail in our goal of building resilience for all. – Rappler.com

Kristoffer Berse, PhD, is Associate Professor at the University of the Philippines-National College of Public Administration and Governance (UP-NCPAG) and concurrent Director for Research and Creative Work of the UP Resilience Institute (UPRI).

Micah Nazal is a UP journalism graduate and an MPA Candidate serving as UPRI’s Senior Project Associate responsible for research grant management and media engagement.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the University of the Philippines, UPRI, or UP-NCPAG. 

They say that a crisis brings out the best or worst in people. This is now being put to the test as the world deals with the outbreak of the novel coronavirus.

But make no mistake about it; this dilemma is not just about human beings. As if the world needed another wake-up call, the message is clear: the global COVID-19 pandemic is the latest indicator of the need to protect our environment. (READ: Coronavirus outbreak slashes China carbon emissions – study)

Coronaviruses are naturally zoonotic, or transmitted between animals and people. It belongs to the same group of diseases as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), of which an outbreak occurred in southern China from 2002 to 2003. It was discovered in 2017 that the SARS-causing coronavirus was likely transmitted from horseshoe bats to humans through intermediaries such as civets, which were being sold in local markets and restaurants.

Another coronavirus-related disease, the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), was shown to have been transmitted to humans through dromedary camels. It was the cause of several outbreaks from 2012 to 2018, killing one-third of the diagnosed patients in multiple countries, including Saudi Arabia and South Korea. 

Currently, there is uncertainty regarding from where exactly the virus originated. The World Health Organization recently reported that bats are its most likely sources. Others have alluded to the possibility of pangolins as a direct source of the virus, a notion that was recently disproven through genomic sequencing.

What this means for the environment

First, the pathways of the transmission of these diseases is a reflection of just how interconnected and complex our environment is. Specifically, the current challenges in determining the true source of the coronavirus indicate how vulnerable human communities are to potential threats to public health, especially if current environmentally-destructive practices continue. After all, it is difficult to resolve issues of this magnitude when we do not even know their origins. 

Second, the outbreak signifies the need to obtain proper knowledge and understanding of the biodiversity that surrounds us and avoid endangering them even further. This is best exemplified by the pangolins, which some ecologists fear will be killed en masse due to previous speculations that they are a direct source of the virus. 

According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, 3 of 8 pangolin species are critically endangered, including the Palawan pangolin, an endemic species to the Philippines. Even without being targeted due to the outbreak, they are already under threat from poaching for medicinal, dietary, and spiritual belief purposes. In fact, pangolins are the most heavily trafficked mammals in the world, with an estimated one million pangolins being smuggled from 2000 to 2013. (READ: All hope is not lost for vanishing Palawan pangolin)

The loss of pangolins, the only known mammals to be covered in scales, could lead to significant disruptions of ecosystems worldwide. They contribute to improving the nutrient quality of the soil and provide habitats for other animals. They also help regulate populations of pests such as ants and termites; a single pangolin can consume up to 70 million insects every year. At a time when their conservation should be prioritized, misleading information could simply drive them (and other species) closer to extinction.

Third, the outbreak proves once again that we fail to learn from our history. This reality is not just limited to armed conflicts, political patterns, or social revolutions; it also applies to the way we treat our environment. 

A new approach

As Pope Francis eloquently puts in his encyclical Laudato Si’: “It is not enough, however, to think of different species merely as potential “resources” to be exploited, while overlooking the fact that they have value in themselves.” However, as seen with the coronavirus outbreaks, some people chose to treat nature as a property to exploit instead of simply respecting its dignity. And once again, many others are paying the price for the greed of a few.

Now that the world has been reminded yet again of how disregarding others, humans or otherwise, could directly impact its wellbeing, perhaps this might finally initiate a chain reaction that could break us out of our own self-destructive cycle. (READ: [OPINION] The Pope and single-use plastics)

Maybe global and local laws and policies towards biodiversity conservation would finally be consistently and strictly enforced. Maybe more people would be proactive in joining calls and actions on preventing these outbreaks from happening again. From now on, maybe the notion of protecting other life on Earth will become as imprinted in our consciousness as sanitizing ourselves for self-preservation.

Addressing the pandemic is not just a health issue, but also a commentary on how we regard our environment. Moving forward, we need to enact a genuine ecological approach that, per Pope Francis, “integrate[s] questions of justice in debates on the environment, so as to hear both the cry of the earth and the cry of the poor.” – Rappler.com

John Leo is the Program Manager of Living Laudato Si Philippines and Climate Action for Sustainaility Initiative (KASALI). He has also been a citizen journalist and feature writer since 2016. He earned his MS Atmospheric Science degree from the Ateneo de Manila University in 2018.

What's this about?

Indeed, this is a new kind of war we are fighting. "New" to our generation, at least – the COVID-19 virus.

Isn’t it crazy how in late December and early January we were just watching and following the news on how the virus has gripped China? It wasn't until January 30, 2020 when we had the first confirmed case in the Philippines. Until the 5th of March, we only had 5 confirmed cases.^[1] We were fine.

Then things developed really fast from there; now we are at 140 confirmed cases. Now the entire island of Luzon is on an enhanced community quarantine.

In this article, we share some of the results from an elementary mathematical model that allows us to project the potential growth of confirmed cases.

Findings

Data from western countries conclusively indicate that the increase in COVID-19 cases follows a sustained exponential growth in the first two weeks when significant cases (>10) are reported. This is expected since the virus will only show symptoms 97.5% of the time after 11.5 days^[2]; hence, cases get reported only after about two weeks since its existence.

The current 142 cases in the Philippines, with 29 reported on Monday, March 16, follows closely this exponential trend shared by western countries (e.g., Italy, Germany, USA, etc). And we expect that every two days, the reported new cases will double. 

To illustrate, we are projecting about 58 new cases on March 18 and 116 cases on March 20. If this trend continues, the total cumulative infected patients will be 1,611 by March 23. And if the dynamics does not change/improve, it can reach up to 18,300 the week after that (March 30). 

Finally, by the end of the month (March 31), we might be grappling with 25,894 cases. If we do not have enough kits to test this much number of individuals, then expect that the number of confirmed cases to be reported to be lower than this.  

Why should we be worried?

Many reasons but most importantly, we're worried because this number is not something we believe our healthcare system can handle. In Metro Manila, 800 people struggled for one hospital bed or a 1:800 ratio; and we were short by 42,000 hospital beds.^[3] This number may have already improved since 2017, but we are still worried about the nationwide distribution and accessibility of these facilities.

Where can we put another 26,000 potentially infected patients who are highly contagious?

The data has spoken, and we can only hope it’s lying

Empirical data show that we have a convincing exponential growth of the infected population. This is seen in the figure below plotted in a semi-log scale. 

To compare across country trends, we set all of Monday’s (March 16, 2020) data points to Day 20, and make projections until March 30, 2020.

How confident and accurate are we?

We are not the ones talking here; it is the math and the data. For reproducibility, we have made our code open to all interested. You can download it here if you want to play around with the above fit and the data reported: https://github.com/eflegara/COVID19PH-Projection 

Projection 

When do we expect to get an exponential distribution? Short answer is when the infection spreads at rate r that is proportional to the number of the infected population. This is a valid approximation as long as the number of infected individuals are far less compared to the total population. 

For example, if there is y₀ initial number of individuals infected at time t = 0, at time t = 1 this number will grow to y₁ = y₀ + ry₀ = y₀ (1 + r). For time t = 2, the total number of infected will be y₂ = y₁ + ry₁ = y₀ (1 + r)². In general, we can get the number of infected individuals at time t using the formula: y_t = y₀ (1 + r)^t. By some forces of mathematics, this can be expressed as an exponential: y(t) = a exp(bt) where the rate r = exp (b-1), and the doubling time is given by t_double = ln(2) / ln (1 + r). We illustrate roughly the outcome below for r = 0.5 and y₀ = 5.

As seen in all countries, for 10-14 days, such exponential trend has been preserved. What differentiates South Korea and Singapore from other countries was how the exponential trajectory was stunted in less than two weeks due to widespread virus testing and social distancing measures that were implemented early.

Will this trend change? 

On Sunday morning at 12 am, Metro Manila was placed under community quarantine. And the following day, Monday, the entire Luzon was placed under an "enhanced" community quarantine. Will this be effective? Will this stunt the exponential growth we're seeing, the way South Korea flattened its curve? 

Probably. Hopefully.

We'll only really know once we see changes in the trend (i.e., when we see the trend deviate from its current exponential growth curve) in the next week or so. We have observed that Italy eventually decreased the doubling period from an initial of 1.5 days to about 3.6 days in the last 10 days. If such is applied to the Philippine setting and we slow down the doubling to about 4 days, then the projection will be halved to about 805 cases by March 23 and 9,150 by March 30.

By how much could we be underreporting?

We can only speculate at this point.

However, using South Korea as baseline, the projection makes sense based on the following assumptions:

(1) the distribution in terms of age of that population holds
(2) only symptomatic patients are being tested in the Philippines (most probably 55+ and above)

This is because the age bracket 40 years and below only has ~0.2% mortality rate, while for 60 and above, the mortality rate shoots up to within 10%. This is a ~50 fold increase. 

