3 ms·

It has been at least a week since that "earlier talking point" has been part of the public discourse enough to justify a meta-discourse about it. It's almost as

It has been at least a week since that "earlier talking point" has been part of the public discourse enough to justify a meta-discourse about it. It's almost as though some people (or "people") are determined to keep banging that drum as long as it helps to sow division and undermine WHO/CDC. The focus among reasonable people is and mostly always was about how to ensure that high-quality masks and other PPE are available to those who are most at risk. How about if we focus on that?

dabbledash 7y ago
If you want people to take experts seriously (and make huge personal sacrifices based on their recommendations), then there’s going to have to be some reflection of how much bad advice and prognostication was put out early on in this thing. Sweeping it under the rug or pretending it didn’t happen isn’t going to help.
- notacoward 7y ago
  Oh, there will definitely have to be a lot of that, but "CDC can't be trusted ever again" is just another kind of disinformation we'll be studying. And speaking of what's not helpful, I think derailing discussion of current evidence and courses of action fits into that category. "Who said what when" might be important but it's not urgent. It can be deferred while we deal with the urgent.
yibg 7y ago
The undermining wasn’t done by the “people” in this case, it was done by the authorities putting out contradictory and misleading information. How would the public go about evaluating what information to trust now? Should they wear masks or not? Or just go with the flavor of the day? Like I said before I understand the need to prioritize, but there’s other ways to do that. Redirecting supply to medical facilities etc, which is already being done. Most people can’t even buy n95 respirators now even if they want to. No need to lie about their effectiveness in preventing spread.

dabbledash 7y ago

If you want people to take experts seriously (and make huge personal sacrifices based on their recommendations), then there’s going to have to be some reflection of how much bad advice and prognostication was put out early on in this thing. Sweeping it under the rug or pretending it didn’t happen isn’t going to help.

notacoward 7y ago
Oh, there will definitely have to be a lot of that, but "CDC can't be trusted ever again" is just another kind of disinformation we'll be studying. And speaking of what's not helpful, I think derailing discussion of current evidence and courses of action fits into that category. "Who said what when" might be important but it's not urgent. It can be deferred while we deal with the urgent.

yibg 7y ago

The undermining wasn’t done by the “people” in this case, it was done by the authorities putting out contradictory and misleading information. How would the public go about evaluating what information to trust now? Should they wear masks or not? Or just go with the flavor of the day? Like I said before I understand the need to prioritize, but there’s other ways to do that. Redirecting supply to medical facilities etc, which is already being done. Most people can’t even buy n95 respirators now even if they want to. No need to lie about their effectiveness in preventing spread.