The present project posits that communication design may be an efficient tool in both filtering unreliable knowledge and contributing to a more empathetic dialogue between scientific expertise and citizen concerns. The premises of this hypothesis can be translated as follows:

1. Scientific complexity is not always readily translatable to those outside the fields of study;

2. A correlation between scientific diagnosis and public policy is equally complex and not always clear to citizens;

3. Statistical representation may benefit from more intelligible and accessible interfaces: graphic, figurative, even documentary;

4. An exhaustion over the pandemic may be worsened by overused media communication strategies;

5. An excessive reliance in digital technology and data overflow may have been falling short of its tangible applicability;

6. Citizens may tend to bypass statistical and evidence-based reliability if it happens to be contrary to their own narrative, experience, or preceding beliefs;

7. A behavioural regulation and corresponding pedagogy in crisis scenarios may need to consider subjective components and levels of literacy more than it has so far; 

8. A closer scrutiny of information fluxes in social media, as well as online field work towards more dynamic communication channels, may be essential to the success of scientific and policy-based communication strategies.

As far as relevance, we further posit that historical patterns and the heritage of the present pandemic may help in future communication and regulation of health-related crises and further scenarios of public impact, namely by using communication design as an interface towards engagement and reciprocity.