4 ms·

The WHO has no credibility with me. I don’t believe anything they say anymore.

by beamatronic 7y ago

humaniania 7y ago
That seems pretty extreme to me. Who else is a better authority?
- beamatronic 7y ago
  The CDC The Santa Clara County health department
  - sk0g 7y ago
    Why should anyone in 195-1 countries care about either of those?
    - beamatronic 7y ago
      Because if anyone took this seriously (shelter in place worldwide 1 month ago) we would not be in this situation.
      - recursive 7y ago
        > Because if anyone took this seriously You mean if everyone took this seriously. Which is obviously a lot more difficult. It would probably not be possible to get everyone to agree that the sky is blue or 2+2=4.
        jacquesm 7y ago
        There was a point in time where a single city could have made that difference. Then there was a point in time where single province could have made that difference. Then a country. Now none of this matters anymore but it is still an interesting question: was the virus known and detected at a point in time where it could have been contained? From the long incubation time my gut feeling is that it probably couldn't have been. International airtravel speeds things up, it also didn't make a difference in 1918 when intercontinental traffic was by boat. Lindbergh didn't make his flight until 1927.
- ta999999171 7y ago
  HN comments........
enchiridion 7y ago
Why? Genuine question
- keiru 7y ago
  They showed a strong unwillingness to declare the high state of emergency from the start, which dragged the numbers 30 fold through delayed action. They were the one institution with the moral authority to drive prevention (incentivising testing, the closure of air travel, etc). People act as if the only possible responses are complete inaction or panic. This is terribly misguided. Had the WHO declared high alert a month ago, it would have meant a whole month to take it all in, plan, condition your touch-your-face reflexes, rethink your lifestyle, etc. Maybe they didn't want to be the boy who cried wolf after SARS, MERS and H1N1 were declared global outbreaks and ended up not being full-blown pandemics. But now what? Is the watchdog scared to watch? They act as if Chinese numbers are trustworthy, and I can only guess that it's half political reasons, half delusion. The CCP has a history of under/misreporting catastrophe that should be factored in, at the very least as a warning label. With a mostly mild disease that spreads like wildfire there's bound to be huge visibility biases which were not taken into account, and then you end up with things like Italy where they don't even know how it spread. Instead there's a discourse vacuum where people seem to decide what's going to happen more on the basis of pre-existing narratives than reality. Examples; People mistrust the US believed it's all exaggerated to hurt China, for a while some "journalists" wrote more about racism and stigma than the actual ongoing development, politicians kept ringing the everything's OK alarm, and finally, mindless optimists are the worst. The Chinese government decided to establish an economy-crippling quarantine on January 23rd with only 1000 confirmed cases. Something was awry. And in the following week all the warning sings have been available (the quick spread, reports of CCP measures and life in Wuhan, research papers about the spread, incubation, etc). But for a month now the WHO refused to read the writing on the wall, only god knows why.
  - rasz 7y ago
    We now know with certainty Chinese numbers are more trustworthy than US (and half of EU) ones on the sole basis Chinese are actually TESTING people, while CDC refuses any due diligence.

The WHO has no credibility with me. I don’t believe anything they say anymore.

humaniania 7y ago

That seems pretty extreme to me. Who else is a better authority?

beamatronic 7y ago
The CDC The Santa Clara County health department
- sk0g 7y ago
  Why should anyone in 195-1 countries care about either of those?
  - beamatronic 7y ago
    Because if anyone took this seriously (shelter in place worldwide 1 month ago) we would not be in this situation.
    - recursive 7y ago
      > Because if anyone took this seriously You mean if everyone took this seriously. Which is obviously a lot more difficult. It would probably not be possible to get everyone to agree that the sky is blue or 2+2=4.
      - jacquesm 7y ago
        There was a point in time where a single city could have made that difference. Then there was a point in time where single province could have made that difference. Then a country. Now none of this matters anymore but it is still an interesting question: was the virus known and detected at a point in time where it could have been contained? From the long incubation time my gut feeling is that it probably couldn't have been. International airtravel speeds things up, it also didn't make a difference in 1918 when intercontinental traffic was by boat. Lindbergh didn't make his flight until 1927.
ta999999171 7y ago
HN comments........

enchiridion 7y ago

Why? Genuine question

keiru 7y ago
They showed a strong unwillingness to declare the high state of emergency from the start, which dragged the numbers 30 fold through delayed action. They were the one institution with the moral authority to drive prevention (incentivising testing, the closure of air travel, etc). People act as if the only possible responses are complete inaction or panic. This is terribly misguided. Had the WHO declared high alert a month ago, it would have meant a whole month to take it all in, plan, condition your touch-your-face reflexes, rethink your lifestyle, etc. Maybe they didn't want to be the boy who cried wolf after SARS, MERS and H1N1 were declared global outbreaks and ended up not being full-blown pandemics. But now what? Is the watchdog scared to watch? They act as if Chinese numbers are trustworthy, and I can only guess that it's half political reasons, half delusion. The CCP has a history of under/misreporting catastrophe that should be factored in, at the very least as a warning label. With a mostly mild disease that spreads like wildfire there's bound to be huge visibility biases which were not taken into account, and then you end up with things like Italy where they don't even know how it spread. Instead there's a discourse vacuum where people seem to decide what's going to happen more on the basis of pre-existing narratives than reality. Examples; People mistrust the US believed it's all exaggerated to hurt China, for a while some "journalists" wrote more about racism and stigma than the actual ongoing development, politicians kept ringing the everything's OK alarm, and finally, mindless optimists are the worst. The Chinese government decided to establish an economy-crippling quarantine on January 23rd with only 1000 confirmed cases. Something was awry. And in the following week all the warning sings have been available (the quick spread, reports of CCP measures and life in Wuhan, research papers about the spread, incubation, etc). But for a month now the WHO refused to read the writing on the wall, only god knows why.
- rasz 7y ago
  We now know with certainty Chinese numbers are more trustworthy than US (and half of EU) ones on the sole basis Chinese are actually TESTING people, while CDC refuses any due diligence.