With such assumption, a first order approximation of the underreported cases in the Philippines is: Age below 55 (not tested) / Age above 55 (tested). Looking at the Philippine Statistics Authority data, this is about 90% / 10% or 9x. The assumption here is we are not detecting 9x of the infected because they are not going to hospitals for check-ups.

What now?

Of course, we could be wrong, and the good thing is that in the next few days we will be able to validate or invalidate our results. This is what science is all about! We will eventually know where we have gone wrong, and this will allow us to improve our model and forecast with new data coming in. But for the uncertain times ahead, our advice is to heed the lesson from Andrew Grove: right now, it is better to be paranoid to survive! – Rappler.com

*Christopher Monterola and Erika Fille Legara are Aboitiz Chairs in Data Science at the Aboitiz School of Innovation, Technology and Entrepreneurship of the Asian Institute of Management.

^[1] DOH Press Release / 06 March 2020: DOH Confirms Two More Cases of COVID-19 in PH

^[2] Stephen A. Lauer, et al. (2020) The Incubation Period of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) From Publicly Reported Confirmed Cases: Estimation and Application. Annals of Internal Medicine.

^[3] Jovee Marie de la Cruz (2017) DOH admits lack of beds in Metro Manila hospitals. Business Mirror. Accessed on: 16 March 2020

Love in the time of coronavirus, just like love in the time of cholera, has already happened and will likely continue to happen. How about a ceasefire on the warfront between the Philippine government/armed forces and the communist-led rebels in this time of coronavirus? (READ: Duterte asks NPA for ceasefire during coronavirus lockdown)

It has happened before, on a temporary and short-term basis, during some particularly destructive natural calamities, although mostly on a regional level. Well, this current virus is now a global pandemic. The Philippines is now under a public health emergency – to be clear, according to President Duterte, not martial law – although the military and police are being mobilized to backstop (employ reasonable force, if necessary) the new national emergency response under a civilian-led Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Disease (IATF-EID).

Given that new priority for the military and police, it should be in their interest that there be a temporary ceasefire (or at least a mutual suspension of military offensives) between them and the communist rebels (New People’s Army, NPA) until the coronvirus threat has been contained. 

However, the coronavirus emergency refocusing and redeployment (if substantial) of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) is also a tempting scenario for the NPA to further intensify its tactical offensives, as it has long called for since the collapse of the peace talks in 2018.

Any redeployment of big units of the AFP from the countryside to the National Capital Region of Metro-Manila (maybe the AFP version of “surrounding the cities from the countryside”) will leave some vacuum in the countryside that the NPA would normally take advantage of, such as by all the more attacking “softer” targets like the PNP and paramilitary units (Citizens Armed Forces Geographical Unit, Cafgu), which could no longer rely on immediate AFP reinforcements. 

Humanitarian considerations

But perhaps the military calculus – for both sides – should not be the only or main determinant of policy decisions and courses of action in this military matter. Humanitarian considerations can sometimes trump (pun intended) military considerations.

This looks like one of those times. There are also – to be realpolitik about it – political (including political correctness) and propaganda considerations. What action – continuing armed hostilities or a ceasefire – will win the hearts and minds of the people? Which army is the one helping them deal with this coronavirus threat to their health and their very lives? What is the point in saving people’s lives from the virus but killing perhaps just as many persons in armed hostilities?    

A ceasefire in a time of coronavirus would be in accordance with the spirit, if not the letter, of international humanitarian law.

For example, there is Article 56 on hygiene and public health in occupied territories under the 1949 Geneva Convention No. V on Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War that is an international armed conflict: “To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring and maintaining, with the cooperation of national and local authorities, the medical and hospital establishments and services, public health, and hygiene in the occupied territory, with particular reference to the adoption and application of prophylactic and preventive measures necessary to combat the spread of contagious diseases and epidemics….  In adopting measures of health and hygiene and in their implementation, the Occupying Power shall take into consideration the moral and ethical susceptibilities of the population of the occupied territory.” (boldface emphasis supplied)

Interestingly, both the Philippine government and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), including its ruling Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its main armed force NPA, are on record as adhering to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. And so, in this time of coronavirus, they should be combating the spread of the virus rather than combating their enemy combatants.

Those 'isms'

On a higher philosophical plane or perspective of Maoist dialectics, there comes a time when the contradiction between man and nature takes precedence over the contradiction between man and man (forgive the use of this term rather than the gender-neutral humankind). The longtime principal contradictions between the people of the world and US imperialism globally, and between the Filipino people and the Philippine state now under the “US-Duterte fascist regime” locally, becomes secondary to the new current principal contradiction between the people of the world and coronavirus (if not yet between the people of the world and climate change). 

US imperialism, Chinese imperialism, the Duterte administration, and the CPP-NPA-NDFP can become tactical allies, even if strange bedfellows, against the coronavirus. Resolve this new current principal contradiction first, then go back to the erstwhile principal contradictions, to your protracted people’s war, to your EO No. 70 whole-of-nation approach to end the local communist armed conflict, business as usual.       

Finally, if all other rationalization fails, just have some consideration for the advanced ages (and stages) and pre-existing state of health (classified information that has been occasionally subjected to fake news) of the current acknowledged leaders of your two sides – President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, nearing 75, and his Professor Jose Maria Sison, 81. They are among the elderly most vulnerable to the coronavirus.

Perhaps, good old Pinoy cultural deference to and care for our elders can be reason enough for a ceasefire in a time of coronavirus. Coronabonus: this might help build some confidence for the so far urong-sulong resumption of the peace talks. – Rappler.com

Sa kabila ng lahat ng ito, gusto ko sanang sumulat ng magandang kuwento naman. Kaya ang ginawa ko, naghanap sa internet, sa mapagkakatiwalaang sources tungkol sa brighter side of this crisis. Halimbawa, kung malapit na bang matuklasan ang vaccine, o kung ano ang dapat gawin sakaling tamaan ng salot, mga karanasan at ninja moves mula sa mismong survivors.  

Sa vaccine development, napakaagresibo ng reseach, pero kung ihahambing sa bilis ng paglaganap ng sakit, mabagal. Napakabagal. Akala ko kasi parang sa mga apocalyptic na pelikula lang ang lahat. Iyong tipong sa huling sandali ng pagkumot ng virus sa sangkatauhan, matutuklasan ang mistikal na vaccine. Tapos, iineksiyonan ang lahat; tapos, in a matter of minutes, gagaling. Tuloy ang mankind. Tagumpay ang mankind. Hindi pala sa tunay na buhay. Napakabilis na ang isang taon. O, gaya ng kapangahasan ng ilang kompanya, ilang buwan lang kaya na raw, bago pa masabing may subok na subok nang pangontra sa salot. 

At least ngayon, malapit na ang paglaganap ng murang testing kits na na-develop ng unibersidad na rally nang rally, UP.  

Magandang balita rin kahit papaano ang maraming bilang ng nagsigaling na. Ang iba sa kanila, isinalaysay ang kanilang ordeal. Bagamat gusto kong magtira ng agam-agam sa mga istoryang ito. Iba-iba kasi ang kakayahan para sagupain ng katawan natin ang salot na ito, iba-iba rin ang health care system, or sometimes the lack thereof, sa bawat bansang dinapuan ng sakit.  

Sa atin, hindi pa natatanghal ang istorya ng nagsigaling. Mas natatanghal ang pagkalat, ang bilang ng pinaghihinalaan, dinapuan, namatay; natatanghal ang paraan at sistema (again, or the lack thereof) para hindi na lumaganap ang sakit na kumitil na, as of this writing, ng mahigit 4,000 tao sa buong mundo. Na sana ay hindi na madagdagan pa. (I-BOOKMARK: Novel Coronavirus Outbreak: News, Advisories, Explainers)

Marami sa mga kakilala ko ang Team Bahay ngayon hanggang – hanggang kailan nga ba? Sino ang makapagsasabi? Marami sa mga Team Bahay na ito ang nakatunghay sa social media para maghintay at maghanap ng balita – legitimate source man o hindi – para gamiting reference sa ikikilos nila hanggang humupa o masugpo ang sakit. Kung kailan nga ito, ito ang mas masakit na pag-usapan. Pero huwag na lang muna. Kasi nga positive vibes ang hangad ko. 

Wala pa tayong mapaghuhugutang karanasan para mataya kung sapat na ba ang ating paghahanda. Hindi ito katulad ng bagyo na may signal number at nata-track sa satellite at radar. Hindi ito katulad ng lindol na may aftershocks kapag lumipas na ang pinakamalakas na pagyanig. Sa dalawang kalamidad na ito, kayang sabihin ng dalubhasa na the worst is over. 

Kasi nga hindi nga natin alam kung hanggang kailan ito. Ayokong gawing padron ang nangyari sa Wuhan o sa kabuuan ng Tsina. Lagi akong duda sa impormasyong nanggagaling sa kanilang pamahalaan. Ayoko namang gamitin ang karanasan ng Singapore o Taiwan o South Korea. Malayo sa health care system natin ang sistema nila. Besides, mas may laman ang bungo ng mga pinuno doon. 

Hindi ko magawang maghanda for the long haul. Una, dahil hindi naman talaga natin alam kung hanggang kailan nga ito. Ikalawa, wala namang panghanda. Iyong kapirasong contingency fund ko, wala na. Ipinambili ng bitamina at maintenance drugs para sa akin, para sa asawa ko, at para sa biyenan ko. Ipinambili ko ng mga monosodium glutamate-based na pampalasa at de-lata para puwedeng ihalo sa gulay na inaani dito sa lalawigan. Tsk, alam ko, unhealthy living. Priority ko muna ang maging alive hanggang malagpasan ito. 

