4 ms·

It wasn’t lacking evidence at all, want to know why? Because I read that headline at the time and thought it was ridiculous, I couldn’t believe they were saying

It wasn’t lacking evidence at all, want to know why? Because I read that headline at the time and thought it was ridiculous, I couldn’t believe they were saying something so backwards. If you had been paying attention, you knew already: 1. It was spreading rapidly in humans 2. It was a coronavirus and therefore was similar to other coronaviruses If you were following a precautionary principle, you’d have said “it likely is spreading between humans given we’ve never seen any other form of transmission this rapid in any virus that isn’t, and it’s a coronavirus”. If you think their “don’t wear masks” lie was ok because it was trying to keep medical workers from a shortage, then, how can you not see this as hypocritical? You can’t think the mask lie was ok, due to abundance of caution, and then a total disregard for caution at a much more crucial early stage as ok. But again, if you were paying attention, watching the WHO make statements like this was terrifying. Like driving in a car with a drunk driver who is stepping on the gas. Who in their right mind would make such a totally braindead, reckless press release like that. Technically there’s no direct evidence, but there’s a whole lot of reason to be worried it likely is airborne. So the headline should be “it’s highly possible it’s airborne, we are waiting for concrete data, but recommend caution given exponential spread within humans”. The WHO did things similarly shockingly bad three times or so during the pandemic. I was paying attention to all of them and couldn’t help but think something was up. Something was wrong with the WHO. Not just being conservative, but being totally negligent and backwards time and time again. It really seems they were playing either protection for China, or some sort of interference against a good chunk of the world. If they had done better, many many lives would have been saved. It was some internal politics that broke them. Any halfway sane person knew it at the time.

ceejayoz 6y ago
"I personally believe the evidence will come soon" is not the same as having that evidence. As the excerpts I've cited demonstrate, the WHO's statements at the time are longer than what can be fit in a single 280 character tweet. The tweet is accurate; the WHO was also issuing far more detailed statements including cautions about exactly what you assumed at the time - that further information was likely to arrive later. Again: > According to a timeline of events, Van Kerkhove, who is also the WHO’s technical lead for the COVID-19 response, also said that human-to-human transmission wouldn’t be unexpected, since that is what occurs with SARS and MERS, which are also coronaviruses. They were making the exact point you claim they didn't make.
- nwienert 6y ago
  The WHO January: > International traffic: no restrictions recommended. Wuhan city is a major domestic and international transport hub. Currently, there are no reports of cases outside of Wuhan City. Given the heavy population movements, expected to significantly increase during the Chinese New Year in the last week of January, the risk of cases being reported form elsewhere is increased. WHO does not recommend any specific health measures for travellers. It is generally considered that entry screening offers little benefit, while requiring considerable resources. In case of symptoms suggestive to respiratory illness before, during or after travel, the travellers are encouraged to seek medical attention and share travel history with their health care provider. WHO advises against the application of any travel or trade restrictions on China based on the information currently available on this event. It’s a good thing Trump didn’t listen to them and limited immigration by end of January. They made many more reckless recommendations like this well after they knew people were dying, it was spreading rapidly, and it was a coronavirus.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    The travel "ban" was political theater, targeting only foreign nationals; red meat to add on to the existing trade wars. It had already escaped China at the time. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/01/debate-early-travel-bans-china/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/01/debate-ear... > The measure that the Trump administration implemented could not be described as a “ban” that “closed the country”: It only prohibited U.S. entry to foreign nationals who had visited China in the last 14 days. Americans and U.S. permanent residents returning from Hubei Province were still allowed, subject to a 14-day quarantine. After these policies were enacted, hundreds of thousands of travelers continued to arrive in the United States via direct flights from China. Until Feb. 27, no other travelers to the United States faced such travel restrictions and quarantine requirements — even if they were arriving from other nations that were reporting coronavirus cases. > Restricting flights from China did nothing to prevent the virus from arriving from other parts of the world. Genetic analyses have shown that the large epidemic that unfolded in New York was linked to travelers from Europe. In the early days of the U.S. epidemic, testing was restricted to people with a travel history to China, which limited the ability to detect locally the cases and infections among travelers from other countries. > By the time Trump expanded travel restrictions to Iran on Feb. 28 and to European nations on March 12, it was largely too late. By mid-March, the United States was approaching 2,000 confirmed cases and experiencing severe shortages in testing capacity that meant many infections likely went undiagnosed. The travel restriction did not initially apply to the United Kingdom, which already had hundreds of reported cases. And, implementation caused chaos. Photos showing large crowds of Americans stranded together in long lines and tight corridors for hours at airports may have increased virus transmission among those travelers who eventually made their way back to the United States. https://apnews.com/article/0dc271ad7f7917374a5a0cfb49273783 https://apnews.com/article/0dc271ad7f7917374a5a0cfb49273783 > A recent study from the journal Science found China’s internal crackdown modestly delayed the spread of the virus. It cast doubt that travel restrictions elsewhere will do much compared with other preventive measures, citing in part the likelihood that a large number of people exposed to the virus had already been traveling internationally without being detected.

