19 ms·

That second quote is the really devastating one. That supports (though I would say doesn't entirely prove) the claim that Fauci decided to claim masks were inef

by geebee 6y ago

That second quote is the really devastating one. That supports (though I would say doesn't entirely prove) the claim that Fauci decided to claim masks were ineffective because they were effective and he wanted to make sure people weren't aware of this in order to preserve masks for medical personnel. I watched the video, to make sure that I wasn't missing additional context, and I don't see it (though these videos do get edited, I've been shocked plenty of times once I saw the full raw footage vs the condensed, edited footage). Now, he doesn't quite say the claim I wrote above. His argument (I am now condensing it) is: at the time, we were unaware masks offered protection, physical distancing was our best strategy, and we wanted to keep our limited supply of masks for medical personnel. So, how can masks not be effective and yet also be so effective that we must save our critical supply for medical personnel? Well, one possibility is that medical personnel treat all kinds of illnesses, and that N95s are generally critical for this work, and we wouldn't want them to go without while the public buys them up for an ineffective use. Another could be that they are effective and critical against the virus when you must be around sick people constantly, but not especially effective when you're about town. These are difficult concepts to convey, especially in a soundbite or short interview driven format. Unfortunately, Fauci's line or reasoning does lend support to the claim that he knowingly mislead the public, for what he (perhaps reasonably) believe was the greater good. I still am open to the possibility that he was trying to make a nuanced point and either bungled or it was lost in short media format.

js2 6y ago
> So, how can masks not be effective and yet also be so effective that we must save our critical supply for medical personnel? Medical personnel wear masks for more than just protection from Covid. Surgical and N95 mask availability is critical to the day-to-day operation of a medical facility, is it not? Here's my interpretation: initially, he was concerned about a run on masks and believed masks provided minimal protection against Covid. Later, as mask availability was no longer as much of an issue and as there was increasing evidence that wearing masks might help contain the spread of Covid, he changed his recommendation. I recall there being an evolution in thinking around mask wearing, from masks being worn to protect the wearer to masks being worn to protect people from an asymptomatic wearer. Lots of studies posted here about effectiveness or lack thereof of non-N95 masks. I also recall us learning about asymptomatic spread, the degree to which to virus was aerosolized, and so forth.
- geebee 6y ago
  Medical personnel wear masks for more than just protection from Covid. Surgical and N95 mask availability is critical to the day-to-day operation of a medical facility, is it not? Yes... this is exactly what I meant when I wrote "one possibility is that medical personnel treat all kinds of illnesses, and that N95s are generally critical for this work, and we wouldn't want them to go without while the public buys them up for an ineffective use." Unfortunately, if this was Fauci's point, he did not communicate it well. Some of what appears to be deception may just be bungling an answer that requires a lot of nuance (though again, after what I've seen from hostile or even just lazy soundbite-driven media, at this point I just wouldn't be surprised he actually did say this hat some point and it was not reported or just edited out of a longer interview).
stjohnswarts 6y ago
Sure, we'll probably never know, but his actions speak louder than his words and he has dedicated his life to public service and doing his best to serve it unlike the right wing media, Trump, and others that try to villainize him. They split illegal immigrant families up for months (some to never reconnect again), have no issue with allegations of multiple rapes by their presidential candidate, "pro life" but kick the kids to the curb after birth, constantly in bed with Russian troll theories, and it goes on. Why can't anyone look at the bigger picture at their "whataboutism" when the picture was a not-too-smart grifter became President tried to take over our country with an insurrection while they try to turn Fauci into evil incarnate.
- geebee 6y ago
  Ah, whataboutism. It's not a magical word. You can't say "wingardium whatabousa", wave your wand, and make all your own hypocricies disappear. To me - and this is my own standard, not a set of rules - whataboutism a fallacy is specifically used to avoid acknowledging a problem by derailing the discussion. If a person fully and thoroughly acknowledges a problem, and does not minimize the importance of that problem, then it is not whataboutism to point out the hypocrisy of the other side during the analysis - especially if someone denies or minimizes the existence of bias from the other side. In short, an article like this from The Atlantic (including a reference to an early pandemic NYTimes article that claimed advocating for travel bans was racist) is not whataboutism. These are not just reasonable but important observations: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/03/what-really-doomed-americas-coronavirus-response/608596/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/03/what-... And lastly, while I agree with you about much of Trump and right wing media, I was pretty aghast with the times, WaPo, and other media outlets (this link also from The Atlantic). To be fair the National Review also got this wrong at first. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must-learn-covington-catholic-story/581035/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must... As an aside, The Atlantic is an interesting publication - it is a very left leaning, but has a number of writers who are absolutely willing to go straight at the left when they feel it is behaving hypocritically.