Narito ako ngayon sa lalawigan. Kanselado ang klase ko sa matandang unibersidad sa matandang lungsod ng Maynila. Kanselado pansamantala ang cloud campus, isang internet platform kung saan kami puwedeng magturo. Kanselado dahil kailangan munang mag-settle sa isang komportableng estado ng self-quarantine o limited engagement sa labas ng kanilang mga bahay. Paano nga naman makakapag-aral kung kakaba-kaba dahil inoobserbahan ang sarili at mga kasama? Kung sino ba sa nakasalamuha noon ang positibo sa sakit ngayon? Ganoon din naman kami. Propesor man ay tao rin, lalo sa panahong itong kaliwa’t kanan ang ligalig. 

Maging dito man sa bayan kung saan kami naroroon ng pamilya ko, magpapatupad ng self-quarantine, lalo’t dumagsa ang galing sa Kalakhang Maynilang hindi muna makakapasok sa kanikanilang trabaho o sa unibersidad na pinag-aaralan. Malay ba kung sino doon ang carrier? Kaya ang masayang bayang masaya kahit Mahal na Araw, kanselado pati ang itinatanging festival, ang Pahiyas. Sa isang taon na muli magdiriwang ng pasasalamat sa mabiyayang ani mula sa mabiyayang lupa – again, kung matatapos agad ang salot na ito. Sana. 

Sana matapos agad para ang may maruruming kaluluwang nang-hoard ng rubbing alcohol at surgical mask para ibenta sa napakataas na halaga, malugi. Ang hirap maghangad ng masama sa kapwa, pero hindi ko magawang hindi isiping sana mabutas lahat ang botelya ng rubbing alcohol at amagin sana lahat ang face mask na sinugapa nila.

***

Okay, sige, susukuan ko na muna. Wala akong malinaw na kuwentong positibo hinggil sa krisis na ito. Ako man ay nangangapa, pinapapayapa ang sarili, inihahanda sa kawalang katiyakan ng buhay na ito. Sa akin humuhugot ng lakas ng loob ang pamilya ko. Dapat mabakas sa akin ang kumpiyansa, na focused ako kahit na, sa totoo lang, maraming alinlangan. 

Mag-iiwan na lang siguro ako ng ilang tagubilin: 

Ngayong ipatutupad ang limitadong pagkilos natin upang maiwasan ang pagkalat ng salot, payo ko, makipag-ugnayan nang madalas sa minahamahal sa buhay na malayo sa inyo by way of texting, tawag, PM, video call. Kayang-kaya ninyo ’yan. Madalas ngang magpakalat ang marami sa atin ng balitang walang batayan. Pansin ko nitong mga huling araw, umuusok ang mga kinabibilangan kong chat group ng mga forwarded messages na ang mga detalye ay unproven at unfounded. Mag-iingat sana tayo. Dahil sa panahong ito, ang malinaw at totoong impormasyon ay sandata na rin para labanan ang sakit na ito. 

I-personalize ang pangungumusta. Bukod sa pag-aalaga sa sarisarili, magkumustahan ang mga Team Bahay. Magbigay ng update. Makipagbiruan online. Malaking bagay na ang mabalitaang maayos ka. Hindi mo alam kung anong gaan sa alalahanin nila ang malamang ligtas ka pa rin. Makatutulong ang kapanatagan ng loob para harapin at malagpasan ang pagsubok na ito. 

Basahin ang mga biniling aklat na ipinangako sa sariling babasahin kapag nagkaroon ng sapat na oras. Tumuklas ng ibang karunungan.  

Sa kabila ng lahat ng ito, magpatuloy tayong magpakatatag at magpakatao.

Dahil higit nating makikilala ang ating mga sarili at ang ating kapwa pagkatapos nito. Mag-iingat kayo. Kalingain ang kapwa. Sa pagkakaalam ko, ang kaligtasan ng iyong kapwa ay makatutulong din para ka maging ligtas.  

Isipin at unawain ang bawat sandali dahil may matututuhan tayong lahat sa nangyayaring ito. – Rappler.com 

Bukod sa pagtuturo ng creative writing, pop culture, research, at seminar in new media sa Departamento ng Literatura at sa Graduate School ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas, research fellow din si Joselito D. delos Reyes, PhD, sa UST Research Center for Culture, Arts and Humanities. Siya ang coordinator ng AB Creative Writing program ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas. Concept creator siya dati ng isang masayang palabas sa telebisyon. 

I write this from the comfort of my home.

My parents came home from the grocery with more food to keep us fed for a few weeks. I just made my second cup of tea for the day as I waited for Duterte’s address to air. After the address, I had a video call with my high school friends and we stayed up until 2 am catching up and playing online games together. I could afford to sleep in because we at Rappler set efficient work-from-home measures to prioritize everyone’s safety in the midst of this fiasco.

Needless to say, this lockdown is just a minor adjustment for me and my family. Just admitting this privilege almost feels like a sin. For most Filipinos, the lockdown is an inconvenience at best, a matter of life and death at worst.

I admit that I come from a place of privilege as a middle-class citizen. But I’ve seen way too many Filipinos run into so many hurdles because of how poorly this lockdown was implemented. I can't help but be angry. Several workers braved the traffic just to get to work, because they couldn’t afford to take days off without pay. Later, mass transportation was suspended, which affected thousands of commuters. The Department of Justice stated violators of the Luzon lockdown can be arrested even without a warrant, which is bound to put many people’s lives at risk.

These measures might not affect me, but they will affect many other Filipinos. I guess that’s where a lot of my frustration comes from – not a lot of upper-class and middle-class Filipinos realize how good they have it in the midst of this lockdown. They forget to check their privilege, and come off as incredibly insensitive and narrow-minded.

I saw titas on Facebook share that James Deakin post, where he said we shouldn’t be complaining about the quarantine and curfew because all we’re being asked to do is to “sit on the couch and watch Netflix.” Cat Arambulo-Antonio, watching workers get arrested on her widescreen TV, gratuitously filmed an Instagram story for her followers, saying, “God, why don’t you motherfuckers just stay at home?” These are the kind of people who forget many Filipinos don’t have that kind of option, who fail to realize these people wouldn’t even leave their houses in the middle of a rampant outbreak if they had a better alternative.

And what angers me so much about this is that well-off Filipinos have the audacity to say we should all just cooperate with our government. First of all, I’m allowed to criticize the government’s implementation of the lockdown while cooperating with them – they’re not mutually exclusive. I can be a perfectly behaved, law-abiding citizen while thinking the government can do a better job, because we deserve better than this. ([OPINION] Loving your country is very different from loving your government)

Secondly, cooperation is a two-way street. The elites talk a lot about cooperating with our government, but have they considered asking what the government is doing for its people? Have they wondered if the government was meeting the people where they are, implementing inclusive, intersectional policies? Do they realize not everyone can just “trust the government” to know what its constituents need, let alone give them what they need?

This kind of narrow-mindedness isn’t exclusive to internet personalities and “woke” influencers; it bleeds into the way public officials are responding to the crisis. When the lockdown was imposed on the national capital, Trade Secretary Ramon Lopez told informal workers to just sell outside Metro Manila. After public transportation was suspended, Cabinet Secretary Karlo Nograles left citizens with only two options: to take a private car or walk. When people asked about how the harsh lockdown conditions will affect access to food, Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said, “Walang namamatay sa gutom.” (No one dies of hunger.)

It’s these out-of-touch remarks and anti-poor policies that make me realize how detached our government is from reality. Responding to a crisis like this in ways that only serve the upper class is bound to backfire and fail. It doesn’t sit well with me that I’m one of the few that can afford to live comfortably despite the lockdown, when every Filipino deserves a competent government that addresses all their needs in disastrous times like these. A government tasked to serve the public must serve all of the public.

I write this from the comfort of my home, and I go to sleep tonight knowing tomorrow I’ll have enough food to eat and that I can stay in to keep myself healthy. I can only hope this government does enough to ensure everyone gets the same kind of liberties. – Rappler.com

Crises are supposed to bring out the best in us. 

In our experience as a nation, our virtuous spirit has shone through many times during earthquakes, typhoons, and other disasters. 

Think about it. Volunteerism is alive whether it’s among the youth, the religious, or neighbors in a community. Whenever donation drives are organized, we can expect even strangers to pitch in.

Indeed, it’s during extraordinary circumstances when the values that truly define our relationships emerge.  

At the same time, however, extraordinary circumstances bring out the worst in us as a people. 

From a sociological perspective, the reason is not that people are inherently selfish.

It is because of inequality. In our society, social divisions are undeniable and the moral views to which we subscribe are necessarily shaped by our privileges and limitations. 

Unfortunately, these views color the way we see each other. COVID-19 has rendered this far more visible.

The celebrities among us

Celebrities became moralists overnight. A statement, echoed by a few of them, went viral:

“To those who are complaining about the quarantine period and curfews, just remember that your grandparents were called to war; you are being called to sit on the couch and watch Netflix. You can do this.”

