Calm before the storm
Considering that nobody in Hong Kong has caught bird flu in the current outbreak - and that no case of human-to-human infection has been confirmed anywhere in the world - the alarm bells over the H5N1 virus have been ringing very loudly.
The reason is simple: epidemics produce a particular kind of fear. This is partly because of their pathogenic nature, but even more because of their unpredictability. No one knows for certain what will happen. In Hong Kong, these fears are exacerbated by the recent memories of severe acute respiratory syndrome and by the vulnerability of our economy.
Against this background, the practical, common-sense approach adopted so far by our media is a reassuring sign. A recent series of articles in this newspaper drew a balanced picture of the risks and safeguards associated with the virus; editorials both in this paper and others have struck a similarly mature note.
Will this attitude last if things go more seriously amiss? There are two reasons for cautious optimism.
The first, ironically, is our Sars experience. When that blow fell, mistakes were made. But Hong Kong quickly emerged with credit for bringing an unexampled situation under control. There were unforgettable stories of heroism in our medical profession.
Hong Kong was in the front line in developing ways to diagnose and treat the disease. It is no coincidence that Margaret Chan Fung Fu-chun, our director of health during the Sars outbreak, is now the assistant director-general for communicable diseases with the World Health Organisation.
A second reason for hope is the astonishing rate of medical progress in coping with pandemics. These, like the poor, have always been with us. One contributed to the decline of the Roman empire in the third century; another, the Black Death, took only seven years in the mid-14th century to cull perhaps a third of the population of Europe and the Middle East - and continued to recur at intervals for another two centuries. Spanish flu killed up to 50 million in the late 1920s.
More recently, it has taken decades to bring Aids even partially under control. The combination of improved global communications and vastly better science locally, in the mainland and internationally, give the best grounds for hope in the face of the latest challenge.
But even as things stand now, one key element of Hong Kong's economy - the travel industry - is looking under threat, as is agriculture in the mainland. It is not only hotels and travel agents which are affected, but the entire spectrum of restaurants, retail and resort businesses. Together, these account for a major proportion of our gross domestic product and employ tens of thousands of workers.
When lives may be at stake, it might seem mean-spirited to talk about livelihoods. But surely the two are related. During Sars, the government was not always effective in conveying a balanced picture of the local situation to the international community. I hope the chief executive's team will devote more attention to this in Operation Poplar - a test of the readiness of government departments to respond effectively in the event that we are faced with a flu pandemic.
In particular, it should consider how to counter the heavily biased reporting that disfigured the international media during Sars and inflicted great damage to Hong Kong's image. It should also lobby hard against the counterproductive, if well-intentioned, issuing of travel advisories by the WHO, which blighted the travel industry during Sars.
Anyone who travels in future - and anyone who does not - will have to accept the new risks posed by pandemics, just as they face those arising from natural disasters or terrorism.
Otherwise, our economy will not escape the effects of even a near-miss by the latest viral enemy.
Andrew Wells is a former senior civil servant and a freelance writer