by geebee 6y ago

js2 6y ago

> So, how can masks not be effective and yet also be so effective that we must save our critical supply for medical personnel? Medical personnel wear masks for more than just protection from Covid. Surgical and N95 mask availability is critical to the day-to-day operation of a medical facility, is it not? Here's my interpretation: initially, he was concerned about a run on masks and believed masks provided minimal protection against Covid. Later, as mask availability was no longer as much of an issue and as there was increasing evidence that wearing masks might help contain the spread of Covid, he changed his recommendation. I recall there being an evolution in thinking around mask wearing, from masks being worn to protect the wearer to masks being worn to protect people from an asymptomatic wearer. Lots of studies posted here about effectiveness or lack thereof of non-N95 masks. I also recall us learning about asymptomatic spread, the degree to which to virus was aerosolized, and so forth.

geebee 6y ago
Medical personnel wear masks for more than just protection from Covid. Surgical and N95 mask availability is critical to the day-to-day operation of a medical facility, is it not? Yes... this is exactly what I meant when I wrote "one possibility is that medical personnel treat all kinds of illnesses, and that N95s are generally critical for this work, and we wouldn't want them to go without while the public buys them up for an ineffective use." Unfortunately, if this was Fauci's point, he did not communicate it well. Some of what appears to be deception may just be bungling an answer that requires a lot of nuance (though again, after what I've seen from hostile or even just lazy soundbite-driven media, at this point I just wouldn't be surprised he actually did say this hat some point and it was not reported or just edited out of a longer interview).

stjohnswarts 6y ago

Sure, we'll probably never know, but his actions speak louder than his words and he has dedicated his life to public service and doing his best to serve it unlike the right wing media, Trump, and others that try to villainize him. They split illegal immigrant families up for months (some to never reconnect again), have no issue with allegations of multiple rapes by their presidential candidate, "pro life" but kick the kids to the curb after birth, constantly in bed with Russian troll theories, and it goes on. Why can't anyone look at the bigger picture at their "whataboutism" when the picture was a not-too-smart grifter became President tried to take over our country with an insurrection while they try to turn Fauci into evil incarnate.

geebee 6y ago
Ah, whataboutism. It's not a magical word. You can't say "wingardium whatabousa", wave your wand, and make all your own hypocricies disappear. To me - and this is my own standard, not a set of rules - whataboutism a fallacy is specifically used to avoid acknowledging a problem by derailing the discussion. If a person fully and thoroughly acknowledges a problem, and does not minimize the importance of that problem, then it is not whataboutism to point out the hypocrisy of the other side during the analysis - especially if someone denies or minimizes the existence of bias from the other side. In short, an article like this from The Atlantic (including a reference to an early pandemic NYTimes article that claimed advocating for travel bans was racist) is not whataboutism. These are not just reasonable but important observations: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/03/what-really-doomed-americas-coronavirus-response/608596/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/03/what-... And lastly, while I agree with you about much of Trump and right wing media, I was pretty aghast with the times, WaPo, and other media outlets (this link also from The Atlantic). To be fair the National Review also got this wrong at first. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must-learn-covington-catholic-story/581035/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must... As an aside, The Atlantic is an interesting publication - it is a very left leaning, but has a number of writers who are absolutely willing to go straight at the left when they feel it is behaving hypocritically.