>Timely, honest communication from a source an audience deems credible is essential to containing fear during an epidemic, but governments have the tough job of explaining risk and telling people how to act without also seeding alarm, says Carnegie Mellon University psychologist Baruch Fischhoff, PhD. He chaired the Food and Drug Administration's Risk Advisory Committee and the Environmental Protection Agency's Homeland Security Advisory Committee.

Well that's too bad

Give me a source picked by .gov that the audience would deem credible

From the article:

Framing risk, reducing panic

and

people who were least able to tolerate uncertainty overall experienced the most anxiety during the pandemic and were less likely to believe they could do anything to protect themselves

This is indeed true. The best way to reduce the fear is to logically evaluate the data and facts. Pay close attention to how the media spins things. The fear based herding gets them clicks and other political results.

As they at least indirectly point out, news reports of scary epidemics are really fear based herding. You can measure this in your daily life.

Problem -> reaction -> solution with the idea of "Ordo ad Chao"

There is repeating evidence of the following:

Epidemic/pandemic -> hysteria -> vaccine where the chaos is the hysteria and gaslighting of incompetent government response and the order is the "good feeling" of "fixing" the problem through a pre-made vaccine product.

The fear campaign for Ebola didn't work because risk analysis showed the gestation period was too fast for it to spread. This new virus has a longer period which makes the simulation/analysis seem out of control.