3 ms·

The WHO technically said they were looking into it and that they had not confirmed it spread human to human. That’s totally different from “we have looked into

The WHO technically said they were looking into it and that they had not confirmed it spread human to human. That’s totally different from “we have looked into it and can confirm it does not spread human to human.”

keiferski 7y ago
“Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China” It takes some serious mental gymnastics to interpret this in any way other than the obvious one. This isn’t a philosophical discussion about the limitations of empiricism, it’s a tweet that goes out to millions of people from an organization imbued with serious authority.
- FooBarWidget 7y ago
  And what is the obvious interpretation? Mine is ‘it is preliminary, so results can still change’ and ‘found no clear evidence does not mean evidence will not be found later’. Or maybe we can agree that there is no such thing as obvious, and different people will necessarily have different interpretations, for better or worse.
  - Nasrudith 7y ago
    I see it as yours but recognize it as probably being read like the parents as not only is the default behavior for absense of evidence to treat it as evidence of absense or subtly of magnitude the fine distinction is lost on most. It is anti-communication in context as cunningly putting effort into /not/ being clear. If they truly weren't sure a more honest form would be "We have neither confirmed nor denied the possibility of human to human transmission." (Putting aside any biological questions like are there even any crossspecies transmissions which cause propagative symptoms like coughing or sneezing but do not transmit through it.)
    - chrischen 7y ago
      Well then it's a good thing that we aren't governed by people who just spend 5 seconds misinterpreting tweets.
    - FooBarWidget 7y ago
      Actually they, did say that they could neither confirm nor deny: https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible-new-virus-could-spread-between-n1116066 https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible...
  - abdulmuhaimin 7y ago
    but the only reason this statement would come out is to refute any rumors that its spread person-by-person. So its implied. They cant confirm anything but they need to refute that its spread through humans
  - keiferski 7y ago
    By even posting this tweet, it is implied that there is no human-to-human transmission. They could have easily said, "So far, preliminary tests have found no evidence of human-to-human transmission, however we have only just begun research into the matter and thus still recommend social distancing." Why didn't they say this? Because China seems to have pressured the WHO the entire time, including saying that the borders shouldn't be closed. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/china-coronavirus-who-health-soft-power/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/china-coronavirus-who-h... >And what is the obvious interpretation? Mine is ‘it is preliminary, so results can still change’ and ‘found no clear evidence does not mean evidence will not be found later’. If that's what they meant, then they should have said so. They didn't. As I said before, this is a major health organization that needs to be clear in its communication, not speak in riddles.
    - FooBarWidget 7y ago
      They did say, within 24h of that tweet, that they have not ruled out human to human transmission: https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible-new-virus-could-spread-between-n1116066 https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible...
surge 7y ago
There was very clear evidence, the WHO were just ignoring it like they pretend Taiwan isn't it's own independent entity, they won't talk about Taiwan or interact with them for the sake of politics. It's no coincidence that the one country that has the most reason to mistrust the CCP and took the alternate sources from on the ground reporting as trusted that has managed to not get overrun by this virus. They literally just repeated whatever the CCP said, plenty of information was leaking out of the country through alternate channels, reports about doctor/journalist arrests, and the way the Chinese public was reacting about how serious this virus was. What did they think it was if not human to human transmission? Hundreds of people in multiple cities ate at the same restaurant or tainted meat? People were talking about this virus in China publicly in early January and it was known it was spreading.

keiferski 7y ago

“Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China” It takes some serious mental gymnastics to interpret this in any way other than the obvious one. This isn’t a philosophical discussion about the limitations of empiricism, it’s a tweet that goes out to millions of people from an organization imbued with serious authority.

FooBarWidget 7y ago
And what is the obvious interpretation? Mine is ‘it is preliminary, so results can still change’ and ‘found no clear evidence does not mean evidence will not be found later’. Or maybe we can agree that there is no such thing as obvious, and different people will necessarily have different interpretations, for better or worse.
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  I see it as yours but recognize it as probably being read like the parents as not only is the default behavior for absense of evidence to treat it as evidence of absense or subtly of magnitude the fine distinction is lost on most. It is anti-communication in context as cunningly putting effort into /not/ being clear. If they truly weren't sure a more honest form would be "We have neither confirmed nor denied the possibility of human to human transmission." (Putting aside any biological questions like are there even any crossspecies transmissions which cause propagative symptoms like coughing or sneezing but do not transmit through it.)
  - chrischen 7y ago
    Well then it's a good thing that we aren't governed by people who just spend 5 seconds misinterpreting tweets.
  - FooBarWidget 7y ago
    Actually they, did say that they could neither confirm nor deny: https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible-new-virus-could-spread-between-n1116066 https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible...
- abdulmuhaimin 7y ago
  but the only reason this statement would come out is to refute any rumors that its spread person-by-person. So its implied. They cant confirm anything but they need to refute that its spread through humans
- keiferski 7y ago
  By even posting this tweet, it is implied that there is no human-to-human transmission. They could have easily said, "So far, preliminary tests have found no evidence of human-to-human transmission, however we have only just begun research into the matter and thus still recommend social distancing." Why didn't they say this? Because China seems to have pressured the WHO the entire time, including saying that the borders shouldn't be closed. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/china-coronavirus-who-health-soft-power/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/china-coronavirus-who-h... >And what is the obvious interpretation? Mine is ‘it is preliminary, so results can still change’ and ‘found no clear evidence does not mean evidence will not be found later’. If that's what they meant, then they should have said so. They didn't. As I said before, this is a major health organization that needs to be clear in its communication, not speak in riddles.
  - FooBarWidget 7y ago
    They did say, within 24h of that tweet, that they have not ruled out human to human transmission: https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible-new-virus-could-spread-between-n1116066 https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible...

surge 7y ago

There was very clear evidence, the WHO were just ignoring it like they pretend Taiwan isn't it's own independent entity, they won't talk about Taiwan or interact with them for the sake of politics. It's no coincidence that the one country that has the most reason to mistrust the CCP and took the alternate sources from on the ground reporting as trusted that has managed to not get overrun by this virus. They literally just repeated whatever the CCP said, plenty of information was leaking out of the country through alternate channels, reports about doctor/journalist arrests, and the way the Chinese public was reacting about how serious this virus was. What did they think it was if not human to human transmission? Hundreds of people in multiple cities ate at the same restaurant or tainted meat? People were talking about this virus in China publicly in early January and it was known it was spreading.