7 ms·

Could you elaborate on what that situation is?

kergonath 6y ago
Mask early, serious lockdown as soon as it becomes serious, and don’t end lockdowns before numbers are way low. We masked late, put lockdowns in place late if at all, and ended them way too early, which means that some countries went through several ones. And we’re not through yet. That said, I don’t share the optimism of the parent poster. This would be a heavy burden in terms of freedom and human rights for a result that is far from certain. There have been some resurgences, the extent of which is of course unknown because the truth would be damageable to China. And there is no knowing whether the next variant would start it all over again, in which it would be back to square one.
- aksss 6y ago
  I’m not sure the federal government has the plenary power to enforce such things in the United States. So it was never an option. Authoritarian governments or single-state nations are better able to mandate behavior. The lockdowns, even as implemented, extracted an enormous toll on small businesses and mental health.
  - kergonath 6y ago
    > I’m not sure the federal government has the plenary power to enforce such things in the United States. I am certain it hasn’t. But the same reasoning applies for state governments. Having public health decisions taken at the county level is sheer madness. > The lockdowns, even as implemented, extracted an enormous toll on small businesses and mental health. This is entirely true, and I hope this will make people and governments take health issues and depression more seriously. Now, we don’t have an alternative earth to experiment, but whether one strict lockdown for 6 months followed by progressive reopening is better or worse for people and the economy compared to a succession of waves and partial lockdowns with no end in sight should certainly be discussed. This is even more skewed in countries that do not have a proper safety net and where people have the choice between going to work ill or not having a job.
  - Aunche 6y ago
    I think it's more of a cultural difference rather than government one. Korea and Taiwan are democracies and managed to control the pandemic as well. The US government has the authority to declare martial law, but doing so would completely undermine people's faith in the government.
    - aksss 6y ago
      There is certainly a cultural element, but it is literally a legal difference as well. The federal government in the US does not have the same broad powers as the federal government in Korea. Remember the US is a collection of states that consented to let the feds take on certain powers while retaining many, whereas South Korea is “just” South Korea. Provincial autonomy in SK is not anything like the “state’s rights” issue in the US.
- the8472 6y ago
  >> If the Western world would have done what the WHO advised at the time, we all more or less would have a COVID stuation like the Chinese have for some time. > Mask early Are we living in the same timeline? https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1243972193169616898 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1243972193169616898 https://twitter.com/UNGeneva/status/1244661916535930886 https://twitter.com/UNGeneva/status/1244661916535930886 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234095938555260929 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234095938555260929 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234871709091667969 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234871709091667969 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234619007841525764 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234619007841525764
  - kergonath 6y ago
    Right, yes, that was early March. The guidelines evolved as more information became available and they released new advice in early April, which is far from ideal but better than a lot of governments reactions. Their official stance before that was rigorous test, isolate, and trace, which was not done seriously anywhere outside China.
    - the8472 6y ago
      Well, mask early may not have been the best choice of words then. Taiwan's reaction would qualify as early. And Taiwan is the thing that the WHO has been very conspicuously be silent about even when asked explicitly. https://twitter.com/fu7371/status/1262786140777545728 https://twitter.com/fu7371/status/1262786140777545728
      - kergonath 6y ago
        I agree. They did not advise to mask early on (airborne transmission was still largely unproved around May, if I remember correctly). In my mind it was ‘mask before the apparition of symptoms’, and I realise that my wording was not ideal in the context.
    - ern 6y ago
      There was a concerted effort from government officials, bandwagon-joining academics (aided by journalists) in the West to downplay masking, and to ridicule and shame those who wore masks. Here is a Time article from eary March where it was described as the equivalent of “knocking on wood”. https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/ https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/ I am fairly certain that the US government reversed itself on masks before the WHO did (Wikipedia says WHO changed its advice in June). Did it have to do with a lack of evidence, or was it a cynical ploy to preserve mask stocks for medical professionals? I recall it being the latter: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-...
- Toutouxc 6y ago
  I remember that at the time when we were masking up in the Czech Republic (first half of march, maybe..?), WHO was actually talking a lot about the dangers of face masks when used too eagerly and improperly. Or at least that was what had gotten through our mainstream media.
  - ern 6y ago
    You are remembering correctly. WHO changed its position on masks as late as June 2020. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-says-public-should-wear-masks https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-... The US government changed its stance by April: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/public-health/2020/04/08/why-did-the-recommendation-on-wearing-face-masks-change/ https://www.dallasnews.com/news/public-health/2020/04/08/why... In much of the world, people who wore masks were subject to ridicule, especially on social media because of the cynical public health messaging, which seemed to be about preserving stocks of masks for healthcare workers by telling the public that “masks don’t work” (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-...). The New York Times op-ed above, and efforts from the Czech Republic made discussing public masking more acceptable in the US, and then the rest of the world.
- zepto 6y ago
  The WHO seemed to be doing everything it could to prevent people from talking the virus seriously at the beginning. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who/who-says-countries-should-keep-borders-open-trade-people-moving-despite-coronavirus-idUSKBN1ZU1C2 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who/who-says...
- ern 6y ago
  I am curious about this “pro-lockdown, pro-mask” advice from ethe WHO. I am almost certain that they took a long time to recommend masking. I also am fairly confident that the WHO was/is opposed to lockdowns and it certainly still opposes travel restrictions.
  - kergonath 6y ago
    > I am almost certain that they took a long time to recommend masking. They did. Initially they recommended testing and isolating (which obviously could not scale much). Their guidelines were still happily ignored as they were updated, though.

