Abstract

‘Better safe than sorry’ has been the familiar response of public health authorities to concerns about the enormous cost and disruption to health services that resulted from the 2009 global scare over what turned out to be a relatively benign swine flu virus. Some critics have focused on links between prominent public health figures and the manufacturers of antiviral medications and vaccines who were the conspicuous financial beneficiaries of the scare, alleging undue influence and conflicts of interest. This paper argues – from the perspective of a general practitioner engaged in an inner city practice in the UK during the 2009 pandemic – that the promotion of exaggerated fears of infectious disease as an instrument of policy risks further undermining popular trust in medicine and public health.