10 ms·

> The US surgeon general and Fauci told people to stop buying masks. Then they reversed themselves, and defended their position at the time. Making a claim and

> The US surgeon general and Fauci told people to stop buying masks. Then they reversed themselves, and defended their position at the time. Making a claim and then reversing it based on new data is the correct thing to do. This isn't an issue at all and shouldn't be considered a violation of trust.

vlucas 6y ago
That's not what happened. They intentionally told people to stop buying masks when they KNEW they would help, because they were worried about running out of them for medical professionals. https://medium.com/incerto/the-masks-masquerade-7de897b517b7 https://medium.com/incerto/the-masks-masquerade-7de897b517b7
throwmeaway_pls 6y ago
Saying they don’t work or aren’t necessary was a lie. I’m honestly not trying to stir anything up here, but a lie is a lie. Here’s an interview where Fauci discusses point-blank why the American public was mislead, and it had nothing to do with data: https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-directive-coronavirus https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-dire... We need to hold our leaders to a higher standard. All of them. Red, blue, green, whatever.
- necrotic_comp 6y ago
  What he said on 60 minutes in March 2020, and I'm transcribing here: "The masks are important for someone who is infected to prevent them from infecting someone else. Now when you see people and look at the films in China and South Korea and everyone is wearing a mask - right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks. There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel better, and it might even block a droplet, but it is not providing the perfect protection people think it is. And often, there are unintended consequences, people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face. When you think mask, you should think of healthcare providers needing them and people who are ill. When you look at the films of foreign countries and you see 85% of the people wearing masks, that's fine, I'm not against it, if you want to do it, that's fine." "But it can lead to a shortage of masks?" "Exactly. It can lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it." This was in March, before things started really blowing up. That seems pretty upfront to me as to why they are making the recommendation, and it's incorrect in hindsight. I don't see it as a lie at all.
  - throwmeaway_pls 6y ago
    > There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. I see that statement as a lie. Fauci addressed it in the TheStreet interview and explained why he lied. I don’t see how somebody would see that as not-a-lie, but if you’d like to, go ahead.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - mistermann 6y ago
    > I don't see it as a lie at all. Lying is a combination of truth + intent to speak untruthfully. The video you are replying to at least plausibly demonstrates intent to deceive (for arguably good reason imho, but deceit nonetheless) The video you responded with offers a different perspective, but it does not nullify the prior video. What is True is true from all perspectives, otherwise it is not true. > "There's no reason to be walking around with a mask." From a Truth perspective, this seems untrue. > "When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel better, and it might even block a droplet, but it is not providing the perfect protection people think it is." "perfect protection" is an interesting choice of words. Is he suggesting that if masks are not perfect, they should not be worn? Of course not. But then, why did he say that? > "And often, there are unintended consequences, people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face." And therefore, we shouldn't wear masks? > "Exactly. It can lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it." Which is the reason he gave in the first video for the deceit. I'm not disputing that this was a decent enough strategy under the circumstances (a mask shortage), but it backfired. > I don't see it as a lie at all. They've done a decent job covering this up in most people's minds, but not with conspiracy theorists or highly detail oriented people, and I think it's a shame that people seem frequently unwilling to even acknowledge that they have at least somewhat of a valid point. What is strictly true should perhaps not be ignored. If you want people to "not do your own thinking, trust the experts, without exception, then you would be well advised to be worthy of trust. Or, don't, and reap the rewards Mother Nature bestows upon you. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
yanks215 6y ago
> Making a claim and then reversing it based on new data is the correct thing to do. Agree with this statement, however it does not apply here. There was no new data. They always knew that masks worked, but they needed them for first responders. Confirmation of this from Fauci interview: https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-because-doctors-shortages-from-the-start-2020-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-becaus... The responsible, accountable thing to do would have been to say to Americans, "these masks do work, but we need them for first responders, please donate yours!"
- necrotic_comp 6y ago
  See my comment above. Fauci said on national TV that the first responders needed the masks, and that people buying them up could cause a shortage for the people that needed them. Somehow the messaging got muddied over the last few months.
  - yanks215 6y ago
    I read and comprehend both of your comments. I think we are describing two different points: you are speaking about data on PPE shortages, and I have been speaking about data on PPE efficacy. In the article I linked to, the surgeon general said masks were not effective. This is false. They are effective (along with non-N95 masks). The data on shortages did not need to be remedied with a mischaracterization of PPE's effectiveness. It could have been communicated as I previously suggested, stating, "we messed up and need donations from the world." This would have increased institutional trust (being honest about the situation), and perhaps supported more uniform mask usage in the long-run. The original mischaracterization and subsequent defense of this communication choice remains a cause of institutional mistrust. And even if you don't agree, you must be able to sympathize with the logic behind this conclusion for others. In fact, two other replies to your first comment similarly agreed with me.
    - necrotic_comp 6y ago
      I maintain that your logic is faulty, mainly because of the timing of when these things were said. We had a window in late February/early March where we didn't know how nasty this thing was going to get in the states, and the responsible people in charge (namely, Dr. Fauci and not the administration writ large) made a claim based on previous experience ; as soon as it became apparent that it was getting out of control, there were calls for PPE donations, and the Federal Government refused to act, going so far as to steal PPE purchased by states. There are many reasons for having institutional distrust, but to claim that the singular person in the administration who fought the President on his strategy (and was subsequently muzzled) was actively misleading the public is beyond frustrating.