Mask early, serious lockdown as soon as it becomes serious, and don’t end lockdowns before numbers are way low. We masked late, put lockdowns in place late if at all, and ended them way too early, which means that some countries went through several ones. And we’re not through yet. That said, I don’t share the optimism of the parent poster. This would be a heavy burden in terms of freedom and human rights for a result that is far from certain. There have been some resurgences, the extent of which is of course unknown because the truth would be damageable to China. And there is no knowing whether the next variant would start it all over again, in which it would be back to square one.

aksss 6y ago
I’m not sure the federal government has the plenary power to enforce such things in the United States. So it was never an option. Authoritarian governments or single-state nations are better able to mandate behavior. The lockdowns, even as implemented, extracted an enormous toll on small businesses and mental health.
- kergonath 6y ago
  > I’m not sure the federal government has the plenary power to enforce such things in the United States. I am certain it hasn’t. But the same reasoning applies for state governments. Having public health decisions taken at the county level is sheer madness. > The lockdowns, even as implemented, extracted an enormous toll on small businesses and mental health. This is entirely true, and I hope this will make people and governments take health issues and depression more seriously. Now, we don’t have an alternative earth to experiment, but whether one strict lockdown for 6 months followed by progressive reopening is better or worse for people and the economy compared to a succession of waves and partial lockdowns with no end in sight should certainly be discussed. This is even more skewed in countries that do not have a proper safety net and where people have the choice between going to work ill or not having a job.
- Aunche 6y ago
  I think it's more of a cultural difference rather than government one. Korea and Taiwan are democracies and managed to control the pandemic as well. The US government has the authority to declare martial law, but doing so would completely undermine people's faith in the government.
  - aksss 6y ago
    There is certainly a cultural element, but it is literally a legal difference as well. The federal government in the US does not have the same broad powers as the federal government in Korea. Remember the US is a collection of states that consented to let the feds take on certain powers while retaining many, whereas South Korea is “just” South Korea. Provincial autonomy in SK is not anything like the “state’s rights” issue in the US.
the8472 6y ago
>> If the Western world would have done what the WHO advised at the time, we all more or less would have a COVID stuation like the Chinese have for some time. > Mask early Are we living in the same timeline? https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1243972193169616898 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1243972193169616898 https://twitter.com/UNGeneva/status/1244661916535930886 https://twitter.com/UNGeneva/status/1244661916535930886 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234095938555260929 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234095938555260929 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234871709091667969 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234871709091667969 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234619007841525764 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234619007841525764
- kergonath 6y ago
  Right, yes, that was early March. The guidelines evolved as more information became available and they released new advice in early April, which is far from ideal but better than a lot of governments reactions. Their official stance before that was rigorous test, isolate, and trace, which was not done seriously anywhere outside China.
  - the8472 6y ago
    Well, mask early may not have been the best choice of words then. Taiwan's reaction would qualify as early. And Taiwan is the thing that the WHO has been very conspicuously be silent about even when asked explicitly. https://twitter.com/fu7371/status/1262786140777545728 https://twitter.com/fu7371/status/1262786140777545728
    - kergonath 6y ago
      I agree. They did not advise to mask early on (airborne transmission was still largely unproved around May, if I remember correctly). In my mind it was ‘mask before the apparition of symptoms’, and I realise that my wording was not ideal in the context.
  - ern 6y ago
    There was a concerted effort from government officials, bandwagon-joining academics (aided by journalists) in the West to downplay masking, and to ridicule and shame those who wore masks. Here is a Time article from eary March where it was described as the equivalent of “knocking on wood”. https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/ https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/ I am fairly certain that the US government reversed itself on masks before the WHO did (Wikipedia says WHO changed its advice in June). Did it have to do with a lack of evidence, or was it a cynical ploy to preserve mask stocks for medical professionals? I recall it being the latter: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-...
Toutouxc 6y ago
I remember that at the time when we were masking up in the Czech Republic (first half of march, maybe..?), WHO was actually talking a lot about the dangers of face masks when used too eagerly and improperly. Or at least that was what had gotten through our mainstream media.
- ern 6y ago
  You are remembering correctly. WHO changed its position on masks as late as June 2020. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-says-public-should-wear-masks https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-... The US government changed its stance by April: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/public-health/2020/04/08/why-did-the-recommendation-on-wearing-face-masks-change/ https://www.dallasnews.com/news/public-health/2020/04/08/why... In much of the world, people who wore masks were subject to ridicule, especially on social media because of the cynical public health messaging, which seemed to be about preserving stocks of masks for healthcare workers by telling the public that “masks don’t work” (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-...). The New York Times op-ed above, and efforts from the Czech Republic made discussing public masking more acceptable in the US, and then the rest of the world.
zepto 6y ago
The WHO seemed to be doing everything it could to prevent people from talking the virus seriously at the beginning. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who/who-says-countries-should-keep-borders-open-trade-people-moving-despite-coronavirus-idUSKBN1ZU1C2 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who/who-says...
ern 6y ago
I am curious about this “pro-lockdown, pro-mask” advice from ethe WHO. I am almost certain that they took a long time to recommend masking. I also am fairly confident that the WHO was/is opposed to lockdowns and it certainly still opposes travel restrictions.
- kergonath 6y ago
  > I am almost certain that they took a long time to recommend masking. They did. Initially they recommended testing and isolating (which obviously could not scale much). Their guidelines were still happily ignored as they were updated, though.