Lea Salonga and James Deakin were heavily criticized for what came across as insensitive remarks. Responding to criticisms, Deakin asserted that he was referring a to a specific group of non-essential workers. It was, of course, too late a defense. (READ: [OPINION] The out-of-touch, elitist gaps in our lockdown)

Other influencers gave it a religious meaning. 

Iza Calzado commented on Lea Salonga’s post: “I agree with this and have been thinking about how the COVID-19 situation is actually the Universe’s way of making the world a better place moving forward. Praying for the best.”

Martin Nievera offered 3 praying hands and a heart. 

Admirers came to their defense, demanding that people should shut up. In two different videos, a teenager ranted about the government’s vocal critics who, in her view, should “shut up” and “wash your hands” because “this will pass.” She wanted all of us to “be encouraging to one another” and “cooperate with the government” because “writing isn’t gonna help anyone.” (READ: [OPINION] Loving your country is very different from loving your government)

Lost in their moralism was the state of the working class.

Failure of leadership

Questioning this government does not mean the critical among us wish the virus to continue spreading.

Whenever we ask questions or make comments it is because we believe that things could be (so much) better.

It’s not as if we don’t know what we’re talking about.

Medical practitioners have turned to social media because that is the only platform where they feel they could be heard. On Twitter, Dr. Gia Sison, for example, was compelled to negate Panelo’s claim that bananas will kill the coronavirus.  

And yet one does not even have to be an expert to realize that the government’s drastic policies were bound to fail. Did the cabinet secretaries really expect that locking down the capital without giving ample time to transition was going to succeed?

Managing change is both an art and a skill that people who work with communities know very well. 

Truth be told, people do understand that placing everyone on quarantine is necessary. To do so is more urgent now that data scientists project that 26,000 might be infected by the end of March.

But no one can make sense of it if even the president himself does not know how to speak intelligibly. Worse, Panelo, his insufferable spokesperson, spreads fake news.  

The anxieties people now feel derive precisely from the failure of leadership. That our leaders took a while to prepare for the problem is in itself an indication of this failure. 

The result: chaos. 

Tragedy

“In times of crisis, we must all decide again and again whom we love.” These are the words of Frank O’ Hara, an American poet, in Meditations in an Emergency. 

Although written more than 60 years ago, these words ring true. The only difference is that in our present context, some of us have decided that some are worth loving more than others.

This is the blind spot that comes with thoughtless and callous remarks. The words of Cat Arambulo-Antonio are telling. Upon seeing the news about people at checkpoints, the blogger exclaimed,  “Why don’t you motherfuckers just stay at home?”

What a tragic mistake.

It’s not that Filipinos are undisciplined. The problem is that the most vulnerable among us already bear the brunt of ill-conceived policies. 

These are the poor and the working class — those who struggle on a daily basis to make ends meet. That’s why they’re still in the streets, a reality that the privileged will never understand.

In the final analysis, the COVID-19 crisis — a decisive moment that should have brought out the best in us — has only sharpened the division in our society. 

The privileged few are watching Netflix. The rest are stuck at the borders. – Rappler.com

Jayeel Cornelio, PhD is Associate Professor and Director of the Development Studies Program at the Ateneo de Manila University. He is a 2017 Outstanding Young Scientist of the National Academy of Science and Technology. Follow him on Twitter @jayeel_cornelio.

Disclaimer: Our aim is not to spread further discord and distrust in our government and jail personnel in the time of the coronavirus crisis. We believe that they are doing their best efforts given the dire circumstances. However, we felt that no one is paying attention to the plight of the Persons Deprived of Liberty (PDLs) and we are compelled to share our research on the best practices in other jurisdictions to guide our policy makers.Disclaimer:

The Philippine government placed the entire Metro Manila under “enhanced community quarantine.” The Philippine Supreme Court issued a circular suspending all court hearings. The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) has suspended all jail visitations nationwide. These are all pre-emptive steps to slow down the spread of the novel coronavirus that infected hundreds of people in the Philippines and hundreds of thousands worldwide.

Indeed, one of the most susceptible areas to the spread of the virus is the jails and prisons. With an overcrowding rate of 350%, the Philippines has the most congested correctional system in the world. If one of the PDLs gets infected in the congested jails, it could be a catastrophe. Our jail staff would be tremendously strained to handle the infection once it starts. Despite their best efforts and even in normal circumstances, they lack medical facilities and doctors to handle routine health problems. We have recently witnessed jail unrest in more resource-endowed jail and prison facilities in Italy and the US. We are not sure what the outcome would be if similar unrest began in the Philippine correctional system.

A temporary relief could be the granting of medical furlough to first-time, low-risk, non-violent, and bailable offenders for humanitarian considerations. PDLs who are charged with offenses such as gambling, theft of less than a thousand pesos, drug use, etc., especially those who are old (above 60 years old) and sickly, could be prioritized for release. These are PDLs that, with money and resources, could have bailed out and could have been released, but largely due to poverty, they are languishing in our jails while undergoing prolonged trials. 

The BJMP could initiate the process by writing a letter to the Supreme Court on its assessment of the current jail health capacities. The Supreme Court-Office of Court Administrator could then utilize this as a basis for corrective action. A Supreme Court Circular could then be issued where the jail wardens nationwide would be able to identify first-time, low-risk, non-violent, bailable offenders for release. The Public Attorney’s Office, could also make a national pleading on behalf of all the PDLs, similar to what was done in other jurisdictions. The list could then be submitted to the respective judges, and the judges, using their sound discretion could release the PDLs on their own self-recognizance, or even on “One-Peso Bail.” As a condition, the PDLs could provide a promise to appear on the court-appointed dates. The wardens would get their addresses and the contact information of their relatives for monitoring.  

These low risk PDLs are not a threat to public safety. Releasing them would ease the over-congestion in our jails. This would give a better chance for our jail staff to concentrate their resources on recidivists, higher risk, violent, and non-bailable offenders (who are also still presumed innocent). By keeping them all in jail at the moment places them in a susceptible condition to acquire the coronavirus. In our over-congested jail, this will be tantamount to a death sentence. Releasing low risk, first-time, non-violent bailable offenders under this medical furlough remedy could be our best chance to avert this incoming tragedy.  

It is just a matter of time. – Rappler.com

Raymund E. Narag, PhD is Assistant Professor at the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.

Clarke Jones, PhD is a Senior Research Fellow at the College of Health and Medicine at Australian National University.

I am a med student, and I don’t understand why a lot of people think we want healthcare workers to literally replace the military manning the checkpoints. 

The call for #SolusyongMedikalHindiAksyongMilitar is a call for adequate medical support. The COVID-19 pandemic is, after all, a health crisis. What we need is free, accessible healthcare for all.

We need enough funding for the mass production of the UP-developed COVID-19 test kits; free massive testing; free masks, soaps, alcohol, and medicines; mass sterilization of schools and other public places; more healthcare workers deployed especially to far-flung communities to detect infections as early as possible and to decongest hospitals; increased budget for our hospitals and emergency response teams; and enough medical supplies for our medical frontliners who risk their lives every day, without them having to beg for donations.

And yet, we are met with thousands of policemen and soldiers armed with rifles – many of whom have no PPEs and thermal scanners, are lenient on the enforcement of social distancing, are unaware of what their protocol is if ever they encounter an individual suspected of being infected, and are unaccompanied by barangay healthcare workers. (READ: Duterte places Luzon on lockdown to battle coronavirus)

The call for #SolusyongMedikalHindiAksyongMilitar is a call for adequate economic aid. In any crisis, it is always the poor that are most severely affected. The farmers. The contractual workers. The jeepney drivers. Those who can’t work from home. Those who don’t even have homes. Those who only have enough money to get through the day, not for stocking up on food and medical supplies. Those who can’t afford to self-quarantine or be admitted into a hospital and risk leaving their families to starve. Those who don’t even have the means to go to the nearest hospital or health center.

What we need are food, clean water, shelter, and other services for those displaced by the “community quarantine.” We need a reliable water supply. We need the prices of basic commodities to be frozen. We need subsidies for the workers who have now been deprived of their only source of income. Pero ano? Okay lang kasi wala naman daw namamatay sa gutom, sabi ni Panelo?

The call for #SolusyongMedikalHindiAksyongMilitar is a call for informed rule. We need a clear and comprehensive nationwide information drive to explain how to protect one’s self and others who are more vulnerable at a time like this, and to alleviate mass panic and hoarding of supplies. We need more scientists and health professionals in charge, instead of an incompetent politician whose knee-jerk reaction to a public health crisis is to call on his troops and threaten with arrest those who don’t comply. We need a leader who acts like one – who doesn’t act based on his own personal interests; who has concrete plans backed by science and data; and who recognizes and gives credit to the real heroes of this story, instead of feeding the egos of his best friend and his master.

The call for #SolusyongMedikalHindiAksyongMilitar is a call for accountability. After slashing P10 billion off our national budget for health and allocating this to intelligence funds and “confidential” funds instead; after donating $1.4 million worth of masks to China when our own country was in need; after repeatedly refusing to impose a travel ban from mainland China as a precautionary measure in the name of “diplomacy;” we ask – who does this administration really serve?

We need information, not force. We need medical and financial support, not guns.

Enforcement of a “lockdown” must go hand in hand with the necessary health and economic measures. Otherwise, it’s just another disaster waiting to happen.

