4 ms·

Calling WHO a malicious institution is a bit too much, but let's just say that their track record is far from stellar, some examples: In the 2017/2018 flu seas

Calling WHO a malicious institution is a bit too much, but let's just say that their track record is far from stellar, some examples: In the 2017/2018 flu season the WHO recommended a trivalent vaccine for the common flu (https://www.who.int/influenza/vaccines/virus/recommendations/2017_18_north/en/ https://www.who.int/influenza/vaccines/virus/recommendations...) It turned out that another type B variant was the dominant one that year (https://en.ssi.dk/surveillance-and-preparedness/surveillance-in-denmark/annual-reports-on-disease-incidence/influenza-season-2017-2018 https://en.ssi.dk/surveillance-and-preparedness/surveillance...) which caused a total of 1,644 deaths in Denmark, which is almost four times the current death toll for Corona virus in Denmark. Another example: On the 3rd of march the general secretary of the WHO issued this statement: https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---3-march-2020 https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-... It says for example this: "Evidence from China is that only 1% of reported cases do not have symptoms, and most of those cases develop symptoms within 2 days." And yet here we are with a 96% asymptomatic rate being reported in a prison. I would rather that the WHO delayed their news flow, instead of reporting too soon on what they think. Oh, and probably they should trust the Chinese regime less than they do.

makomk 7y ago
I'm not sure calling them a malicious institution is too much. The WHO pushed hard on the idea that there definitely were no asymptomatic cases and China had confirmed this for sure using arguments that seemed utterly nonsensical - like, they were essentially arguing that asymptomatic cases didn't exist because testing of people with symptoms didn't find them. They had a whole campaign of interviews with US publications to spread this, as part of a broader regurgitation of dubious Chinese propaganda about things like how exactly they contained their own outbreak.

makomk 7y ago

I'm not sure calling them a malicious institution is too much. The WHO pushed hard on the idea that there definitely were no asymptomatic cases and China had confirmed this for sure using arguments that seemed utterly nonsensical - like, they were essentially arguing that asymptomatic cases didn't exist because testing of people with symptoms didn't find them. They had a whole campaign of interviews with US publications to spread this, as part of a broader regurgitation of dubious Chinese propaganda about things like how exactly they contained their own outbreak.