3 ms·

> It is impossible to establish evidence for long term complications of a novel virus that has been with us for less than a year. Exactly - there is no reason

by jjcon 6y ago

> It is impossible to establish evidence for long term complications of a novel virus that has been with us for less than a year. Exactly - there is no reason to believe it causes long term problems so fearmongering about it pointless and anti-scientific.

acituan 6y ago
I don’t follow. Just because something causes fear doesn’t mean that it tells us anything about its truthiness. When faced with something novel, the right approach is to be cautious, for some optimal values of novel and cautious. If we were in a timeline where cigarettes or uranium toothpastes were as novel as sars-cov-2, we wouldn’t have established their long term effects yet either.
- jjcon 6y ago
  > Just because something causes fear doesn’t mean that it tells us anything about its truthiness. Not inherently but the problem is throwing out unscientific speculation without any evidence. This is often done with Covid because fear speculation attracts attention and get clicks/views. People are hardwired to look for fear - so this sort of irresponsible speculation is dangerous because it spreads like wildfire.
chimprich 6y ago
> fearmongering This term (or the similar "scaremongering") gets thrown around an awful lot in discussions about the novel coronavirus and I don't think it's helpful. For one thing, it's quite insulting to assume someone is deliberately exaggerating something for manipulation purposes. Please assume some good faith. It's also a problem in that it doesn't advance the discussion in any way, because it can be applied to just about any topic where you don't like the argument. Discussing dangers of possible long-term health effects of contracting COVID-19? Fearmongering. Raising concerns about climate change? Fearmongering. Studies that show a link between alcohol and heart disease? Fearmongering. It's such a general-purpose accusation that it's meaningless in most contexts.
- jjcon 6y ago
  > Discussing dangers of possible long-term health effects of contracting COVID-19? Fearmongering. The problem is throwing out unscientific speculation with zero evidence - that is fearmongering. HN is held to a higher standard.

by jjcon 6y ago

acituan 6y ago

I don’t follow. Just because something causes fear doesn’t mean that it tells us anything about its truthiness. When faced with something novel, the right approach is to be cautious, for some optimal values of novel and cautious. If we were in a timeline where cigarettes or uranium toothpastes were as novel as sars-cov-2, we wouldn’t have established their long term effects yet either.

jjcon 6y ago
> Just because something causes fear doesn’t mean that it tells us anything about its truthiness. Not inherently but the problem is throwing out unscientific speculation without any evidence. This is often done with Covid because fear speculation attracts attention and get clicks/views. People are hardwired to look for fear - so this sort of irresponsible speculation is dangerous because it spreads like wildfire.

chimprich 6y ago

> fearmongering This term (or the similar "scaremongering") gets thrown around an awful lot in discussions about the novel coronavirus and I don't think it's helpful. For one thing, it's quite insulting to assume someone is deliberately exaggerating something for manipulation purposes. Please assume some good faith. It's also a problem in that it doesn't advance the discussion in any way, because it can be applied to just about any topic where you don't like the argument. Discussing dangers of possible long-term health effects of contracting COVID-19? Fearmongering. Raising concerns about climate change? Fearmongering. Studies that show a link between alcohol and heart disease? Fearmongering. It's such a general-purpose accusation that it's meaningless in most contexts.

jjcon 6y ago
> Discussing dangers of possible long-term health effects of contracting COVID-19? Fearmongering. The problem is throwing out unscientific speculation with zero evidence - that is fearmongering. HN is held to a higher standard.