**4. Perspective and conclusion**

From the hitherto discussed, one fact has been established. That the emergence of myths poses a great danger to the prevention and the halting of further spread of the COVID-19. Whether orchestrated by the different factors we have highlighted or because of other truisms our purview did not cover, fake news, a mythical approach to the novel virus is and has been detrimental to efforts to curtail it both nationally and globally. Combating the menace of misinformation must be a course of action any worthy academics must take seriously. That is what we have done here.

However, from another point of view, some may argue that how can we say for certain that what we generally refer to as unfounded myths about the coronavirus are unfounded? What exactly convinced us of their falsity? Is it because these other views regarded as myths are unpopular or because we have some facts indicating their

#### *Myths: Barriers to Fighting the COVID-19 Pandemic DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98711*

falsity? Is it not possible that the majority can be wrong? These are questions with far-reaching implications. The history of science is replete with examples whereby the whole scientific community was wrong, and the so-called lonely voices of dissidents were right. In some moments of history, only conspirators were promoting heliocentricity, the real science of the time was touted as geocentricity. It is dissenting voices of the likes of Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Einstein etc. that has sometimes proven what we have previously known to be false as true. Some may argue then that, it is possible that what seems to be legends of superstitious origin today may come to be flawless truth when further evidence appears. As the American writer Richard Rorty noted, declaring a viewpoint as true or false, one myth and another fact, are ways we condemn or praise views that we like or disagree with not that one is true or false [13]. Going by this, it can be argued then that since we do not have enough knowledge about the coronavirus, it will be too early to classify some views as fake, true, false or myths.

Nonetheless, we must correct any position or postulation presented in the fashion previously stated for two reasons. First, comparing scientific disagreement exemplified in the likes of Galileo, Newton or Einstein can and must not be likened to COVID-19 myths. The reason is conspirators and fake news peddlers have not given any evidence for their theories. They start and end with them postulating it. In the case of scientific dissidents like Galileo, evidence was presented, and, in the end, the truth prevailed. In the case of COVID-19 conspirators, it is not the case that evidence is not enough they are non-existent. Hence, they do not belong to the same category as the moment in which scientific postulation disagrees with known facts.

Secondly, although we do not possess enough knowledge on the COVID-19, it remains a fact that we know a lot already and based on what we currently know, conspirators can be declared false and mythical engagement as cheer falsity. We do not need to know everything about everything to distinguish between what is true or false. One does not need to be in New York to state that it is true that it is in the United States of America and that it is the most populated State therein. In like fashion, scientific knowledge is always open-ended. The reason, a future scientist will retest and reexamine the findings of their predecessors. So, any view that states we cannot distinguish between what is true or false because we do not know all there is to know about COVID-19 is unfounded, illogical, and naïve. We can never know everything about something. Future evidence will either validate or invalidate our present knowledge but based on the authority of our present knowledge, we can always make an informed decision about what is true or false. Given what is presently available, therefore, some views as we have earlier highlighted cannot be vindicated of their mythical nature.

Conclusively, the emergence of fake news and misinformation about the novel coronavirus places a very stringent task on our shoulders. It is the task of always soliciting the truth. Just as the influx of true findings on the virus is enormous, the continuous appearance of convincing conspiracies has crossed a barrier of obscurity into a limbo zone of our postmodern kitsch. Notwithstanding, the question we must always ask when faced with any postulation, comments, theory, or information on COVID-19 is "where are the evidence?" Swallowing any theory either politically motivated or culturally and religiously infused is detrimental not only to individual survival but also to the overall interest of our ailing world. Myth, to be candid, is an amorphous concept rejecting classification either of truth or falsity, but when evidence is lacking or are incoherent, we can assertively declare not just that they are false but more so that they are dangerous and must be tenaciously fought into oblivion.
