Question

If you could edit the planet to make it less vulnerable to pandemics, what would you change? The current coronavirus has been (often misleadingly) compared to the flu, but the flu does kill hundreds of thousands of people every year. How many would need to be projected to die in a given flu season before governments impose extreme social distancing? Should social distancing in fact be the long-term global norm, to prevent unknown outbreaks that could be even deadlier than COVID-19? Should other long-term threats, such as climate change, be treated with this same disruptive level of urgency, or is it unwise to take such bold action on more distant dangers? And, in what ways will the world be a better place for our having survived this crisis together? (Hint: at least the dolphins are happy.)

Answer 1

Answer:

Hey mate here is your answer.//

Explanation:

Three months ago, no one knew that SARS-CoV-2 existed. Now the virus has spread to almost every country, infecting at least 446,000 people whom we know about, and many more whom we do not. It has crashed economies and broken health-care systems, filled hospitals and emptied public spaces. It has separated people from their workplaces and their friends. It has disrupted modern society on a scale that most living people have never witnessed. Soon, most everyone in the United States will know someone who has been infected. Like World War II or the 9/11 attacks, this pandemic has already imprinted itself upon the nation’s psyche.

Having been through a pandemic in recent history, it seems reasonable to expect that government agencies in the U.S. would be prepared for the next one. But there are some key differences between the 2009 swine flu and COVID-19, and the response to each of them.

Hope it helps you.//✔✔✔

Please do mark me as Brainliest.//