Again, solusyong medikal, hindi aksyong militar! – Rappler.com

Lorielle Ann "Lala" Aquino is a Philippine Science High School (PSHS) and University of the Philippines (UP) alumna. She is currently taking up Medicine.

If you think these people willfully leave their homes amid a deadly pandemic, think again.

On Monday evening, March 16, President Rodrigo Duterte announced that he would put the entire island of Luzon under enhanced community quarantine. A day prior, community quarantine in Metro Manila had already begun, which involved a ban on land, domestic air, and domestic sea travels in and out of the region. (READ: What is 'enhanced community quarantine' and will it work?) 

Under enhanced community quarantine, however, all forms of public transportation are suspended, and people are discouraged from leaving their homes, except to buy food, medicine, and other necessities. (READ: Mass transportation suspended in Luzon)

Disaster met the new measure right on its first hour. Workers heading home were stranded – right on the streets – as uniformed personnel banned any more travel. The commuters, probably hundreds of them, were locked in by traffic barricades, crowded within a limited space.

It was evidently a poorly managed situation. The effort to strictly implement the lockdown compromised the core measure upon which it was based: social distancing. This, by all means, easily put all these people at risk of contracting the virus, and worse comes to worst, each one of them could spread the virus to their families.

As the first day of the Luzon-wide lockdown progressed, netizens shared their dismal stories of struggle over having no means of transportation, with the lockdown only allowing for private vehicles on the road. Many commuters had no choice but to endure walking all the way to work.

One netizen even took a video showing commuters scrambling to hitch a ride on passing pickup trucks – with no regard for social distance anymore – just to get to where they needed to be.

WATCH: Working commuters scramble to ride a truck as the Philippine government declared an "enhanced community quarantine" to prevent the spread of the coronavirus disease – locking down Metro Manila and the rest of Luzon #COVID19PHpic.twitter.com/24GnyUs13c

— Rappler (@rapplerdotcom) March 17, 2020

Some were quick to call these people “pasaway” (stubborn) and “matigas ang ulo” (hard-headed). Others lamented that they should “just follow the rules” and stop jeopardizing everyone else’s safety. An influencer even angrily, and dare I say, ignorantly, ranted her fill on Instagram Stories, saying, "God, why don't you motherf*ckers just stay at home?" (Yikes.)

“Sumunod na lang kayo, imbis na magreklamo (Just follow the rules and stop complaining),” a handful of comments said in response to people who openly critiqued the poor implementation of the lockdown. They then gave suggested solutions which were hardly a choice for many of these commuters.

Work from home? That’s not a choice for minimum wage workers who barely have enough to feed their families twice a day, much less afford an internet connection at home. That’s not a choice for employees bound by “no work, no pay” contracts and whose nature of work does not fit a remote work setup.

Avoid public transport? I cannot even fathom how they find this a viable option. The commuting public, which comprises a good fraction of the population, is essentially the working class. Despite terrible traffic, these people still heavily rely on buses, public utility vehicles (PUVs), and trains prone to technical problems. That’s not a choice for people whose budget can only allow for so much. Asking them to avoid public transport is literally asking them to walk to work – and walk they did.

Obey the rules? That’s not a choice when the rules themselves disregard the best interests of these people, let alone address them. Rules are supposed to protect everyone, not just some.

Crisis strikes the poor twice as hard

We've seen it before – in a more recent instance, the Taal unrest – and we're still seeing it now: in times of crises, the poor always suffer double the damage.

And I guess it's what people born of privilege fail to realize. For vulnerable sectors, crisis is a gun to the head: they always have to bear the full severity of the consequences. At this point, it is not only a matter of surviving pandemic pandemonium for them; it’s fundamentally a matter of surviving the day. It's about having food on the table and taking things day by day. If they refused to leave the house and earn the money they needed to buy food, medicine, and other necessities, getting by the remaining weeks of lockdown would be wishful thinking at best.

When these are the problems one has to face every single day, a looming pandemic doesn’t seem so big a monster after all.

Consequently, with the deadly virus being the least of their concerns, these people continue to resort to measures, sometimes desperate, to make ends meet, making them all the more vulnerable to virus exposure. It only goes south from there. Next thing they know, it’s already too late.

So trust me when I say these pasaway workers would take the option to stay home the first good chance they get. We all want to get through this crisis alive and well, but with the inadequate measures in place, the choice to confine themselves in their own homes is but a luxury they simply cannot afford.

They say a crisis brings out the ugly in everyone. In the end, it all zeroes in on how a government grossly disregards the interests of the poor and hardly addresses their plight, which sadly isn't so surprising anymore. It tells of the private sector prioritizing its capitalist interests over the welfare of its constituents, all amid a global emergency. It speaks of how privilege can make one incapable of empathy and blind from reality.

If pointing fingers is the game, you better be pointing at the top of this power hierarchy – if not at yourself. – Rappler.com

“Your grandparents were called to war. All you have to do is sit at home and do nothing. You can do that. Just shut up and wash your hands. Cooperate with the government…”

These are the words of a certain social media influencer, who called out her fellow Filipinos for apparently doing nothing but criticize the fragile social safety net of the Duterte administration. One video after another, she fired at "hard-headed" citizens who went out of their homes despite the metro-wide (now island-wide) lockdown due to the pandemic. 

“God, why don’t you m*******ckers stay at home?! Stay at home! Don’t you guys get it?!” another Instagram influencer said. (READ: Viral content: Pandemic offers influencers captive audiences

I did not know who this other influencer was until today. Out of curiosity, I looked her up, and her profile hinted that she was from the upper class, enjoying a curated lifestyle perfect for the ‘Gram. It then occurred to me that it wasn't rocket science for her to come up with such statement.

Indeed, it is not that hard for some of you to stay at home to protect yourself from contracting the coronavirus and spreading it. At home, you can watch movies or work out. There are classes available online, if you love learning. You can also check on your friends, especially those you haven’t talked to in a while. In the information age, boredom should not really be an issue anymore. (READ: Luzon lockdown: What are the do's and don'ts?)

But it’s a different story for Filipinos who live a hand-to-mouth existence. Boredom is not a gut issue for them.

They have forsaken convenience and even safety amid the pandemic to provide basic necessities for their family. Some are laborers who only get paid on a daily basis. Some are minimum-wage employees on a “no work, no pay” set-up. Work-from-home policies are not always available nor applicable to some industries. How then can these people “just stay at home?”

Not everyone experiences the same struggles. All of us are born into circumstances we never really chose. So, to ask whether a person is privileged (or not) only elicits unproductive discussions. The question we should ask instead should be: how do we make sense of the privilege that we have?

With privilege comes a responsibility to champion social justice on behalf of the aggrieved neighbor. This is why Filipinos who sit comfortably in their homes must never “just shut up and wash their hands.” To help those affected by the pandemic and the lockdown would be the most practical thing to do.

However, there is something even more urgent and long-lasting: to exact accountability from the officials who put us in this situation in the first place. – Rappler.com

The following is Part 1 in a 2-part series

Last week, I watched and listened to Mr Gan Kim Yong, Singapore's Minister of Health, say that responding effectively to the COVID-19 crisis will depend on several things:

(1) the state of a country's health system
(2) the extent to which its society has accumulated social capital to overcome serious challenges like pandemics
(3) whether good governance is the norm in that country. 

I remember being filled with apprehension listening to that speech, for we don't have all 3 ingredients.

Yes, we 're not a least developed country, and so yes, we have a functioning health system that works for the rich and the middle class. But it is a system that has yet to work for the poor. Certainly it does not compare in any way to Northern Italy’s modern health system, which we know is collapsing in the face of COVID-19.

Definitely, with such an economically unequal and politically divided society, there is very little social capital to recognize and talk about. I will write about how we can restore social capital in the second part of this article.

For sure, good governance is not something we can be proud of. Although previous administrations cannot boast of being paragons of clean and straight government, President Duterte himself has admitted his failure to reform government.

Failing from the start

Bad governance is the reason for the missteps at the beginning of this pandemic and the messy way the latest decisions are being implemented.

The Philippines was in a state of denial in the early stages of the pandemic. There might have been a window in late January to stop the novel coronavirus from entering our islands. But by delaying action for political and diplomatic reasons, we lost that chance.

As experts predicted, the infections began to spread, crawling at first then gaining speed as time passed – from one confirmed case in January 30 to 140 confirmed cases and 11 deaths, majority in Metro Manila, as of March 15 – a span of only one-and-a half months. As of Wednesday morning, March 18, there were 193 confirmed cases and 14 fatalities.

While in the early stages only persons with known travel history have been infected, the upsurge of infections among those with no travel history indicates that local transmission is happening, and happening fast. 

By not acting immediately and decisively in preventing the entry of the novel coronavirus, the exponential explosion of infections was not prevented.

A justified lockdown

With the raising by the Department of Health (DOH) of Code Red Sub-Level 2 last week, President Rodrigo Duterte imposed a 30-day lockdown, euphemistically labeled as a community quarantine, on Metro Manila. It essentially prohibited domestic land, air, and sea travel to and from Metro Manila up to April 14, extending the suspension of classes in the metropolis until April 12, and banning planned or spontaneous mass gatherings. 

