question: The rise of the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the incongruity of individualization ideologies that position individuals at the centre of health care, by contributing, making informed decisions and exercising choice regarding their health options and lifestyle considerations. When confronted with a global health threat, government across the world, have understood that the rhetoric of individualization, personal responsibility and personal choice would only led to disastrous national health consequences. In other words, individual choice offers a poor criterion to guide the health and wellbeing of a population. This reality has forced many advanced economies around the world to suspend their pledges to ‘small government’, individual responsibility and individual freedom, opting instead for a more rebalanced approach to economic and health outcomes with an increasing role for institutions and mutualization. For many marginalized communities, individualization ideologies and personalization approaches have never worked. On the contrary, they have exacerbated social and health inequalities by benefiting affluent individuals who possess the educational, cultural and economic resources required to exercise ‘responsibility’, avert risks and adopt health protecting behaviours. The individualization of the management of risk has also further stigmatized the poor by shifting the blame for poor health outcomes from government to individuals. This paper will explore how the COVID-19 pandemic exposes the cracks of neoliberal rhetoric on personalization and opens new opportunities to approach the health of a nation as socially, economically and politically determined requiring ‘upstream’ interventions on key areas of health including housing, employment, education and access to health care.