4 ms·

I think that the root problem that needs to be addressed is that to a lot of people, scientists and the media appear to put politics before truth. The recent h

by ColanR 6y ago

I think that the root problem that needs to be addressed is that to a lot of people, scientists and the media appear to put politics before truth. The recent hydroxychloroquine is an obvious example [1]; The Lancet should never have published something with data so obviously questionable, and the media should not have picked it up so immediately as political ammunition. But the result is that the media appears to be "once again" lying to the public. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23421797 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23421797

throwaway894345 6y ago
> I think that the root problem that needs to be addressed is that to a lot of people, scientists and the media appear to put politics before truth. Fully agree here. I'm aware of Heterodox Academy trying to tackle this problem in the academic world--is there an analog solving for media bias?
- jerf 6y ago
  At this point, the only thing I'm hoping for is basically total media collapse. It's actually proceeding apace. By its very nature, being slick TV shows and edited textual content, it'll superficially look like everything's fine until the very end, but the layoffs continue to roll through, marginal outlets are closing, the viewership drops, the respect keeps finding new lows... it's still looking good and may even come sooner than you think. This does not, on its own, solve the problem, but it makes the problem possible to solve.
  - thu2111 6y ago
    Yes for TV news. Not for every kind of news. Some outlets are having a good crisis. In the UK the Daily Telegraph is giving back the government furlough/support money as it doesn't need it. So is The Spectator. Interestingly these are the right wing newspapers. Why give up free money? Because the government really needs it but the newspapers don't, given that they are profitable and subscriptions have been rising, not falling. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/a-statement-from-the-chairman-of-the-spectator https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/a-statement-from-the-cha... The Daily Telegraph has doubled subscriptions in March alone.
salmon30salmon 6y ago
This happened again today, with Washington Post publishing an article based on a study that was submitted to Nature on March 22, 2020. They used this old data (2 months ago is old in this case) to claim that the lockdown saved millions upon millions of lives. To be that disingenuous can't be accidental, I am afraid. And I am normally a fan of WaPo
- mthoms 6y ago
  The data is indeed old but China began its lockdown on January 24th and South Korea a month later. Those countries seem to be the central focus of the study with regards to evaluating the effectiveness of the shutdown(s). I'm only a layperson but it doesn't seem too far-fetched that they could extrapolate from how those countries "flattened the curve" to come up with a ballpark estimate of global fatalities averted. After all, other countries mostly followed a similar "curve flattening" pattern (as far as I'm aware). At the very least, I don't see anything inherently disingenuous. Side note: FWIW, the study itself says the authors last "updated" it on May 13th (not the data itself though it appears).
  - salmon30salmon 6y ago
    IMO, it is pretty easy to see why an extrapolation is faulty. Let us look at two different reasons: 1. Density. China and South Korea are far more dense than most of the western world. Seoul has a density of 42,000 per square mile. New York City, the densest city in the US, has a density of 23,000 per square mile. The next top 10 most populous cities in the USA have an average density of 5,000 per square mile. Over half of South Koreans live in an urban environment, while less than 25% of Americans do. Density, and the number of interactions someone has in a day, is a major determining factor in the spread of any airborne virus. Density also has implications for transit use, which in NYC was shown to be a large source of transmission. 2. Demographics. Italy, the United States and Sweden all have very different demographics and cultures. In Italy, many people live in multi-generational housing, and nursing home usage is far lower than the United States. The average age of Italy is also higher. Sweden is more like the US in terms of nursing homes, but still lower. As the older folks are far more likely to die from this, or even have detectable infections, the way each country manages their aging population will have a huge impact on mortality. For example, people going about their day like normal, and then returning to their shared home with their Grandma would put Grandma at a much higher risk of infection. That is the Italy scenario. In the United States, where the old either live independently or in a group home, their vectors are much more limited. Test and trace everyone going to and working at a nursing home. It should also be noted that the areas if NYC most heavily hit are also more multi-generational than the rest of the city and country. So see, you can't take one nation and extrapolate it out to the world. That is a faulty model and those who championed it should know better.

by ColanR 6y ago

throwaway894345 6y ago

> I think that the root problem that needs to be addressed is that to a lot of people, scientists and the media appear to put politics before truth. Fully agree here. I'm aware of Heterodox Academy trying to tackle this problem in the academic world--is there an analog solving for media bias?

jerf 6y ago
At this point, the only thing I'm hoping for is basically total media collapse. It's actually proceeding apace. By its very nature, being slick TV shows and edited textual content, it'll superficially look like everything's fine until the very end, but the layoffs continue to roll through, marginal outlets are closing, the viewership drops, the respect keeps finding new lows... it's still looking good and may even come sooner than you think. This does not, on its own, solve the problem, but it makes the problem possible to solve.
- thu2111 6y ago
  Yes for TV news. Not for every kind of news. Some outlets are having a good crisis. In the UK the Daily Telegraph is giving back the government furlough/support money as it doesn't need it. So is The Spectator. Interestingly these are the right wing newspapers. Why give up free money? Because the government really needs it but the newspapers don't, given that they are profitable and subscriptions have been rising, not falling. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/a-statement-from-the-chairman-of-the-spectator https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/a-statement-from-the-cha... The Daily Telegraph has doubled subscriptions in March alone.

salmon30salmon 6y ago

This happened again today, with Washington Post publishing an article based on a study that was submitted to Nature on March 22, 2020. They used this old data (2 months ago is old in this case) to claim that the lockdown saved millions upon millions of lives. To be that disingenuous can't be accidental, I am afraid. And I am normally a fan of WaPo

mthoms 6y ago
The data is indeed old but China began its lockdown on January 24th and South Korea a month later. Those countries seem to be the central focus of the study with regards to evaluating the effectiveness of the shutdown(s). I'm only a layperson but it doesn't seem too far-fetched that they could extrapolate from how those countries "flattened the curve" to come up with a ballpark estimate of global fatalities averted. After all, other countries mostly followed a similar "curve flattening" pattern (as far as I'm aware). At the very least, I don't see anything inherently disingenuous. Side note: FWIW, the study itself says the authors last "updated" it on May 13th (not the data itself though it appears).
- salmon30salmon 6y ago
  IMO, it is pretty easy to see why an extrapolation is faulty. Let us look at two different reasons: 1. Density. China and South Korea are far more dense than most of the western world. Seoul has a density of 42,000 per square mile. New York City, the densest city in the US, has a density of 23,000 per square mile. The next top 10 most populous cities in the USA have an average density of 5,000 per square mile. Over half of South Koreans live in an urban environment, while less than 25% of Americans do. Density, and the number of interactions someone has in a day, is a major determining factor in the spread of any airborne virus. Density also has implications for transit use, which in NYC was shown to be a large source of transmission. 2. Demographics. Italy, the United States and Sweden all have very different demographics and cultures. In Italy, many people live in multi-generational housing, and nursing home usage is far lower than the United States. The average age of Italy is also higher. Sweden is more like the US in terms of nursing homes, but still lower. As the older folks are far more likely to die from this, or even have detectable infections, the way each country manages their aging population will have a huge impact on mortality. For example, people going about their day like normal, and then returning to their shared home with their Grandma would put Grandma at a much higher risk of infection. That is the Italy scenario. In the United States, where the old either live independently or in a group home, their vectors are much more limited. Test and trace everyone going to and working at a nursing home. It should also be noted that the areas if NYC most heavily hit are also more multi-generational than the rest of the city and country. So see, you can't take one nation and extrapolate it out to the world. That is a faulty model and those who championed it should know better.