Let me be clear that I fully support this community quarantine decision, both the general one initially imposed on Metro Manila and the subsequent enhanced community quarantine in Luzon. Many more local governments, as we are seeing now in Cebu, Davao, and Zamboanga City, have also imposed some kind of quarantine. (READ: LOOK: Scenes across Metro Manila as Luzon lockdown begins)

These decisions were based on a recommendation by the Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF) for the Management of Emerging and Infectious Diseases. Dr Edsel Salvana, a lead scientist in that group and  a colleague in the University of the Philippines, is the most credible scientific voice on infectious diseases and COVID-19. It is good the Duterte government is listening to him and the IATF. (READ: DOH launches hotlines for coronavirus queries)

Dr Salvana has been an early advocate of social distancing as the first defense to COVID-19. And he is right.  

Peter Salavey, president of Yale University, articulates the reason well: “The clearest relevant lesson we have drawn from our best-informed, wisest sources is this: pandemics are defeated by bold measures that blunt the curve of the rate of infection through the dramatic reduction of intense human contact.”

This why schools have to be closed and should not reopen until the danger is past. Thankfully, there are alternative ways of teaching and learning. 

A lockdown is proven to be an effective measure to restrict the movement of people and minimize the risk of exposure or prevent those already infected from spreading the disease. It has been adopted in many affected countries like China, France, Italy, and Spain, to name a few. Initially, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Germany were taking a different approach – putting their people in the peril – but they too are now imposing lockdowns. Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea took a different approach successfully but that option, based on early action, is no longer available for us.

Chaos in implementing the NCR quarantine 

While supporting the community quarantine, I am afraid that its implementation has been messy and problematic. I teach a climate change and disaster management course in the Ateneo School of Government and I tell my students that good disaster response requires solid planning, which includes imagining scenarios and modeling how people and institutions respond to the decisions that will be taken.

It should have been foreseen that the announcement of a community quarantine would trigger panic buying and people racing to terminals and ports to go back to the provinces and get out of Manila before the lockdown takes effect. Without the adequate preparation of other local governments, this exodus to the provinces might have the perverse effect of spreading the coronavirus across our islands.

It has not given me confidence seeing our inadequately protected police officers and soldiers in hastily set-up checkpoints. Many of them could get sick because of that. 

Another surprise was the announcement by the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority that the 16 cities and one municipality of the National Capital Region would impose a curfew from 8 pm to 5 am. Local legislative councils would have to enact ordinances to impose these curfews and provide penalties for their violation.

I oppose curfews. They are diversionary and can even be harmful. Chances are people will stay in the places other than their homes if only to avoid the curfew and end up gathering in groups. The more reasonable approach is to temporarily close non-essential businesses and events like bars, restaurants, malls, parlors, etc subject to supporting workers and small businesses.

On practical grounds, enforcement of a curfew is a logistical nightmare which will dissipate much needed human resources. Imagine, thousands of police and military personnel doing the rounds during curfew hours accosting people and forcing them to go home.

As I will argue in Part 2 of this article, government resources are better deployed to help the poor achieve social distancing. (To be concluded) – Rappler.com

Tony La Viña teaches law and is former dean of the Ateneo School of Government.

These days economists worldwide agree on two things. 

First, the global economy is headed for a recession or sustained economic downturn due to COVID-19. Governments are now drawing up huge stimulus packages to shore up their embattled economies.

Second, the first order of business is to contain COVID-19. Unless the pandemic is quelled, a global economic recovery won’t occur any time soon.

So this week I’m taking the time to look at epidemiologists’ outlooks for COVID-19, in the Philippines and abroad, to see where we’re headed.

The outlook looks grim. 

Two studies suggest the Philippines – which now has sustained community transmission – is only at the very beginning of this public health crisis. (READ: Coronavirus cases in PH could reach 26,000 by end-March) 

In fact, the Philippine epidemic might not peak until June and taper off until October (or even longer). This bleak outlook coincides with epidemiologists’ predictions abroad.  

Thankfully, we’re not totally helpless. We can still change the course of this contagion – if only we “flatten the curve.”

Grim scenarios

Exactly how will COVID-19 spread in the Philippines? (WATCH: Rappler Talk: The Exponential Growth of a Pandemic)

Filipino epidemiologists are now crunching the numbers, and there are two studies I’ve seen so far. 

The first analysis is by Dr. Jomar Rabajante of the Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Physics at the University of the Philippines (UP) Los Baños.  

He predicts that, at least for Metro Manila, the epidemic will peak at around mid-April, when there could be in excess of 2,500 cases in a single day (Figure 1). 

When the epidemic is seen to subside by end of June, there will have been a total of 11,000 cases in Metro Manila.

Figure 1. Source: Rabajante [2020] 

The second analysis – this time nationwide in scope – is by Dr. Darwin Bandoy of the College of Veterinary Medicine at UP Los Baños and the School of Veterinary Medicine at University of California at Davis. 

Dr. Bandoy’s estimates are grimmer. He predicts the nationwide epidemic will not peak until end of June, when we could see a whopping 245,000 cases in a day (see Figure 2). Worse, the epidemic won’t taper off until October, he said.

Dr. Bandoy tweeted, “If we will not control [COVID-19], we will be like Italy in 2 months time.” 

My latest #COVID2019 COVID-19 case forecast and reproductive number estimate for the Philippines @mlq3@czarmedinagucehttps://t.co/gV3Ae4qeEqpic.twitter.com/csfHnUdWa0

— drbandoyDVM,CPhil (@darwinbandoy) March 16, 2020

Figure 2. Source: Bandoy [2020]

In short, the two analysts say we’re in for a roller coaster ride, and we’re just at the beginning.

Caveats

How do we make sense of these alarming findings?

First, they roughly coincide with the studies abroad. 

On March 16, thirty esteemed scientists of the Imperial College at London published a study predicting that an unmitigated epidemic might kill as many as 510,000 people in the UK and 2.2 million people in the US.  

Similar to Dr. Bandoy’s findings, the epidemics in the US and the UK will also likely peak around June (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Source: Ferguson et al. [2020]

The Imperial College study was so shocking it prompted the US and UK governments to enact new sweeping regulations against COVID-19. Even US President Donald Trump, who constantly played down COVID-19 for several weeks, now sounds worried.

Second, the analysts’ findings are only as good as the models and assumptions they used, and these may explain differences in their predictions. More studies will surely crop up in the weeks to come.

Third and most important, by no means are the projections fixed outcomes we’re all doomed to suffer. Filipinos can still abate the epidemic and alter its course – provided we “flatten the curve.”

Two options

The Imperial College study offered two primary strategies to fight COVID-19.  

Mitigation. This is to slow down the epidemic spread, but not extinguish it totally. 

Figure 4 shows mitigation can be achieved by a variety of measures, including closing down schools and universities, case detection and isolation, home quarantine, and social distancing among the elderly (who are most vulnerable to COVID-19).

Figure 4. Source: Ferguson et al. [2020] 

Suppression. This involves reversing the growth of the pandemic and bringing down the number of new cases to a bare minimum. This can be enforced by more extreme measures like population-wide social distancing.

The good thing with suppression is that you can make sure hospitals won’t be swamped with new cases of COVID-19, hospital resources won’t be depleted, and frontline health workers won’t be run to the ground. 

But suppression comes at a huge social cost. Aside from severe economic downturn, it might also take a huge toll on millions of people’s physical and mental health.

There’s also no let up with suppression: you must enforce it until a vaccine is found. 

Dr. Rabajante provides some numbers (Figure 5). Even if a “community quarantine” successfully suppresses the number of COVID-19 cases in Metro Manila until April 14, if we all go back to normal after that, a nightmarish explosion of cases could still occur – bringing us all back to square one. 

Figure 5. Source: Rabajante [2020]

The problem is that the world is still 12 to 18 months (at least a year) away from a vaccine. It will take even longer to bring it to the Philippines and vaccinate a majority of our people.

This suggests government might have to enforce stringent lockdowns and social distancing for the rest of 2020, or even beyond. 

Botched lockdown

In principle, suppression could work, but so far the Duterte government’s “enhanced community quarantine” has been a failure.

Government itself is the first to violate its rules and guidelines on social distancing. 

For instance, thousands of motorists and commuters – including doctors, for Pete’s sake – have been held up at checkpoints, massed together in a way that promotes rather than suppresses the spread of COVID-19.  

Opportunisticpoliticians also distributed aid while gathering hundreds of people, risking their health.

The lockdown has also been glaringly anti-poor. Poor workers, patients, and the elderly have been forced to walk for several miles because of the ill-conceived ban on public transportation.  

At a time of need, the Department of Social Welfare and Development is also scaling back rather than ramping up some of its key social welfare programs, such as social pension for seniors and unconditional cash transfers.  

And despite the urgency of the situation, government is also not beefing up quickly enough its testing capabilities, as well as the resources needed by our frontline health workers. As early as now, some hospitals are reporting shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) like masks, gloves, and gowns.

Mitigation at best 

All in all, government seems woefully incapable of implementing a Luzon-wide lockdown for several months on end. Absent sufficient safety nets, a protracted lockdown will also bury millions of our people deep in hunger and poverty. 

Given our resources and current state of governance, it seems our best bet in the coming months (or year) is continued mitigation: case isolation, home quarantine, school closures, social distancing, and good personal hygiene. 

