4 ms·

yes WHO woefully mishandled the situation, from underestimating the gravity of the situation and arguing against closing borders in january, to delays declaring

• SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
  Didn’t WHO initially say that while working with the Chinese they determined it was not spreadable through contact of items? EDIT: yes, of pets and items: > When asked, "Is it safe to receive letters and parcels from China?" [WHO] Answered, "Coronaviruses are safe because they do not survive long on letters and other objects." > In response to the question `` whether a new coronavirus can spread from pets '', `` at present there is no evidence that pets such as dogs and cats can be infected with the new coronavirus '' is. There is also Taiwan showing that its likely China is misleading the WHO (would China ever do that!?)
  • anoncareer0212 7y ago
    no EDIT: op added "of items" to his question, dramatically changing it
    • jmoss20 7y ago
      Even without it though, yes: https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1217043229427761152 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152?ref_src=t...
      • SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
        That’s even worse than what I was saying. Why would the WHO have any credibility after this?
• magicsmoke 7y ago
  That's the advantage of a decentralized system. Without everyone following centralized orders if the central authority's wrong not everyone gets screwed. The iconoclasts might end up ahead, or they might end up behind, but at least there's a bit of experimentation. That's probably the best argument against a global government in sci-fi. Having all of humanity under the same government is putting all your eggs in one basket.