key: cord-0694601-0nwhai2n authors: Lee, Jong-Koo title: The policy art of the “trade-off” for combatting COVID-19 date: 2021-06-24 journal: Osong Public Health Res Perspect DOI: 10.24171/j.phrp.2021.0150 sha: eb0dfb6734a9a7d8f257ce9754dc241b30ae939e doc_id: 694601 cord_uid: 0nwhai2n nan vaccine acquisition and rollout were delayed, and vaccine hesitancy due to controversy regarding the rare event of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis linked the AstraZeneca vaccine made an impact on the race towards vaccination. The one-dose use of the Janssen vaccine targeting veterans is also scheduled to start after approval by the regulatory authorities, which will lead to further progress in this race. This provides an optimistic perspective that 14 million people will be able to receive the shot. However, more active persuasion is needed. Infectious diseases have a large external effect, and in order to protect the entire society, herd immunity is required to block transmission. A sophisticated explanatory model is needed for political decision-making and persuasion of the public. Non-pharmacological intervention policies, vaccine rollout, and border opening are inextricably linked with the COVID-19 infection rate and economic losses. Therefore, modeling to determine which policy option to choose and at which time to implement it becomes important, and simulation of the options would help in decision-making. Although the government has never clearly stated whether its policy goal regarding COVID-19 is to eliminate the disease or to mitigate its consequences, the trade-off between different options is the art of decisionmaking for the elimination of COVID-19. Public health measures, economic losses, democratic solidarity, and civil liberties are important factors when evaluating pandemic responses. The Republic of Korea has been recognized as one of the 5 best Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in terms of eliminating COVID-19 [5] . The Korean government has aimed to lower R(t) below 1 and then shift to a mitigation policy once it falls below 1; thus, the Republic of Korea is an example of a country with a tight suppression policy, not a country with an aggressive/moderate elimination policy [6] . Most of all, an authentic attitude on the part of decisionmakers makes it possible to persuade the public to participate in policy uptake. The government's responsibility is to secure a safe vaccine and to make decisions transparently. The responsibility of the media is to provide accurate and detailed reports on the benefits of vaccines according to the science and the evidence. The accountability of the people is to get vaccinated, wear masks, and maintain social distancing. No one is safe until everyone is safe. When everyone is responsible and accountable in their role, COVID-19 will be eliminated. Not applicable. The author has no conflicts of interest to declare. None. WHO Director-General's keynote speech at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum ´21 Geneva: WHO; 2021 Biden administration to buy 500 million Pfizer coronavirus vaccine doses to donate to the world COVID-19 Vaccines. The FDA has regulatory processes in place to facilitate the development of COVID-19 vaccines that meet the FDA's rigorous scientific standards Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of the BNT162b2 Covid-19 vaccine in adolescents SARS-CoV-2 elimination, not mitigation, creates best outcomes for health, the economy, and civil liberties Melbourne: The University of Melbourne The policy art of the "trade-off" for combatting COVID-19