In any case, let’s brace ourselves for tougher times and look out for one another. – Rappler.com

The author is a PhD candidate and teaching fellow at the UP School of Economics. His views are independent of the views of his affiliations. Thanks very much to Dr. Bandoy and Dr. Rabajante for valuable comments and insights. Follow JC on Twitter (@jcpunongbayan) and Usapang Econ (usapangecon.com). 

While there have been laudable moves on the part of government, such as the closure of schools for a month, banning of mass gatherings, working from home, and the imposition of the social distancing strategy, there are inadequacies in its total lockdown policy as it penalizes rather than incentivizes proper behavior at this time. This could even exacerbate the problem as it fails to provide for alternatives to the poor.

In public policymaking, best practices are usually replicated, so the same or similar results are expected. However, at this point in time, there are still no best practices as the whole world is still grappling with the coronavirus crisis. The lockdown in China is definitely NOT A BEST PRACTICE since they still have the most number of COVID-19 cases (more than 80,000) and the most number of deaths (more than 3,000). Plus, the fact that the lockdown itself was the culprit as to why the residents of Wuhan fled to different parts of the world, which eventually spread the virus globally.

Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan, on the other hand, didn't impose a lockdown but seemed to be managing the worst of the crisis without reaching the level of cases and deaths in China. But all of them, including China, DID NOT stop their public transport systems. Precisely, because all of these countries know that continuous, albeit limited mobility and economic activity are essential to their people's survival. (READ: Coronavirus keeps 500 million people home around the world)

Thus, the policy challenge now is not only how to contain COVID-19, but also how to minimize the economic dislocation it would cause.

In view of the above, in addition to the laudable policies in effect as mentioned above, the following are some policy recommendations:

On health

1. Require all individuals going out of their homes to wear at least a cloth mask or even a large handkerchief wrapped around the face (ideally, with goggles or eyeglasses). This could help prevent the spread of the virus through abrupt or uncovered coughing or sneezing for the undiagnosed carrier, while protecting the healthy from the droplets.

2. Require all business establishments, government offices, all MRT stations, and bus terminals, to have alcohol stations at multiple points within their areas.

3. Require MMDA personnel and other pertinent government workers to man alcohol stations in waiting areas for buses, the MRT, and jeepneys for random alcohol disinfection of hands. Call for citizen volunteers to provide for this alcohol disinfection operation.

4. Government to require alcohol and surgical mask producers to increase their production and procure their produce for mass distribution to hospitals, frontliners, and disinfection operations.

5. Lift the ban on PUVs and treat drivers and conductors as frontliners essential to the delivery of public services. Provide them with personal protective equipment.

6. Prepare schools near hospitals or makeshift medical tents as possible isolation areas for COVID-19 patients in case the number of the infected increases beyond the capacity of the hospitals.

7. Move the hospital triage stations to open areas outside the hospital so that incoming regular patients and their relatives could not be infected by suspected COVID-19 patients.

8. Mobilize willing nursing students or unemployed nursing graduates to work with pay as nursing assistants in public or private hospitals at government expense. Provide for makeshift sleeping areas for them to optimize both resting and service time.

9. Government must set up multiple testing centers for early detection and treatment.

10. Government to expedite the release of medical supplies imported through Customs.

11. Only essential foreigners (diplomats, spouses of citizens, working expats) should be allowed entry into the country.

But all international passengers including returning citizens, should be treated as suspected carriers and, therefore, must be tested and go on self-quarantine.

On labor and the economy (legislation required)

1. Prepare a P500 billion economic stimulus package for industries and SMEs heavily affected by the crisis. This should include bailouts, tax relief, cash doleouts to workers, etc.

2. Provide grants to employers who provide paid leaves for their employees.

3. Government to coordinate with banks for a 1-month moratorium on loan amortizations.

4. Government to distribute vouchers for groceries to daily wage earners affected.

5. Realign P200 billion of the current budget on infra to expand the 4Ps program. – Rappler.com

Antonio F. Trillanes IV is a lecturer on public policy and former senator.

The Philippines is in a public health crisis – a problem that is medical as well as social. Depending on the culture that we have, our collective behavior and social environment have great potential in solving or aggravating the coronavirus pandemic.

Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in his March 12 speech that "because COVID-19 will be with us for a long time, there are baseline things that we must get used to, like...adopting new social norms." This means that we have to question the things that we usually do. And then we change the things that can make us more vulnerable to the virus.

Aside from having a more hygienic lifestyle and practicing social distancing, there are still others that need mentioning here. 

Example 1: Re-orient "May awa ang Diyos" (God is merciful). Religion is a lot of things, but it is not enough to cannot ensure people's health amidst a pandemic. Faith can be beneficial in keeping a positive outlook, but we need to be careful that it does not downplay the problem at hand. God is merciful, yes, but in the time of pandemic, mercy is not the only thing that we need. We also need to follow preventive measures – no mass gatherings – and be critical of our government's crisis management.

Example 2: Parents need to listen to their children. Millennials and Gen Z navigate social media well and are better informed, especially when they know how to discern real from fake news. The younger generation also has more access to real-life COVID-19 stories that give them an idea of how grave this virus really is. Many parents may feel like they are being disrespected when their children tell them what to do, but this is a cultural mindset that we can leave behind as we move on with community quarantine.

Example 3: Acknowledge that a home and a house are two different things. These two should ideally overlap, but lived experiences of some Filipinos show otherwise. We are required to stay put in our own houses, yet a lot of us would not feel safe nor at home. Having a toxic relative is an unfortunately normal part of Filipino family life. There is no need, then, to shame those who did not choose to stay in their houses within this month-long quarantine.

Example 4: Know that we are not vulnerable the same way and do something about it. If we ever feel that everything is perfectly okay, then we need to talk to other people – ask our building guard, our kasambahay, our delivery boy, or anyone who does not enjoy the same comforts as we. This pandemic has divided people into those who can afford to follow blanket precautionary measures, and those who have no choice but to work and stay cramped within their settlements. We should stop assuming that because things are going to be okay for us, then it's the same for everybody else.

Example 5: Drop the "Baka kailanganin ko" (I may need it in the future) mentality. This mentality has caused people to hoard medical supplies, leaving frontliners, especially health workers, with little resources to protect themselves. This mentality has also caused hesitation from people to transfer a little bit of savings to the marginalized who consider a peso a matter of life and death. We have a lot of donation drives online both for frontliners and the marginalized sectors who are most vulnerable to this virus. Our ready, secure finances for the future are already real-time lifelines for some – surely, chipping in would not hurt. (READ: [OPINION] Notes from a supermarket on the last day of freedom)

Example 6: Stop counting individual contributions in ending this pandemic. This isn't the essence of bayanihan that has gotten the nation out of various crises many times before. Bayanihan is recognizing that we do not have the same capacity to help, and those who have more to give should assist those who have less. The goal is to get everybody through this crisis. This is an expensive and daunting task whose cost and demands need to be shared by Filipinos who can afford to contribute – which includes but is not exclusive to monetary donation.

Example 7: Question "Sumunod ka na lang" (Just obey). Telling people to just follow equates telling people not to point out shortcomings in proposed crisis management. There are real problems that many vulnerable sectors face which are not included in crisis management. Speaking truth to exclusion and socio-economic divide does not mean being unwilling to help the government. Quite the contrary, even. 

These are not normal times. We should not wait for coronavirus symptoms to manifest especially since we might be asymptomatic carriers. We need to act as if we already carry the virus, and change our behavior so we do not transmit it to someone else. It is important to emphasize, however, that changing what have been normal Filipino behaviors can still be helpful even after we get through this pandemic.  

For now, let's defeat this public health crisis as a collective. #CourageOn! – Rappler.com

Athena Charanne 'Ash' R. Presto teaches at the Sociology Department of the University of the Philippines-Diliman. She tweets at @sosyolohija. 

The following is Part 2 in a two-part series. You can read Part 1 here.

Social distancing cannot be enforced coercively. It requires education and persuasion. It requires people to have trust and confidence in their government. It requires assurance that the government will take care of the people who follow its directives. 

In short, social distancing can only succeed if there is social capital. 

That is a big challenge for a society that is so unequal and one that is bitterly divided along partisan lines. 

Prioritizing the poor

In a way, what is happening now in Metro Manila is neither a lockdown nor a community quarantine. It is, instead, an attempt to get the middle class and the rich to distance themselves from each other and from the poor. (READ: Luzon lockdown: What are the do's and don'ts?)

For sure, the rich and the middle class have heard enough, know what to do, and can fend for themselves. They can work and worship from home, and teach and study online.

However, the poor do not have many options. They still have to work. They still have to commute. They still have to live in homes shared with 10-20 people, in “loobans” with hundreds of shanties in the same 100-200-square-meter area. The poor will not be able to do a lot of social distancing. Our less privileged neighbors will be ravaged by the coronavirus. 

The government should focus all its attention and resources on the poor. Non-coercive interventions – the establishment of support mechanisms – should be directed to help the poor cope with the economics of the community quarantine, and to assist them in doing social distancing.

While I support the temporary closure of non-essential establishments, such a closure must be accompanied by economic support measures for affected employees and small businesses. Among others, the proposal of Senator Risa Hontiveros to provide P10,000 as immediate relief for affected workers is a good start. This amount, however, is clearly not enough, as this lockdown is likely to continue for months.

