5 ms·

> The WHO has been spreading misinformation from the start, including claims that covid does not spread from human to human Go back and actually read the full

by knzhou 6y ago

> The WHO has been spreading misinformation from the start, including claims that covid does not spread from human to human Go back and actually read the full set of WHO statements in mid-January. They have a bunch of statements saying that nations should get prepared, one saying that specific studies haven’t yet found hard evidence for person-to-person transmission (because at that point most of the cases they’d managed to find were tied to the market). The WHO never, ever said that it can’t be transmitted, and they absolutely never said that people should do nothing about COVID-19. They were urging nations to act for months before they actually did.

nraynaud 6y ago
I would add that WHO requires nations to inform them of the measures they are intending to take so that WHO can do some coordination, and nations don’t tell them and WHO has to do catch up by reading the newspapers.
rglullis 6y ago
They did say though that flying to China was still okay in as late as February. For what? Fear of CCP? If this virus had come in some African country, they would have no problem in closing everything out - as anyone that understands tail risks would. But because it's China, then the recommendations for actions come after the evidence can not be hidden anymore. It is immoral.
- knzhou 6y ago
  No, that's wrong. WHO essentially never encourages travel restrictions, their whole philosophy is that open international collaboration is crucial (that's why the W stands for "world"!). At the height of the Ebola epidemic, they didn't call for travel restrictions to Africa either.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    That is a well-polished turd of an argument you are trying to sell there. Not recommending travel restrictions due to "promoting international collaboration", really? I don't need to be an expert in medicine to understand that if an epidemic breaks out in an area, the first thing authorities should do is to avoid getting more people in that area. Even more so when the cause/methods of transmission and speed of transmission is unknown.
    - anigbrowl 6y ago
      Instead of being rude why don't you find some examples of the WHO recommending travel restrictions?
      - rglullis 6y ago
        How many pandemics did we have since WHO was founded, not originated in China, with such speed of contagion and long incubation period which allows for infected people to get infected in one city and be on a plane to infect the other side of the world in less than 24 hours? Hard to find a counterexample when n=0. My "being rude" is due to the fact that the WHO's actions and directions have been mostly politics washed up in science instead of properly looking for guidance for the well-being of people. It has cost hundreds of thousands of lives. They should've asked for restrictions. They should tell people "wearing a mask may not help you, but not wearing is certainly worse, so go ahead and get masks." All we get instead is CYA and bureaucratic responses. They need to be held responsible for their part in this mess.
        anigbrowl 6y ago
        You could surely find recommendations (should they exist) for unilateral imposition of rules in relation to recent epidemics like Ebola. After all your argument above was: If this virus had come in some African country, they would have no problem in closing everything out - as anyone that understands tail risks would. But because it's China, then the recommendations for actions come after the evidence can not be hidden anymore. It is immoral. Now I agree the coronavirus situation is without precedent, but if you're going to make assertions that they would have done X here while only doing Y there, you need to back it up with some evidence for your claims about X.
        rglullis 6y ago
        So your objection to what I am saying is that I claim some double standard when there is no instance where they applied one of these standards? Is that it? Ok, fine. Never mind the fact that this is also a mistake of conflating absence of evidence for evidence of absence. Your objection does not invalidate what I am saying regarding the biggest problem with the WHO: their failure in defending early action and in showing themselves to be a political-bureaucratic organization more preoccupied with its own existence than in achieving the goals it was supposed to.
- vkou 6y ago
  Flying to non-Wuhan China in mid-February was about as okay as driving to the next town over in the US, in early-March. An incredible majority of cases were in Wuhan.

by knzhou 6y ago

nraynaud 6y ago

I would add that WHO requires nations to inform them of the measures they are intending to take so that WHO can do some coordination, and nations don’t tell them and WHO has to do catch up by reading the newspapers.

rglullis 6y ago

They did say though that flying to China was still okay in as late as February. For what? Fear of CCP? If this virus had come in some African country, they would have no problem in closing everything out - as anyone that understands tail risks would. But because it's China, then the recommendations for actions come after the evidence can not be hidden anymore. It is immoral.

knzhou 6y ago
No, that's wrong. WHO essentially never encourages travel restrictions, their whole philosophy is that open international collaboration is crucial (that's why the W stands for "world"!). At the height of the Ebola epidemic, they didn't call for travel restrictions to Africa either.
- rglullis 6y ago
  That is a well-polished turd of an argument you are trying to sell there. Not recommending travel restrictions due to "promoting international collaboration", really? I don't need to be an expert in medicine to understand that if an epidemic breaks out in an area, the first thing authorities should do is to avoid getting more people in that area. Even more so when the cause/methods of transmission and speed of transmission is unknown.
  - anigbrowl 6y ago
    Instead of being rude why don't you find some examples of the WHO recommending travel restrictions?
    - rglullis 6y ago
      How many pandemics did we have since WHO was founded, not originated in China, with such speed of contagion and long incubation period which allows for infected people to get infected in one city and be on a plane to infect the other side of the world in less than 24 hours? Hard to find a counterexample when n=0. My "being rude" is due to the fact that the WHO's actions and directions have been mostly politics washed up in science instead of properly looking for guidance for the well-being of people. It has cost hundreds of thousands of lives. They should've asked for restrictions. They should tell people "wearing a mask may not help you, but not wearing is certainly worse, so go ahead and get masks." All we get instead is CYA and bureaucratic responses. They need to be held responsible for their part in this mess.
      - anigbrowl 6y ago
        You could surely find recommendations (should they exist) for unilateral imposition of rules in relation to recent epidemics like Ebola. After all your argument above was: If this virus had come in some African country, they would have no problem in closing everything out - as anyone that understands tail risks would. But because it's China, then the recommendations for actions come after the evidence can not be hidden anymore. It is immoral. Now I agree the coronavirus situation is without precedent, but if you're going to make assertions that they would have done X here while only doing Y there, you need to back it up with some evidence for your claims about X.
        rglullis 6y ago
        So your objection to what I am saying is that I claim some double standard when there is no instance where they applied one of these standards? Is that it? Ok, fine. Never mind the fact that this is also a mistake of conflating absence of evidence for evidence of absence. Your objection does not invalidate what I am saying regarding the biggest problem with the WHO: their failure in defending early action and in showing themselves to be a political-bureaucratic organization more preoccupied with its own existence than in achieving the goals it was supposed to.
vkou 6y ago
Flying to non-Wuhan China in mid-February was about as okay as driving to the next town over in the US, in early-March. An incredible majority of cases were in Wuhan.