008 Citation: Moore R (2021) Pandemics, Public Health and Social Science. Arch Community Med Public Health 7(1): 008-011. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17352/2455-5479.000125 https://dx.doi.org/10.17352/acmph DOI: 2455-5479 ISSN: MEDICAL GROUP Mini Review Pandemics, Public Health and Social Science Ronnie Moore* School of Medicine and Medical Sciences, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland Received: 07 January, 2021 Accepted: 18 January, 2021 Published: 20 January, 2021 *Corresponding authors: Ronnie Moore, School of Medicine and Medical Sciences, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, E-mail: https://www.peertechz.com The PREPARE 1 research consortium is a European Union (EU) funded five-year (plus) investigation (additional funding and aims were added), set up to assess public health and clinical preparedness in the event of an Infectious Disease (ID) pandemic. The project, initiated in 2014 represents an international, multidisciplinary investigation conducted by a range of research clinicians and social scientists, aiming (as a first phase) to identify key structural, behavioural and cultural barriers to the rapid implementation of large multi- site clinical studies in Europe (Work package 1, see EARL Reports) 2,3 . This was a complex investigation and included a number of quantitative and qualitative research approaches and strategies. These included, mining various secondary data and official document. In addition, the investigation conducted detailed literature searches on clinical trial authorisation and ethical approval processes in each Member State (MS) of the European union [with some additional countries]; Country mapping of respective country ethics processes, recording Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), legal, regulations, and ethical and official guidelines; Developing procedures for tracking ethical approval in real-time in various MS; It established a raft of appropriate research strategies, including social surveys, various types of depth interviews, including telephone interviews, and focus groups. These included a range of face-to-face and telephone interviews with relevant key informants (ie, high profile professional stakeholders, Public Health Officials and front-line medical researchers, at different levels) in key member states. The investigation therefore sought multiple triangulations via the use of multiple data gathering techniques and data sources within and between quantitative and qualitative methodologies. The detail is published elsewhere (PREPARE EARL Reports 2015 and 2016 and in various associated publications, some listed here). The context of this project was bound by a growing concern that a serious pandemic was an eminent threat [1,2]. This was based on latest information on risk likelihood, as well as observed historical episodes. Increased frequency of threats added to this giving cause for concern in recent years because of rapid sociological and environmental changes, e.g., technology, livestock management and food production, transport, migration, and changes in climatic conditions. The links between globalisation and pandemics are therefore underscored, ‘Pandemics are thus often understood as the unintended ‘blowback’ – or even as the epidemiological footprint – of intensified globalization’ [3] and regarded by some as the Third Epidemiological Transition [4]. The weaknesses of national and, in particular, international public health agencies have been cruelly exposed amid the Covid -19 emergency of 2019-20-21. Medical science has limited control over diseases outbreaks, particularly since many of these are unpredictable in terms of likely threat origin, trajectory and mutation. Known viruses can and do mutate (as we see currently with Covid-19 emergency) potentially making vaccines ineffective. In addition, vaccines themselves, as well as risk perception and public attitudes, may even become part of the problem. In light of the emergence of both known and newly identified viruses there is some cause for concern. However, a biomedical clinical approach, often at the forefront of this type of research, may simply not be enough in itself to identify, control and manage these types of infections. It is argued here that a three-dimensional approach is needed, to include specialists from various branches of the social sciences. Some have argued that public health emergency systems have over-emphasized the clinical sciences [biomedical, Expert 1 https://www.prepare-europe.eu/About-us/Workpackages/ Workpackage-1 2 https://www.prepare-europe.eu/Portals/0/Documents/LibraryDocs/ Ethics,%20administrative,%20regulatory%20and%20 logistic%20bottlenecks%20and%20solutions%20for%20 pandemic-relevant%20clinical%20research%20in%20Europe. pdf?timestamp=1543322479291 3 https://ec.europa.eu/research/infocentre/article_en.cfm?artid=52026