ceejayoz 6y ago

"I personally believe the evidence will come soon" is not the same as having that evidence. As the excerpts I've cited demonstrate, the WHO's statements at the time are longer than what can be fit in a single 280 character tweet. The tweet is accurate; the WHO was also issuing far more detailed statements including cautions about exactly what you assumed at the time - that further information was likely to arrive later. Again: > According to a timeline of events, Van Kerkhove, who is also the WHO’s technical lead for the COVID-19 response, also said that human-to-human transmission wouldn’t be unexpected, since that is what occurs with SARS and MERS, which are also coronaviruses. They were making the exact point you claim they didn't make.

nwienert 6y ago
The WHO January: > International traffic: no restrictions recommended. Wuhan city is a major domestic and international transport hub. Currently, there are no reports of cases outside of Wuhan City. Given the heavy population movements, expected to significantly increase during the Chinese New Year in the last week of January, the risk of cases being reported form elsewhere is increased. WHO does not recommend any specific health measures for travellers. It is generally considered that entry screening offers little benefit, while requiring considerable resources. In case of symptoms suggestive to respiratory illness before, during or after travel, the travellers are encouraged to seek medical attention and share travel history with their health care provider. WHO advises against the application of any travel or trade restrictions on China based on the information currently available on this event. It’s a good thing Trump didn’t listen to them and limited immigration by end of January. They made many more reckless recommendations like this well after they knew people were dying, it was spreading rapidly, and it was a coronavirus.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  The travel "ban" was political theater, targeting only foreign nationals; red meat to add on to the existing trade wars. It had already escaped China at the time. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/01/debate-early-travel-bans-china/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/01/debate-ear... > The measure that the Trump administration implemented could not be described as a “ban” that “closed the country”: It only prohibited U.S. entry to foreign nationals who had visited China in the last 14 days. Americans and U.S. permanent residents returning from Hubei Province were still allowed, subject to a 14-day quarantine. After these policies were enacted, hundreds of thousands of travelers continued to arrive in the United States via direct flights from China. Until Feb. 27, no other travelers to the United States faced such travel restrictions and quarantine requirements — even if they were arriving from other nations that were reporting coronavirus cases. > Restricting flights from China did nothing to prevent the virus from arriving from other parts of the world. Genetic analyses have shown that the large epidemic that unfolded in New York was linked to travelers from Europe. In the early days of the U.S. epidemic, testing was restricted to people with a travel history to China, which limited the ability to detect locally the cases and infections among travelers from other countries. > By the time Trump expanded travel restrictions to Iran on Feb. 28 and to European nations on March 12, it was largely too late. By mid-March, the United States was approaching 2,000 confirmed cases and experiencing severe shortages in testing capacity that meant many infections likely went undiagnosed. The travel restriction did not initially apply to the United Kingdom, which already had hundreds of reported cases. And, implementation caused chaos. Photos showing large crowds of Americans stranded together in long lines and tight corridors for hours at airports may have increased virus transmission among those travelers who eventually made their way back to the United States. https://apnews.com/article/0dc271ad7f7917374a5a0cfb49273783 https://apnews.com/article/0dc271ad7f7917374a5a0cfb49273783 > A recent study from the journal Science found China’s internal crackdown modestly delayed the spread of the virus. It cast doubt that travel restrictions elsewhere will do much compared with other preventive measures, citing in part the likelihood that a large number of people exposed to the virus had already been traveling internationally without being detected.