vlucas 6y ago

That's not what happened. They intentionally told people to stop buying masks when they KNEW they would help, because they were worried about running out of them for medical professionals. https://medium.com/incerto/the-masks-masquerade-7de897b517b7 https://medium.com/incerto/the-masks-masquerade-7de897b517b7

throwmeaway_pls 6y ago

Saying they don’t work or aren’t necessary was a lie. I’m honestly not trying to stir anything up here, but a lie is a lie. Here’s an interview where Fauci discusses point-blank why the American public was mislead, and it had nothing to do with data: https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-directive-coronavirus https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-dire... We need to hold our leaders to a higher standard. All of them. Red, blue, green, whatever.

necrotic_comp 6y ago
What he said on 60 minutes in March 2020, and I'm transcribing here: "The masks are important for someone who is infected to prevent them from infecting someone else. Now when you see people and look at the films in China and South Korea and everyone is wearing a mask - right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks. There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel better, and it might even block a droplet, but it is not providing the perfect protection people think it is. And often, there are unintended consequences, people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face. When you think mask, you should think of healthcare providers needing them and people who are ill. When you look at the films of foreign countries and you see 85% of the people wearing masks, that's fine, I'm not against it, if you want to do it, that's fine." "But it can lead to a shortage of masks?" "Exactly. It can lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it." This was in March, before things started really blowing up. That seems pretty upfront to me as to why they are making the recommendation, and it's incorrect in hindsight. I don't see it as a lie at all.
- throwmeaway_pls 6y ago
  > There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. I see that statement as a lie. Fauci addressed it in the TheStreet interview and explained why he lied. I don’t see how somebody would see that as not-a-lie, but if you’d like to, go ahead.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- mistermann 6y ago
  > I don't see it as a lie at all. Lying is a combination of truth + intent to speak untruthfully. The video you are replying to at least plausibly demonstrates intent to deceive (for arguably good reason imho, but deceit nonetheless) The video you responded with offers a different perspective, but it does not nullify the prior video. What is True is true from all perspectives, otherwise it is not true. > "There's no reason to be walking around with a mask." From a Truth perspective, this seems untrue. > "When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel better, and it might even block a droplet, but it is not providing the perfect protection people think it is." "perfect protection" is an interesting choice of words. Is he suggesting that if masks are not perfect, they should not be worn? Of course not. But then, why did he say that? > "And often, there are unintended consequences, people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face." And therefore, we shouldn't wear masks? > "Exactly. It can lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it." Which is the reason he gave in the first video for the deceit. I'm not disputing that this was a decent enough strategy under the circumstances (a mask shortage), but it backfired. > I don't see it as a lie at all. They've done a decent job covering this up in most people's minds, but not with conspiracy theorists or highly detail oriented people, and I think it's a shame that people seem frequently unwilling to even acknowledge that they have at least somewhat of a valid point. What is strictly true should perhaps not be ignored. If you want people to "not do your own thinking, trust the experts, without exception, then you would be well advised to be worthy of trust. Or, don't, and reap the rewards Mother Nature bestows upon you. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

yanks215 6y ago

> Making a claim and then reversing it based on new data is the correct thing to do. Agree with this statement, however it does not apply here. There was no new data. They always knew that masks worked, but they needed them for first responders. Confirmation of this from Fauci interview: https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-because-doctors-shortages-from-the-start-2020-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-becaus... The responsible, accountable thing to do would have been to say to Americans, "these masks do work, but we need them for first responders, please donate yours!"

necrotic_comp 6y ago
See my comment above. Fauci said on national TV that the first responders needed the masks, and that people buying them up could cause a shortage for the people that needed them. Somehow the messaging got muddied over the last few months.
- yanks215 6y ago
  I read and comprehend both of your comments. I think we are describing two different points: you are speaking about data on PPE shortages, and I have been speaking about data on PPE efficacy. In the article I linked to, the surgeon general said masks were not effective. This is false. They are effective (along with non-N95 masks). The data on shortages did not need to be remedied with a mischaracterization of PPE's effectiveness. It could have been communicated as I previously suggested, stating, "we messed up and need donations from the world." This would have increased institutional trust (being honest about the situation), and perhaps supported more uniform mask usage in the long-run. The original mischaracterization and subsequent defense of this communication choice remains a cause of institutional mistrust. And even if you don't agree, you must be able to sympathize with the logic behind this conclusion for others. In fact, two other replies to your first comment similarly agreed with me.
  - necrotic_comp 6y ago
    I maintain that your logic is faulty, mainly because of the timing of when these things were said. We had a window in late February/early March where we didn't know how nasty this thing was going to get in the states, and the responsible people in charge (namely, Dr. Fauci and not the administration writ large) made a claim based on previous experience ; as soon as it became apparent that it was getting out of control, there were calls for PPE donations, and the Federal Government refused to act, going so far as to steal PPE purchased by states. There are many reasons for having institutional distrust, but to claim that the singular person in the administration who fought the President on his strategy (and was subsequently muzzled) was actively misleading the public is beyond frustrating.