Militaristic approach is wrong

This is why I have strong reservations about a militaristic approach to implementing the community quarantine and curfew in Metro Manila. It will divert resources from the real challenge – helping the poor survive the days, weeks, and months ahead. (READ: [OPINION] Solusyong medikal, hindi aksyong militar)

The police and military can be better utilized as a complement to healthcare providers trying to detect cases of the virus. The police and military can help in the dissemination of relevant information about the virus, especially in vulnerable sectors like the depressed areas of Metro Manila. They can also help in the disinfection of places and the distribution of relief goods to indigent families.

The government must provide for the poor. Otherwise, starvation will terrorize the poor more than the virus will. In desperation, if they cannot feed their families, crime will become attractive.

The pandemic is primarily a public health emergency and not a security problem. It is but logical that the police and military, without neglecting their main duties, must take a more proactive role in helping out in this emergency.  

A national unity government

The coronavirus presents our greatest challenge since World War II, when the Japanese invaded and occupied our islands and cities. There was no escape from the war, and now there is no escape from the virus; one cannot choose to ignore it. It’s like Lawin, Yolanda, Sendong, Ondoy, Reming, Milenyo, and other disasters for those caught geographically in the middle. But this one threatens all our islands, and it is not a one-day event.

Unlike the Japanese occupation, however, this is not a war and cannot be fought with arms or brute force. It has to be fought with science, discipline, cooperation, and national unity.

Unless we are united as a people, we will not defeat this enemy. 

Except for their enactment of curfews, I am glad that the mayors of Metro Manila are totally engaged in this fight. I have been watching Mayors Joy Belmonte of Quezon City, Abby Binay of Makati, Vico Sotto of Pasig, Francis Zamora of San Juan, and Isko Moreno of Manila – and these young leaders give me confidence. 

But there is much work to do at the national level so we can achieve unity.

Personally, I will support the Duterte government in its community quarantine strategy. As I have written in this article, that strategy can succeed not through coercion or through a militaristic approach, but by assisting the poor.

I put my full support behind Health Secretary Francisco Duque and all our health workers. Secretary Duque, whom I know professionally, might have made mistakes early in this fight, but he is still the best Filipino to lead us to victory against the coronavirus. His experience as Philhealth head, health secretary in the Arroyo and Duterte governments, and Chair of the Civil Service Commission will serve him and us well in addressing this complex challenge.

I was also relieved to see Cabinet Secretary Karlo Nograles take the lead in coordinating the actions related to the enhanced quarantine for Luzon. Sec Nograles is competent, serious, and decent. He will do well in this task.

Recognizing the extraordinary circumstances we are facing, I call on President Duterte to take radical steps for national reconciliation. Order the release of Senator Leila de Lima and other political prisoners aligned with the Left. Change course in the war against drugs. Reach out to journalists and media organizations it has attacked. Accelerate the peace process with the communists with whom an immediate ceasefire should be agreed with.

The coronavirus is an existential threat to all of us. If we do not unite, many of us will die and there might be no country left to fight over. A national unity government gives us a fighting chance. – Rappler.com

Ganito na lang kasi kababaw ang kaligayahan ng marami sa atin. 

Kaya kapag nakakakita ng pinunong ginagawa ang trabaho, ang mamuno at mamahala, natutuwa ang marami sa atin, lalo’t kaydaling magpahayag ng organikong katuwaan sa social media. Kaya rin ang bilis nagte-trending (ehem, hindi kagaya ng scripted troll farm virtual utterance lately tungkol sa mga paawa eme eme). Masaya ang marami sa atin na para bang pambihira ang pinunong tunay na namumuno at namamahala sa bansang ito; pinunong hinuhugutan ng inspirasyon, lalo sa mga panahon ngayon. Wait. Pambihira naman kasi talaga.  

Sanay na kasi tayo sa maski papaano na lang. O maskipaps. Sanay na tayo, or, to be more precise, manhid na sa mabagal na pagtugon at aksiyon sa panahon ng krisis. Sanay na tayong dedmahin sa buong panahon matapos ang eleksiyon hanggang iparamdam na importante uli sa kampanya at sa mismong botohan. Sasayawan ka lang, panalo na. 

Sanay na tayo sa tersera klaseng pakikitungo ng mga pulitiko. Unless mahilig, natutuwa, at nai-inspire ka sa gibberish pronouncements. O sa mga pulitikong nagte-teleport sa kanilang posisyon bilang mambabatas o alalay. O sa mga ni-recycle na pulitikong may naaagnas na nakaraan at may mistulang naaagnas na pagmumukha.

Kaya kapag may deviation sa trapo ways of our politicians, masaya tayo. Puwede pala. Kaya naghahanap tayo ng aksiyon sa iba. Naghahambing. Nang-aasar. Eh maraming madaling mapikon. Lalo iyong mga may malawak na makinarya't matataas na posisyon. Idagdag pa ang may sinasakang mapagpalang farm ng mga troll.

Dahil alam ko namang pamilyar kayo dito sa ikinukuwento ko, kaya dederetsuhin ko na. Buong araw ba naman nating kaniig ang ating social media account. Tungkol ito sa batang-batang Pasig City mayor na si Vico Sotto, na noong una pa lang, dahil sa mga salik na hindi naman niya sadya, gaya ng pagiging anak ng mga personalidad ng showbiz, ay napagtuunan na agad ng pansin. Kaydaling mahulog ng atensiyon ng madla sa kaniya, lalo’t nagawa niyang talunin ang isang matandang lahing itinuring na pag-aari ang kapangyarihan sa city east of Metro Manila, lahing nag-ugat hindi lamang sa lungsod kung hindi sa mas matataas na bulwagan ng kapangyarihan sa bansa. 

Sa pagkahulog ng marami kay Mayor Vico, inungkat ng marami ang personal na buhay ng binata kahit na ayaw niya. Kakaiba si Mayor Vico sa nakagisnan nating pulitikong kahit ano na lang ang mapag-usapan, basta ma-cover o mailathala sa pambalot ng tinapa. Sinabi pa ng treinta anyos na punong lungsod: “If we want better governance, we should stop treating our government officials like showbiz personalities.” The nerve ng mayor na ito, ha? Sa panahong isinasapelikula ng mga laos na artista ang buhay ng mga pulitiko, sa panahong kanlungan ng mga laos ang mga opisina ng gobyerno, tigilan daw natin ang pagtrato sa mga pulitiko bilang showbiz personalities. Wala ito sa matandang trapo tenet, ha? Kakaiba.  

Well, hindi tayo nagpapigil. Matigas ang ulo natin. Maraming oras (lalo ngayon!) para bantayan ang kaniyang ginagawa. At sa bawat ginagawang ito na wala sa standard operational procedures ng mga trapo, natutuwa tayo. Isine-share, bininyagan ng hashtag, naging laman ng meme, itinuring na idolo. Mayroon pa ngang na-in love. Kaybibilis nating ma-fall.  

Ginawa nating benchmark ang Pasig. Ginawang biro ang kawalang-aksiyon ng ibang lungsod. Hindi nakapagtatakang may hindi natuwa sa mga ideyang out of the (trapo) box sa gitna ng mapaminsalang kalamidad. At sino ang hindi matutuwa? Siyempre iyong mga na-underscore ang inefficiency, lalo’t kay daling ma-access ang ginagawa, o kawalang ng ginagawa, ng iba pang pamahalaang lokal. Nag-sound-off ang ibang ahensiya: sumunod sa nakamulatan nating maskipaps na standard o makakatikim ng asunto. Ang gandang euphemism para sa huwag kang masyadong magaling. 

Kaya sa susunod na may local politician na maayos ang trabaho, huwag masyadong excited sa pagpuri. Baka uli mag-trending at maging target agad ng mapanibughuin, gaya ng nangyayari kay Mayor Vico, na kinukuyog ngayon ng mga beteranong tagakuyog ng administrasyon. (BASAHIN: #ProtectVico trends as netizens defend Pasig mayor's coronavirus measures) 

In part, kasalanan din ito ng inip na inip nang smartphone-toting Pinoy. Hindi naman magte-trending si Mayor Vico all by his lonesome self kung hindi tayo nag-share. O sige na nga, kung hindi tayo natuwa. Dahil sa bansang itong sanay na sa kapalpakan, parang sugo mula sa kaitaasan ang marunong mamahala at tumugon agad sa pangangailangan. 

Hindi tayo sinanay sa maayos na serbisyo kaya nabibigla tayo sa mga gaya ni Vico. At dapat manatili ang ganitong estado. Hanggang novelty na lang. Ipinararamdam sa atin ng mga nangyayari na hindi natin dapat makasanayan ang mabuting paglilingkod. Hindi dapat tumaas ang ating standards. Dapat manatiling mababaw ang ligaya para sa paminsan-minsang kinang ng pag-asang kailangang apulahin agad ng mga banta ng kaso at concerted kuyog; dahil, oo nga naman, baka maging rallying personality pa ng mga naghahanap ng maayos na serbisyo. Lalo’t sanay na sanay na tayo sa maskipaps. At alam na alam na natin kung paano lumimot, at magpanalo ng mga nagbubodots. – Rappler.com 

Bukod sa pagtuturo ng creative writing, pop culture, research, at seminar in new media sa Departamento ng Literatura at sa Graduate School ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas, research fellow din si Joselito D. delos Reyes, PhD, sa UST Research Center for Culture, Arts and Humanities. Siya ang coordinator ng AB Creative Writing program ng UST.